The joint statement issued after the foreign ministers of India and China met in Moscow proposes a new set of confidence-building measures (CBMs) to maintain peace along the disputed border, an indication of that existing bilateral agreements have failed to fill the trust gaps between the United States. troops from the two countries on the border.
“The two foreign ministers agreed that as the situation improves, the two sides should accelerate the completion of new mutual confidence-building measures to maintain and enhance peace and tranquility in the border area,” the statement said. issued after Foreign Minister S Jaishankar and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi met in Moscow on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) Foreign Ministers Meeting on Thursday.
He did not elaborate on what CBMs could be, but indicates that New Delhi and Beijing believe more measures must be implemented before the situation spirals out of control in the hostile Himalayan terrain.
The priority, of course, is first to disconnect the two armies along the friction points.
The ongoing four-month tensions along the Royal Line of Control (LAC) in eastern Ladakh indicate that around half a dozen border agreements and dozens of rounds of talks, including 22 rounds under the Special Representatives (SR) high-profile mechanism – could not prevent what happened the night of June 15 in the Galwan Valley – the death of soldiers and the rapid erosion of trust.
So far, the main agreements linking New Delhi and Beijing to keep peace on the border are the Agreement on the Maintenance of Peace and Tranquility Along the Line of Royal Control on the Sino-Indian Border (1993) , Agreement on Confidence-Building Measures in the Military Field Along the Line of Actual Control at the China-India Border (1996), and the India-China Border Defense Cooperation Agreement (2013) , which lists ways to reduce misunderstandings between the two countries along the border, including prohibiting one side from actively following or following patrols on the other side.
Other agreements signed in 2005 and 2012 talk about the construction of CBM, the political parameters and guiding principles to resolve the boundary issue and the establishment of the Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination on Border Issues between China and India.
New Delhi believes that Beijing’s action in the Galwan Valley breached three of the key bilateral agreements – 1993, 1996 and 2013 – that have kept the disputed border for the most part quiet.
Obviously more needs to be done.
“The Indian side does not see the development of India-China relations as dependent on solving the boundary issue and India does not want to back down,” read a Chinese reading on the meeting, quoting Jaishankar.
However, it is quite clear that the question of limits, especially after the current round of tension and the death of the troops, is tied to the general relationship.
Friction and violence have impacted economic and commercial ties as well as slowing down exchanges between peoples, all in a year that marks the 70th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and India.
The new round of friction has also affected the growing economic interdependence between the two countries.
Clearly, the new CBMs planned to keep the peace on the border must focus and address the ground-level trust gaps between the two armies.
The problem is the fact that LAC is not demarcated: perceptions differ on both sides.
There should also be a consensus among top leaders on the new CBMs, which may not be that easy.
“Both leaders (Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping) are taking a more assertive stance towards all rivals, including each other; attributing military tensions to hostility from the other side and demanding that soldiers be firm in defending national borders and forcefully rejecting perceived aggression, ”Toby Dalton and Tong Zhao of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace write in a research article on the ongoing tensions.
However, Jaishankar and Wang seem to agree that there is an urgent need to disengage from the hostility and reestablish engagement both diplomatically and militarily.
According to the joint India-China statement, both parties agreed that “the current situation in the border areas is not in the interest of either party,” and “therefore … border troops from both parties should continue their dialogue, disconnect quickly, maintain adequate distance and relieve tension. “
The ministers agreed that “both sides will respect all existing agreements and protocols on border issues between China and India, maintain peace and tranquility in the border areas and avoid any action that could aggravate things.”
.
