New Delhi: India and China have agreed to stop sending more troops to the frontlines in Ladakh, refrain from unilaterally changing the situation on the ground, and avoid taking any actions that may complicate the situation, the countries said in a joint statement Tuesday.
The statement was issued after senior Army officials of the two sides held the 6th round of commander-level talks Monday as part of the countries’ first military-diplomatic dialogue.
The 14-hour talks were held at the Chushul-Moldo meeting point, on the Chinese side of the Line of Actual Control (LAC), from Monday 9 am.
India and China said they had “candid and in-depth exchanges of views” on stabilising the situation along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Ladakh, where the two sides have been locked in a stand-off since April.
“They (the two sides) agreed to earnestly implement the important consensus reached by the leaders of the two countries, strengthen communication on the ground, avoid misunderstandings and misjudgments, stop sending more troops to the frontline, refrain from unilaterally changing the situation on the ground, and avoid taking any actions that may complicate the situation,” the statement added.
The two sides also agreed to hold the 7th round of military commander-level talks as soon as possible.
Among other things, they decided to take practical measures to properly solve problems on the ground, and jointly safeguard peace and tranquility in the border area, the joint statement said.
This is the second joint statement issued by India and China this month, with the first one released after External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar met his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi met in Russia on 10 September.
At the time, the two sides had decided to keep talking, disengage fast, and keep distance as part of a five-point agenda to ease tensions.
Also Read: India and China stick to demands, current ground positions in Ladakh could become status quo
‘No forward movement on ground’
The five-point agenda served as the basis for Monday’s meeting, but sources in the defence and security establishment said there has been no forward movement on the ground.
Sources had told ThePrint earlier Tuesday that the talks had ended in a “stalemate”, with both sides sticking to their stances as far a the situation on the ground was concerned.
While the Indian delegation refused to comply with the Chinese army’s demand to pull out from the southern banks of the Pangong Tso, the Chinese declined India’s emphasis on disengagement at all friction points along the LAC in Ladakh, the sources had said.
China has been peeved by India’s move on the intervening night of 29-30 August, when specialised units along with regular soldiers outflanked the Chinese and occupied crucial heights along the southern bank of the Pangong Tso.
At the military-diplomatic dialogue, India was represented by 14 Corps Commander Lt Gen. Harinder Singh, his would-be successor Lt Gen. P.G.K. Menon, along with two officers of major general rank, four brigadiers and other colonel-level officers and translators.
They were joined by Navin Srivastava, joint secretary in the Ministry of External Affairs who looks after China. Indo-Tibetan Border Police Inspector General Deepam Seth was also a part of the delegation.
Also Read: Linking LAC peace with good relations shows India still doesn’t get China
This Just means that India will do nothing while China gets ready for a full fledged war. This means that China has amassed all it needs at the border and is ready for aggression. The Indian negotiating party is full of Idiots. There should be only one condition, “China withdraw, and India will take steps post such withdrawal”…..
What it means is China will attack in winter. Let’s be ready for war.
This means that China will definitely send more troops to the LAC and the border secretly, while India naively stops its build up of troops.
Tomorrow morning you can expect 10,000 additional PLA troops in Depsang. Chinese doctrine is to remain focused on war objectives. All options on table must be exploited, ethical or unethical. After Mao uprising, religion is absent from China and so are traditional ethics and ethos.
So far so good?
Like the Ten Commandments and Ashoka’s Edicts, in present times, nothing is etched in stone. The world is evolving. The increase in rate of speed of change after the II WW War, in areas ranging from technology to tactics can rival the speed of light, so to speak. Methods (the way we talk) are less important than the core issue. It is better that we stick to basics rather than to methods in our analysis of all matters and situations including the LAC. What is happening now, incursions and excursions et al, between India and China has happened many times earlier; it is just that this time because of technology the game is being played out louder in the media.
The fact is, nothing about LAC has really changed since 1947, as the exact line of LAC has never been agreed by the two parties. Using this as an excuse, China often tries to grab unoccupied territories (patrolled by both etc…) wherever possible and whenever it suits them, along the LAC. The primary intend is nothing more than to keep India on a leash and ensure it is not a competition in South Asia. It is also sad that two Nations, even after wars and lengthy talks, have not been able to resolve it for decades. This happens when one or both parties do not want a resolution. It is abundantly clear here as to who does not want the issue resolved. It is fallacious to expect that, this issue will get resolved any time soon. China has to be brought to the negotiating table, hopefully one day in the near future and define the IB (not LAC). It is imperative that we maintain a strong Defence Force and better strategic stance when we go to the negotiating table,
China will win the day, if we as a Nation divert most of our energies here rather than on the economic and societal issues which are more fundamental and enduring to a better future for India. Unfortunately in a geo-political polity we can’t chose our neighbours.
Like Snehesh (The Print) often says, War is not a solution while it can extend the problem.