Sharp divergences between India and China remained at stalemate along the Royal Line of Control (LAC) even after the two sides framed a five-point roadmap to ease tensions on the disputed border and accelerate the withdrawal of troops.
The two sides reached an agreement on the five points during talks between Foreign Minister S Jaishankar and his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi on the sidelines of a meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in Moscow on Thursday night. .
Items include a dialogue aimed at rapid disengagement, maintaining adequate distance between the two sides’ troops and easing tensions, complying with all border management agreements and protocols, and working on new confidence-building measures once let the situation ease.
Also read: How the Jaishankar-Wang 5-Point Consensus Works Depends on One Man | Analysis
Wang was quoted by a statement from the Chinese Foreign Ministry acknowledging that it is normal for two important neighbors, such as India and China, to have differences and that bilateral ties have reached “a crossroads”, although there is no challenge that cannot overcome. if both sides keep moving in the right direction.
These comments marked a slight shift in China’s stance in recent weeks, including during Defense Minister Rajnath Singh’s meeting with his Chinese counterpart Wei Fenghe on September 4 to hold the Indian side responsible for the standoff.
Also read: India-China Joint Statement Emphasizes Need for Greater Confidence-building
In other areas, however, marked differences persisted between the two parties, and experts noted that both countries had not made any mention of the reestablishment of the status quo in LAC as it existed in April, nor had they set a deadline to complete the disconnection and de-escalation. .
The statement by China’s Foreign Ministry also said that the Indian side “does not consider the development of India-China relations to depend on the solution of the boundary issue,” but people familiar with the events dismissed it.
The people, speaking on condition of anonymity, noted that Jaishankar had emphasized even before the meeting that “the state of the border cannot be disassociated from the state of the relationship,” and that he had repeated this in conversations with Wang.
Also Read: India and China Agree on a 5-Point Plan to Resolve the Border Standoff – Here’s What You Need to Know
During the meeting, Jaishankar made clear that the recent incidents in eastern Ladakh had “inevitably impacted the development of the bilateral relationship,” said one of the people quoted above. “While the Indian side recognized that a solution to the border issue required time and effort, it was clear that maintaining peace and tranquility in the border areas is essential for the development of ties,” the person added.
People also questioned the Chinese statement’s claim that “the Indian side believes that China’s policy towards India has not changed,” saying that the Chinese side has yet to provide a satisfactory explanation of the concentration of troops and equipment in violation of all existing border agreements. which has created new sources of inflammation throughout LAC.
The Chinese statement quoted Wang as highlighting China’s “tough position” on the situation and emphasizing the need to “immediately stop provocations such as shooting and other dangerous actions” and “push back all personnel and equipment it has trespassed.”
The persons cited above reiterated that Indian troops had not crossed the LAC and it was Chinese troops who had fired into the air during the last clash on September 7 on the southern shore of Pangong Lake. “We are committed to a resolution through peaceful dialogue, but it is the Chinese side that has repeatedly resorted to aggressive military actions and poses,” said a second person.
Former ambassador Vishnu Prakash is among those who remain skeptical about China’s intentions and willingness to honor commitments made during Thursday’s meeting.
“The joint India-China statement on border disengagement is somewhat uninspiring. The Chinese do not appear to have agreed to restore the status quo ante. There are no timelines, ”he said.
“The understanding on quick disconnect is vague at best. It will be a miracle if these commitments are fulfilled, ”added Prakash.
.
