Undid revision 795896729 by MBlaze Lightning (talk) |
Adamgerber80 (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
| campaignbox = |
| campaignbox = |
||
}} |
}} |
||
The '''2017 China India border standoff''' refers to the military border standoff between the [[Indian Armed Forces|Indian armed forces]] and the [[People's Liberation Army]] of [[China]] over construction of a road in [[Doklam]] |
The '''2017 China India border standoff''' refers to the military border standoff between the [[Indian Armed Forces|Indian armed forces]] and the [[People's Liberation Army]] of [[China]] over construction of a road in [[Doklam]] (known as Donglang in China). The standoff started on 16 June 2017 when Chinese troops with construction vehicles and road-building equipment began moving south into Doklam, a territory which [[India]] and [[Bhutan]] consider as Bhutanese territory.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/26/world/asia/dolam-plateau-china-india-bhutan.html|title=How India and China Have Come to the Brink Over a Remote Mountain Pass|last=Barry|first=Steven Lee Myers, Ellen|date=2017-07-26|work=The New York Times|access-date=2017-08-16|last2=Fisher|first2=Max|language=en-US|issn=0362-4331}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-india-idUSKBN19O109|title=China says India violates 1890 agreement in border stand-off|date=Mon Jul 03 10:00:57 UTC 2017|work=Reuters|access-date=2017-08-16}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/06/china-india-bhutan-standoff-disputed-territory|title=Chinese and Indian troops face off in Bhutan border dispute|first=Michael|last=Safi|date=5 July 2017|publisher=|accessdate=10 August 2017|via=The Guardian}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-china-india-doklam-standoff-20170724-story.html |title=Doklam standoff: China sends a warning to India over border dispute |access-date=11 August 2017 |work=Los Angeles Times |agency=Associated Press |publication-date=24 July 2017}}</ref> On June 18, 2017, around 270 Indian troops, with weapons and two bulldozers, entered Doklam to stop the Chinese troops from constructing the road.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://accesswdun.com/article/2017/8/566782|title=China warns Indian troops to get out of contested region|publisher=|accessdate=10 August 2017}}</ref> |
||
==Background== |
==Background== |
||
Line 76: | Line 76: | ||
At the press conference on 3 July 2017, China Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang told India journalist that former Indian prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru accepted the 1890 Britain–China treaty. <ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1475054.shtml|title=Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang's Regular Press Conference on July 3, 2017|website=www.fmprc.gov.cn|access-date=2017-08-16}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.news18.com/news/world/nehru-accepted-1890-treaty-india-using-bhutan-to-cover-up-entry-china-1450635.html|title=Nehru Accepted 1890 Treaty; India Using Bhutan to Cover up Entry: China|publisher=|accessdate=6 July 2017}}</ref> Contrary to Chinese claim, India media reported that Nehru’s 26 September 1959 letter to Zhou, cited by China, was a point-by-point refutation of the claims made by the latter on 8 September 1959. Nehru made it amply clear in his refutal that the 1890 treaty defined only the northern part of the Sikkim-Tibet border and not the tri-junction area. Nehru claimed that "rectification of errors in Chinese maps regarding the boundary of Bhutan with Tibet is, therefore, a matter which has to be discussed along with the boundary of India with the Tibet region of China in the same sector."{{Citation needed|date=August 2017}} |
At the press conference on 3 July 2017, China Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang told India journalist that former Indian prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru accepted the 1890 Britain–China treaty. <ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1475054.shtml|title=Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang's Regular Press Conference on July 3, 2017|website=www.fmprc.gov.cn|access-date=2017-08-16}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.news18.com/news/world/nehru-accepted-1890-treaty-india-using-bhutan-to-cover-up-entry-china-1450635.html|title=Nehru Accepted 1890 Treaty; India Using Bhutan to Cover up Entry: China|publisher=|accessdate=6 July 2017}}</ref> Contrary to Chinese claim, India media reported that Nehru’s 26 September 1959 letter to Zhou, cited by China, was a point-by-point refutation of the claims made by the latter on 8 September 1959. Nehru made it amply clear in his refutal that the 1890 treaty defined only the northern part of the Sikkim-Tibet border and not the tri-junction area. Nehru claimed that "rectification of errors in Chinese maps regarding the boundary of Bhutan with Tibet is, therefore, a matter which has to be discussed along with the boundary of India with the Tibet region of China in the same sector."{{Citation needed|date=August 2017}} |
