India, China commander talks fails
Where the meeting held?
- The talks were held at Moldo on the Chinese side.
What is the intention of meeting?
- The focus on working out the third phase of disengagement from Patrolling Point 15 in Hot Springs as part of the overall disengagement and de-escalation along the Line of Actual Control (LAC).
- The 13th round of senior military commander talks between India and China ended in a stalemate, with each side blaming the other for it.
- The Indian Army maintained that its side made “constructive suggestions” to resolve the “remaining areas”, while the Chinese military alleged that India made “unreasonable and unrealistic demands”.
- During the meeting, the Indian side, therefore, made constructive suggestions for resolving the remaining areas but the Chinese side was not agreeable and also could not provide any forward-looking proposals.
What’s going on the border area?
- Continuing build-up of troops and infrastructure by China on its side along the Line of Actual Control and as both sides are preparing to be deployed in the high-altitude areas of eastern Ladakh for the second straight winter this year.
- The PLA’s comment on India making “unrealistic demands” stands in stark contrast to New Delhi’s view on the LAC crisis, which began in April 2020 when the PLA massed thousands of troops along the LAC, carried out multiple transgressions in eastern Ladakh, and disregarded the many previously agreed upon border agreements aimed at keeping the peace.
- While negotiations have led to disengagement in some of the areas, thousands of PLA troops remain in forward areas.
What India says?
- Indian Army observed that the situation along the LAC had been caused by unilateral attempts of Chinese side to alter the status quo and in violation of the bilateral agreements.
What about PLA statement?
- Generally, the Chinese military’s statement came from the Defence Ministry, in the earlier talks.
- But now the statement from the PLA’s Western Theatre Command in Chengdu, which has in recent rounds appeared to have taken over the responsibility for putting out statements on the LAC situation.
- This is seen by some observers as Beijing placing less importance on the slow moving negotiations.
- The PLA statement did not suggest any agreement reached on either disengaging or on new protocols.
What about earlier settlement?
- The stand-off began in May, 2020.
- Both sides have held a series of talks at different levels- political, diplomatic and military.
- Part of agreements reached and resulted disengagement from both sides of Pangong Tso in February and the Patrolling Point 17 at Gogra area in August.
Where yet to reach agreement?
- The other friction areas that remain are Hot Springs, Demchok and Depsang.
- Officials remarked that while an agreement for resolving Hot Springs was within reach, Demchok and Depsang were legacy issues and tough to resolve.
- In addition to the overall disengagement and de-escalation, the two sides had also agreed to work out new protocols for patrolling to ensure such instances do not occur again.
Source: The Hindu