New Delhi: With Prime Minister Narendra Modi stating that the prolonged border dispute between India and China needs to be urgently addressed for the sake of the region and the world in general, it is time to take a relook at the genesis of this problem and where it stands today.
“It is my belief that we need to urgently address the prolonged situation on our borders so that the abnormality in our bilateral interactions can be put behind us,” Modi said during an interview with US publication Newsweek. “Stable and peaceful relations between India and China are important for not just our two countries, but the entire region and world.”
He further stated that he hoped and believed that “through positive and constructive bilateral engagement at the diplomatic and military levels, we will be able to restore and sustain peace and tranquility in our borders”.
China reacted to Modi’s statement on Thursday saying that “sound and stable ties” serve the common interests of both China and India. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning, however, at the same time stated that the boundary question “does not represent the entirety of the India-China relations”.
“It should be placed appropriately in the bilateral relations and managed properly,” Mao said during a media briefing. “The two sides are in close communication through diplomatic and military channels.”
According to MS Pratibha, Associate Fellow at the East Asia Centre in the Manohar Parrikar Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses, Prime Minister Modi’s comment will make people take note. “We have resolved only some sticking points,” Pratibha told ETV Bharat. “We are trying to tell China to resolve the rest of the issues. We want the withdrawal of the heavy presence of troop deployment in the India-China border areas.”
She further stated that China, too, wants to normalise ties with India. “China has a lot of business interests in India and wants India to normalise economic exchanges and people-to-people contacts. India is saying if China wants to normalise ties, then the situation at the Line of Actual Control should also become normal,” Pratibha said.
The long-running Sino-Indian border dispute revolves around the sovereignty of several sizable and smaller pieces of territory situated between China and India. The India-China border, known as the Line of Actual Control (LAC), stretches over 3,488 km across the Himalayas.
One of these territories, Aksai Chin, is under Chinese administration, but is also claimed by India. It primarily consists of sparsely inhabited, high-altitude terrain, although some valuable pasture lands are present along its periphery. Positioned at the crossroads of Kashmir, Tibet, and Xinjiang, Aksai Chin is intersected by China’s Xinjiang-Tibet Highway.
Another area of contention lies south of the McMahon Line, situated within what was formerly known as the North-East Frontier Agency (NEFA) and is now the northeast Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh. While administered by India, this territory is also claimed by China. The McMahon Line, established through an agreement between British India and Tibet as part of the 1914 Simla Convention, remains a focal point of dispute. However, China rejects the validity of the McMahon Line agreement, arguing that Tibet was not independent when it entered into the Simla Convention.
Tensions along the border reached a boiling point in 1962 when Chinese and Indian troops engaged in a bitter border war. China launched simultaneous offensives in Ladakh and across the McMahon Line in what was then NEFA. Initially making inroads, the Chinese soon achieved all of their territorial objectives before unilaterally withdrawing after a month of fighting.
The war ended with China in control of Aksai Chin and holding claimed territories in Arunachal Pradesh. Thousands of soldiers lost their lives on both sides. There was a brief border clash in 1967 in the region of Sikkim, despite there being an agreed border in that region. In 1987 and in 2013, potential conflicts over the Line of Actual Control were successfully de-escalated.
Agreements were signed pending the ultimate resolution of the boundary question in 1993 and 1996. This included “confidence-building measures” and the Line of Actual Control. To address the boundary question, formalised groups were created such as the Joint Working Group (JWG) on the boundary question. It was to be assisted by the Diplomatic and Military Expert Group. In 2003 the Special Representatives (SRs) mechanism was constituted. In 2012, another dispute resolution mechanism, the Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination (WMCC) was framed.
However, a major stand-off took place in Doklam in 2017 when Indian troops moved to prevent Chinese road construction in an area claimed by both China and Bhutan. After months of escalating tensions, the crisis was finally resolved through diplomatic channels.
Since the eruption of the eastern Ladakh border standoff on May 5, 2020, following a violent clash between troops of both sides in the Pangong Tso Lake area, relations between India and China have gone into a deep freeze, with the exception of trade ties. Twenty-one rounds of corps commander-level talks have been conducted thus far in an attempt to resolve the standoff.
According to the Chinese military, both sides have agreed to disengage from four specific points: the Galwan Valley, Pangong Tso Lake, Hot Springs and Jianan Daban (Gogra). However, India is urging the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to also disengage from the Depsang and Demchok areas. India maintains that normalcy in relations with China cannot be restored as long as the border situation remains tense and unresolved.
China has also been engaging in grey zone warfare with India over the border dispute by spreading disinformation, creating false narratives and running influencing campaigns. For the fourth time since 2017, China this month released yet another list of new names for places and sites in Arunachal Pradesh.
The latest list released by China’s Ministry of Civil Affairs contains new names for 30 places and sites in Arunachal Pradesh. These include 11 residential areas, 12 mountains, four rivers, one lake, one mountain pass and a piece of land. All the names have been given in Chinese characters, Tibetan and Pinyin, the Roman alphabet version of Mandarin Chinese.
China first released a list of new names for six places in Arunachal Pradesh in 2017. This was followed by a second list of 15 places in 2021, and then a third list of names for 11 places in 2023. China refers to Arunachal Pradesh as Zangnan or south Tibet, a territory Beijing claims to be a part of the Tibet Autonomous Region. In Mandarin Chinese, Zang refers to Tibet and “nan” means south.
Read more: China Says Boundary Issue With India Does Not Represent Entirety Of Bilateral Ties