||
India media claims that, as Nehru in his reply had made it clear that boundaries of Sikkim and Bhutan did not fall within the scope of the discussion, the following quote of Nehru's letter by Chinese government's Spokesperson Geng Shuang was out of context: |
India media claims that, as Nehru in his reply had made it clear that boundaries of Sikkim and Bhutan did not fall within the scope of the discussion, the following quote of Nehru's letter by Chinese government's Spokesperson Geng Shuang was out of context: |
||
<blockquote> |
<blockquote> |
||
This Convention of 1890 also defined the boundary between Sikkim and Tibet; and the boundary was later, in 1895, demarcated. There is thus no dispute regarding the boundary of Sikkim with the Tibet region. |
This Convention of 1890 also defined the boundary between Sikkim and Tibet; and the boundary was later, in 1895, demarcated. There is thus no dispute regarding the boundary of Sikkim with the Tibet region.{{Citation needed|date=August 2017}} |
||
<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1475054.shtml|title=Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang's Regular Press Conference on July 3, 2017|website=www.fmprc.gov.cn|access-date=2017-08-16}}</ref> |
|||
</blockquote> |
</blockquote> |
||
To clarify what he thought the India media was trying to muddy waters, Geng Shuang replied: |
To clarify what he thought the India media was trying to muddy waters, Geng Shuang replied: |
||
<blockquote> |
<blockquote> |
||
The so-called tri-junction, as the name suggests, is a point. It is not a line, much less an area. India misinterprets tri-junction point as an area, from ulterior motives. This time, the trespassing point of Indian army, is on the Sikkim-China border, which is 2000 metres away from the tri-junction point, Mount Gipmochi, by the 1890 Treaty. |
The so-called tri-junction, as the name suggests, is a point. It is not a line, much less an area. India misinterprets tri-junction point as an area, from ulterior motives. This time, the trespassing point of Indian army, is on the Sikkim-China border, which is 2000 metres away from the tri-junction point, Mount Gipmochi, by the 1890 Treaty.{{Citation needed|date=August 2017}} |
||
<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1475054.shtml|title=Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang's Regular Press Conference on July 3, 2017|website=www.fmprc.gov.cn|access-date=2017-08-16}}</ref> |
|||
</blockquote> |
</blockquote> |
||
Line 92: | Line 96: | ||
On 19 July 2017, China renewed its call for India to withdraw its troops from Doklam. <ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.arabnews.com/node/1131641/world|title=China holds live-fire drills in disputed Himalayan territory, tells India to withdraw|date=19 July 2017|publisher=|accessdate=19 July 2017}}</ref> |
On 19 July 2017, China renewed its call for India to withdraw its troops from Doklam. <ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.arabnews.com/node/1131641/world|title=China holds live-fire drills in disputed Himalayan territory, tells India to withdraw|date=19 July 2017|publisher=|accessdate=19 July 2017}}</ref> |
||
⚫ | On 2 August 2017, the Chinese foreign ministry released the now widely known 15-page official position statement ''The Facts and China's Position Concerning the Indian Border Troops' Crossing of the China-India Boundary in the Sikkim Sector into the Chinese Territory''.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/P020170802542676636134.pdf|title=The Facts and China's Position Concerning the Indian Border Troops' Crossing of the China-India Boundary in the Sikkim Sector into the Chinese Territory (2017-08-02)|last=China Foreign Ministry|date=2017-08-02|website=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/|archive-url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/P020170802542676636134.pdf|archive-date=2017-08-02|access-date=2017-08-15}}</ref> According to this document, there were still over 40 Indian troops and one bulldozer in Doklam (Donglang) region.{{Citation needed|date=August 2017}}<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/P020170802542676636134.pdf|title=The Facts and China's Position Concerning the Indian Border Troops' Crossing of the China-India Boundary in the Sikkim Sector into the Chinese Territory (2017-08-02)|last=China Foreign Ministry|date=2017-08-02|website=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/|archive-url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/P020170802542676636134.pdf|archive-date=2017-08-02|access-date=2017-08-15}}</ref> |
||
⚫ | On 24 July 2017, Chinese Foreign Minister [[Wang Yi (politician)|Wang Yi]] told reporters that it is very clear who is right and who is wrong in the standoff in Doklam, and that even senior Indian officials have publicly said that Chinese troops have not intruded into Indian territory.<ref |
||
⚫ | On 24 July 2017, Chinese Foreign Minister [[Wang Yi (politician)|Wang Yi]] told reporters that it is very clear who is right and who is wrong in the standoff in Doklam, and that even senior Indian officials have publicly said that Chinese troops have not intruded into Indian territory.<ref>Wang Zihao, [https://www.ecns.cn/voices/2017/08-03/267944.shtml U.S. scholar: India should remember the history], [[China Daily]], 2017-08-03</ref> |
||
⚫ | On 2 August 2017, the Chinese foreign ministry released the now widely known 15-page official position statement ''The Facts and China's Position Concerning the Indian Border Troops' Crossing of the China-India Boundary in the Sikkim Sector into the Chinese Territory''.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/P020170802542676636134.pdf|title=The Facts and China's Position Concerning the Indian Border Troops' Crossing of the China-India Boundary in the Sikkim Sector into the Chinese Territory (2017-08-02)|last=China Foreign Ministry|date=2017-08-02|website=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/|archive-url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/P020170802542676636134.pdf|archive-date=2017-08-02|access-date=2017-08-15}}</ref> According to this document, there were still over 40 Indian troops and one bulldozer in Doklam (Donglang) region.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/P020170802542676636134.pdf|title=The Facts and China's Position Concerning the Indian Border Troops' Crossing of the China-India Boundary in the Sikkim Sector into the Chinese Territory (2017-08-02)|last=China Foreign Ministry|date=2017-08-02|website=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/|archive-url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/P020170802542676636134.pdf|archive-date=2017-08-02|access-date=2017-08-15}}</ref> |
||
In the 15 page statement released on August 2, 2017, the [[Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China|Foreign Ministry]] in Beijing accused India of using Bhutan as "a pretext" to interfere and impede the boundary talks between China and Bhutan. The report referred to India's "trespassing" into Doklam as a violation of the territorial sovereignty of China as well as a challenge to the sovereignty and independence of Bhutan.<ref name=":0" /><ref>http://www.livemint.com/Politics/ofIIdIQ8Dp93jC5EfUdUKJ/China-demands-unconditional-withdrawal-by-India-in-a-15page.html</ref> |
In the 15 page statement released on August 2, 2017, the [[Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China|Foreign Ministry]] in Beijing accused India of using Bhutan as "a pretext" to interfere and impede the boundary talks between China and Bhutan. The report referred to India's "trespassing" into Doklam as a violation of the territorial sovereignty of China as well as a challenge to the sovereignty and independence of Bhutan.<ref name=":0" /><ref>http://www.livemint.com/Politics/ofIIdIQ8Dp93jC5EfUdUKJ/China-demands-unconditional-withdrawal-by-India-in-a-15page.html</ref> |
||
China says in the 15-page document that it notified India regarding its plan to construct road "in advance in full reflection of China’s goodwill". On 4 August 2017, The Ministry of External Affairs of India refused to confirm or deny this when asked that if India received notification, why it did not use diplomatic channels before sending its troops across the border but now is asking for diplomatic solution.<ref>{{Citation|last=Ministry of External Affairs, India|title=Weekly Media Briefing by Official Spokesperson (August 4, 2017)|date=2017-08-04|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJnAoru8VsY|accessdate=2017-08-16}}</ref> China charged that India is certainly not for peace though it always put peace on its lips.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-india-border-idUSKBN1AJ1TP|title=China says India building up troops amid border stand off|date=Fri Aug 04 03:42:13 UTC 2017|work=Reuters|access-date=2017-08-16}}</ref> |
|||
The Bhutanese government on August 2017 later denied an earlier statement by China that Bhutan has relinquished its claims to Doklam.<ref>{{cite news|title=Bhutan Denies Ceded Claim Over Doklam|url=https://sputniknews.com/politics/201708111056370739-bhutan-doklam-disputed-area/|accessdate=13 August 2017|agency=Sputnik|date=11 August 2017}}</ref> |
The Bhutanese government on August 2017 later denied an earlier statement by China that Bhutan has relinquished its claims to Doklam.<ref>{{cite news|title=Bhutan Denies Ceded Claim Over Doklam|url=https://sputniknews.com/politics/201708111056370739-bhutan-doklam-disputed-area/|accessdate=13 August 2017|agency=Sputnik|date=11 August 2017}}</ref> |
||
On August 15, 2017, several Indian and Chinese soldiers were alleged to have been injured after a melee broke out between them when a group of Chinese soldiers were alleged to have attempted to infiltrate across the border near [[Pangong Lake]] into Indian controlled territory in [[Ladakh]].<ref>https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-china-idUSKCN1AV29F</ref> |
On August 15, 2017, several Indian and Chinese soldiers were alleged to have been injured after a melee broke out between them when a group of Chinese soldiers were alleged to have attempted to infiltrate across the border near [[Pangong Lake]] into Indian controlled territory in [[Ladakh]].<ref>https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-china-idUSKCN1AV29F</ref> |
||
== Legal and political analyses == |
|||
Retired Australian-British [[journalist]] and scholar [[Neville Maxwell]], who is most famous for reshaping the now orthodox scholarly view on the 1962 [[Sino-Indian War]]<ref>{{cite book |last = Maxwell |first = Neville |year = 2015 |title = India's China War (2nd Ed) |publisher = Natraj Publishers in Association with Wildlife Protection Society of India| location = New Delhi |isbn = 978-8181582508 |ref = none}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090326032121/http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~johnston/garver.pdf|title=Wayback Machine|date=2009-03-26|access-date=2017-08-16}}</ref>, scathingly said of India on the current standoff:<ref name ="maxwell2017">Neville Maxwell, [http://m.scmp.com/week-asia/geopolitics/article/2102555/indias-china-war-round-two This Is India's China War, Round Two], Jul 14, 2017</ref> |
|||
{{quote|"Every generation of literate Indians is inculcated with that false sense of national oppression by the cartographic image showing broad areas of Indian territory 'occupied' by China, with reminders that Beijing’s maps reveal an intention to seize even more... Time, weather and probably local human mischief will have obliterated the border markers [from 1890] but the careful verbal description in the Treaty prevails to prove that the local Indian commander, with or without higher orders, has blatantly moved forces into what is now Chinese territory. Beijing, sorely chafed already by India’s recent repeated provocations, appears to have decided that this is too much, and has itself adopted the absolutist Nehruvian position of 'no discussion without withdrawal'." |
|||
"The Indian attempt to depict this confrontation as tripartite should be disregarded. Bhutan is not an independent actor, is rather an Indian glove-puppet."}} |
|||
Maxwell stated that because India has reinforced a permanently stationed brigade of troops in Bhutan, the Bhutanese rulers are being kept hostage for fear that their country be annexed by India just as [[Sikkim]].<ref name ="maxwell2017">Neville Maxwell, [http://m.scmp.com/week-asia/geopolitics/article/2102555/indias-china-war-round-two This Is India's China War, Round Two], Jul 14, 2017</ref> |
|||
P. Stobdan, a former Indian ambassador and an expert on Himalayan affairs, stated in an article that "The prevailing sentiment in Bhutan is in favour of resolving the issue with China amicably without further delay, so that the country can have a peaceful boundary with its northern neighbour as it has with India." <ref>{{Cite web|url=https://thewire.in/156180/bhutan-doklam-border-china/|title=In the Tri-Junction Entanglement, What Does Bhutan Want?|last=Stobdan|first=P.|website=thewire.in|language=en-GB|access-date=2017-08-15}}</ref> In another article, Mr. Stobdan stated: "Uncomfortable about the increasing cosiness between Bhutan and China, India looked for an opportunity to punish Thinley. Critics in Bhutan suggested that New Delhi had made up its mind to write a fine script for Thinley’s exit from power. Playing with electoral politics was not a big deal. In the days leading up to the Bhutanese general election in July 2013, New Delhi, in an unambiguous signal, abruptly cut subsidies on gas and kerosene sales, among other tough measures to Bhutan." "The tragedy was that India chose to leverage economic assistance as a tool to influence the election results. The story is no different from what China does to its neighbours. However, China does not allow itself to be seen as interfering in the internal affairs of others. In essence, India’s model of economic assistance to neighbours such as Bhutan and Nepal remains exploitative and no remedy exists for altering it yet."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://thewire.in/157293/india-china-doklam-real-problem-bhutan/|title=India's Real Problem Lies in its Bhutan Policy, Not the Border|last=Stobdan|first=P.|website=thewire.in|language=en-GB|access-date=2017-08-15}}</ref> |
|||
Sourabh Gupta, a senior fellow at the Institute for China-America Studies in Washington, stated in an article and later in an interview: "India is militarily engaging a state actor from the soil of a third country over a piece of land its partner country does not even control. Not even the mighty US does that" and "New Delhi does not possess legal standing to directly engage China to ease the stand-off in Doklam. That standing is held by Bhutan. Efforts to pre-empt this dilemma via talks will only add to the question of New Delhi’s motivations and purposes."<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.scmp.com/week-asia/geopolitics/article/2103656/indias-got-itself-fine-mess-doklam-its-time-get-out-and-let|title=India needs to get out of the mess in Doklam|work=South China Morning Post|access-date=2017-08-16}}</ref><ref>{{Citation|last=CGTN America|title=Sourabh Gupta on the China-India border stand-off|date=2017-07-25|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZzKbsjqMyg|accessdate=2017-08-16}}</ref> |
|||
The standoff between China and India stems from India's security concern of its [[Siliguri Corridor]], according to official position statement ''Recent Developments in Doklam Area'' released by India on 2017-06-30,<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://mea.gov.in/press-releases.htm?dtl/28572/Recent_Developments_in_Doklam_Area|title=Recent Developments in Doklam Area|website=mea.gov.in|language=en|access-date=2017-08-16}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=http://thediplomat.com/2017/07/whats-driving-the-india-china-standoff-at-doklam/|title=What's Driving the India-China Standoff at Doklam?|last=Diplomat|first=Ankit Panda, The|work=The Diplomat|access-date=2017-08-17|language=en-US}}</ref> but China, in its 15-page official position statement ''The Facts and China's Position Concerning the Indian Border Troops' Crossing of the China-India Boundary in the Sikkim Sector into the Chinese Territory'' released on 2017-08-02'','' criticized India's action and position as excuses for illegal intrusion into Chinese territory and violation of Chinese territorial sovereignty.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/P020170802542676636134.pdf|title=The Facts and China's Position Concerning the Indian Border Troops' Crossing of the China-India Boundary in the Sikkim Sector into the Chinese Territory (2017-08-02)|last=China Foreign Ministry|date=2017-08-02|website=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/|archive-url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/P020170802542676636134.pdf|archive-date=2017-08-02|access-date=2017-08-15}}</ref> A Chinese observation post on the mountain of Gipmochi would have a clear view of this vital corridor which is heavily fortified by Indian troops. Scholar Caroline Brassard states, "its strategic significance for the Indian military is obvious." Distinguished Indian scholar Dr. [[Manoj Joshi]] in New Delhi stated in a video interview that "if we think the [[Siliguri Corridor]] is vulnerable, equally, the Chinese think the [[Chumbi Valley]] is vulnerable, because on one side of [[Chumbi Valley]] we have very strong forces in [[Sikkim]], and even armors and tanks ...."<ref name="auto">{{cite web|url=https://thewire.in/155118/india-china-face-off-watch-manoj-joshi-m-k-venu-discuss/|title=India-China Face-Off: Watch Manoj Joshi and M.K. Venu Discuss|last=Staff|first=The Wire|date=|website=thewire.in|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20170731014232/https://thewire.in/155118/india-china-face-off-watch-manoj-joshi-m-k-venu-discuss/|archivedate=31 July 2017|deadurl=no|accessdate=27 July 2017|df=dmy-all}}</ref> He explained that the China-India-Bhutan tri-junction point cannot be Batang La as India claimed because India, as the successors of the British, is party to the 1890 convention, which explicitly says that Mount [[Gipmochi]] is the tr-ijunction, though Bhutan is not, therefore Doklam/Donglang belongs to China as per this treaty. He further explained that because Bhutan is not a party to this treaty, the dispute on the Doklam/Donglang area is between Bhutan and China, but Bhutan did not claim the area until November 2000 at the 14th round of boundary talk it had with China. He stated that India would need to withdraw its troops and that "this is something we ought to encourage Bhutan and China to settle."<ref name="auto" /> |
|||
==See also== |
==See also== |
Revision as of 07:28, 17 August 2017
2017 China–India border standoff | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||
Belligerents | |||||
India (on behalf of Bhutan) | China | ||||
Casualties and losses | |||||
several injured [1] | several injured [2] |
The 2017 China India border standoff refers to the military border standoff between the Indian armed forces and the People's Liberation Army of China over construction of a road in Doklam (known as Donglang in China). The standoff started on 16 June 2017 when Chinese troops with construction vehicles and road-building equipment began moving south into Doklam, a territory which India and Bhutan consider as Bhutanese territory.[3][4][5][6] On June 18, 2017, around 270 Indian troops, with weapons and two bulldozers, entered Doklam to stop the Chinese troops from constructing the road.[7]
Background
Unlike China and Bhutan, India does not claim Doklam but supports Bhutan's claim.[8][9][10]
Doklam is an area disputed between China and Bhutan located near their tri junction with India.[11][12] As per Chinese claims, Doklam is located in the Xigaze area of Tibet, bordering the state of Sikkim[13]
In 1949, Bhutan signed a treaty with India giving allowance to India to guide its diplomatic and defense affairs. [14] In 2007, the treaty was superseded by a new friendship treaty that replaced the provision that made it mandatory for Bhutan to take India's guidance on foreign policy, providing broader sovereignty to Bhutan and not requiring it to obtain India's permission over arms imports.[15][16] Article 2 of the 2007 Friendship Treaty signed by India and Bhutan in 2007 states:
In keeping with the abiding ties of close friendship and cooperation between Bhutan and India, the Government of the Kingdom of Bhutan and the Government of the Republic of India shall cooperate closely with each other on issues relating to their national interests.[citation needed]
Former Foreign Secretary and Ambassador of India to China, Nirupama Rao said:
Bhutan and India enjoy the closest relationship of mutual trust and confidence and enduring friendship. There is absolutely no controversy about military-to-military cooperation and understanding between our two countries. India holds Bhutanese sovereignty as sacred and inviolable.[citation needed]
Ambassador of Bhutan to India Vetsop Namgyel stated,
Doklam is a disputed territory and Bhutan has a written agreement with China that pending the final resolution of the boundary issue, peace and tranquillity should be maintained in the area.[citation needed]
India charges that China has violated this 'peace agreement' by trying to construct roads in Doklam.[17] India also criticized China for "crossing the border" and attempting to construct a road (allegedly done "illegally"), while China criticized India for entering its territory.[18]
Events
On 29 June 2017, Bhutan protested to China against the construction of a road in the disputed territory.[19] According to the Bhutanese government, China attempted to extend a road that previously terminated at Doka La towards the Bhutan Army camp at Zornpelri near the Jampheri Ridge two km to the south; that ridge, viewed as the border by China but as wholly within Bhutan by both Bhutan and India, extends eastward approaching India's highly-strategic Siliguri corridor.[20] On the same day, the Bhutanese border was put on high alert and border security was tightened as a result of the growing tensions.[21] China released a map depicting Doklam as part of China; according to China's claim, via the map, that territory North of Gipmochi belonged to China and claimed it was supported by the 1890 Convention of Calcutta between China and Britain,[22] which stated in Article I that
The boundary of Sikkim and Tibet shall be the crest of the mountain range separating the waters flowing into the Sikkim Teesta and its affluents from the waters flowing into the Tibetan Mochu and northwards into other Rivers of Tibet. The line commences at Mount Gipmochi on the Bhutan frontier, and follows the above-mentioned water-parting to the point where it meets Nipal territory.
At the press conference on 3 July 2017, China Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang told India journalist that former Indian prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru accepted the 1890 Britain–China treaty. [23][24] Contrary to Chinese claim, India media reported that Nehru’s 26 September 1959 letter to Zhou, cited by China, was a point-by-point refutation of the claims made by the latter on 8 September 1959. Nehru made it amply clear in his refutal that the 1890 treaty defined only the northern part of the Sikkim-Tibet border and not the tri-junction area. Nehru claimed that "rectification of errors in Chinese maps regarding the boundary of Bhutan with Tibet is, therefore, a matter which has to be discussed along with the boundary of India with the Tibet region of China in the same sector."[citation needed]
India media claims that, as Nehru in his reply had made it clear that boundaries of Sikkim and Bhutan did not fall within the scope of the discussion, the following quote of Nehru's letter by Chinese government's Spokesperson Geng Shuang was out of context:
This Convention of 1890 also defined the boundary between Sikkim and Tibet; and the boundary was later, in 1895, demarcated. There is thus no dispute regarding the boundary of Sikkim with the Tibet region.[citation needed]
To clarify what he thought the India media was trying to muddy waters, Geng Shuang replied:
The so-called tri-junction, as the name suggests, is a point. It is not a line, much less an area. India misinterprets tri-junction point as an area, from ulterior motives. This time, the trespassing point of Indian army, is on the Sikkim-China border, which is 2000 metres away from the tri-junction point, Mount Gipmochi, by the 1890 Treaty.[citation needed]
On 5 July 2017, the Chinese government said that it had for the past 24 months a basic consensus with Bhutan that Doklam belongs to China, and there was no dispute between the two countries.[27]
On 19 July 2017, China renewed its call for India to withdraw its troops from Doklam. [28]
On 2 August 2017, the Chinese foreign ministry released the now widely known 15-page official position statement The Facts and China's Position Concerning the Indian Border Troops' Crossing of the China-India Boundary in the Sikkim Sector into the Chinese Territory.[29] According to this document, there were still over 40 Indian troops and one bulldozer in Doklam (Donglang) region.[citation needed][30]
On 24 July 2017, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told reporters that it is very clear who is right and who is wrong in the standoff in Doklam, and that even senior Indian officials have publicly said that Chinese troops have not intruded into Indian territory.[31]
In the 15 page statement released on August 2, 2017, the Foreign Ministry in Beijing accused India of using Bhutan as "a pretext" to interfere and impede the boundary talks between China and Bhutan. The report referred to India's "trespassing" into Doklam as a violation of the territorial sovereignty of China as well as a challenge to the sovereignty and independence of Bhutan.[29][32]
The Bhutanese government on August 2017 later denied an earlier statement by China that Bhutan has relinquished its claims to Doklam.[33]
On August 15, 2017, several Indian and Chinese soldiers were alleged to have been injured after a melee broke out between them when a group of Chinese soldiers were alleged to have attempted to infiltrate across the border near Pangong Lake into Indian controlled territory in Ladakh.[34]
See also
- China–India relations
- Bhutan–China relations
- Sino-Indian War
- Nathu La and Cho La clashes
- Siliguri Corridor
References
- ^ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-china-idUSKCN1AV29F
- ^ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-china-idUSKCN1AV29F
- ^ Barry, Steven Lee Myers, Ellen; Fisher, Max (2017-07-26). "How India and China Have Come to the Brink Over a Remote Mountain Pass". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2017-08-16.
{{cite news}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ "China says India violates 1890 agreement in border stand-off". Reuters. Mon Jul 03 10:00:57 UTC 2017. Retrieved 2017-08-16.
{{cite news}}
: Check date values in:|date=
(help) - ^ Safi, Michael (5 July 2017). "Chinese and Indian troops face off in Bhutan border dispute". Retrieved 10 August 2017 – via The Guardian.
- ^ "Doklam standoff: China sends a warning to India over border dispute". Los Angeles Times. Associated Press. 24 July 2017. Retrieved 11 August 2017.
- ^ "China warns Indian troops to get out of contested region". Retrieved 10 August 2017.
- ^ Barry, Steven Lee Myers, Ellen; Fisher, Max (26 July 2017). "How India and China Have Come to the Brink Over a Remote Mountain Pass". The New York Times. Retrieved 11 August 2017 – via NYTimes.com.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ "Sikkim standoff: Beijing should realise Bhutan is as important to India as North Korea is to China". Firstpost. 30 June 2017. Retrieved 11 August 2017.
- ^ Staff (28 June 2017). "Indian bunker in Sikkim removed by China: Sources". The Times of India. Archived from the original on 6 July 2017.
{{cite news}}
: Unknown parameter|dead-url=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (help) - ^ "Doklam Standoff: Beyond Border Dispute - Mainstream Weekly". www.mainstreamweekly.net. Retrieved 10 August 2017.
- ^ Mitra, Devirupa (5 July 2017). "Expert Gyan: On India, China Stand-Off At Border Tri-Junction With Bhutan". The Wire. Retrieved 11 August 2017.
- ^ ."关系:洞郎地区 (3964647)S". OpenStreetMap. Retrieved 2017-08-07.
- ^ Som, Vishnu (2017-06-29). Shukla, Shuchi (ed.). "At Heart Of India-China Standoff, A Road Being Built: 10 Points". NDTV. Archived from the original on 2017-08-09.
{{cite news}}
:|archive-date=
/|archive-url=
timestamp mismatch; 2017-06-29 suggested (help); Unknown parameter|deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (help)[failed verification] - ^ "South Asia news, business and economy from India and Pakistan". Asia Times Online. Retrieved 19 July 2017.
- ^ "The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Editorial". www.tribuneindia.com. Retrieved 19 July 2017.
- ^ Sikkim standoff: Beijing should realise Bhutan is as important to India as North Korea is to China, First Post, 30 June 2017.
- ^ Som, Vishnu (29 June 2017). Shukla, Shuchi (ed.). "At Heart Of India-China Standoff, A Road Being Built: 10 Points". NDTV. Archived from the original on 29 June 2017.
{{cite news}}
: Unknown parameter|deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (help) - ^ "Bhutan protests against China's road construction". The Straits Times. 30 June 2017. Retrieved 11 August 2017.
- ^ Shaurya Karanbir Gurung Behind China's Sikkim aggression, a plan to isolate Northeast from rest of India, Economic Times, 3 July 2017.
- ^ "Bhutan issues scathing statement against China, claims Beijing violated border agreements of 1988, 1998". Firstpost. 30 June 2017. Retrieved 2017-06-30.
- ^ "EXCLUSIVE: China releases new map showing territorial claims at stand-off site". Retrieved 6 July 2017.
- ^ "Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang's Regular Press Conference on July 3, 2017". www.fmprc.gov.cn. Retrieved 2017-08-16.
- ^ "Nehru Accepted 1890 Treaty; India Using Bhutan to Cover up Entry: China". Retrieved 6 July 2017.
- ^ "Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang's Regular Press Conference on July 3, 2017". www.fmprc.gov.cn. Retrieved 2017-08-16.
- ^ "Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang's Regular Press Conference on July 3, 2017". www.fmprc.gov.cn. Retrieved 2017-08-16.
- ^ PTI (5 July 2017). "No dispute with Bhutan in Doklam: China". Retrieved 6 July 2017 – via The Economic Times.
- ^ "China holds live-fire drills in disputed Himalayan territory, tells India to withdraw". 19 July 2017. Retrieved 19 July 2017.
- ^ a b China Foreign Ministry (2017-08-02). "The Facts and China's Position Concerning the Indian Border Troops' Crossing of the China-India Boundary in the Sikkim Sector into the Chinese Territory (2017-08-02)" (PDF). http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/ (PDF). Retrieved 2017-08-15.
{{cite web}}
: Check|archive-url=
value (help); External link in
(help)|website=
- ^ China Foreign Ministry (2017-08-02). "The Facts and China's Position Concerning the Indian Border Troops' Crossing of the China-India Boundary in the Sikkim Sector into the Chinese Territory (2017-08-02)" (PDF). http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/ (PDF). Retrieved 2017-08-15.
{{cite web}}
: Check|archive-url=
value (help); External link in
(help)|website=
- ^ Wang Zihao, U.S. scholar: India should remember the history, China Daily, 2017-08-03
- ^ http://www.livemint.com/Politics/ofIIdIQ8Dp93jC5EfUdUKJ/China-demands-unconditional-withdrawal-by-India-in-a-15page.html
- ^ "Bhutan Denies Ceded Claim Over Doklam". Sputnik. 11 August 2017. Retrieved 13 August 2017.
- ^ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-china-idUSKCN1AV29F
External links
- Neville Maxwell, THIS IS INDIA’S CHINA WAR, ROUND TWO, Jul 14, 2017