Indian and Chinese military agree to disengage on disputed Himalayan border

[snoop1130]

Indian and Chinese military agree to disengage on disputed Himalayan border

 

A satellite image taken over Galwan Valley in Ladakh, India, parts of which are contested with China, June 16, 2020, in this handout obtained from Planet Labs Inc. Picture taken June 16, 2020. Mandatory credit PLANET LABS INC/via REUTERS

 

NEW DELHI/BEIJING (Reuters) - Indian and Chinese military commanders have agreed to disengage forces facing off over a disputed stretch of border where a clash last week left 20 Indian soldiers dead, an Indian government source in New Delhi said on Tuesday.

 

Speaking in Beijing, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said the two sides had agreed to take measures to ease tensions.

 

"There was a mutual consensus to disengage," the Indian source said, commenting on the outcome of a meeting between commanders on border on Monday that lasted almost 11 hours.

 

China's Zhao described recent media reports of 40 Chinese casualties in the clash as "fake news".

 

China has not disclosed how many casualties its side suffered in the brutal fighting on June 15, when soldiers beat each other with rocks and wooden sticks embedded with nails, while observing a long-held protocol to avoid using firearms.

 

Troops from the nuclear-armed neighbours have been facing-off in several areas in the Ladakh region in the western Himalayas since last month, and the clash in the Galwan valley last week was the deadliest in more than five decades.

 

Yet, the Indian source said Monday's parley on the Chinese side of the Line of Actual Control (LAC), the de facto border, was conducted in a "cordial, positive and constructive atmosphere."

 

"Modalities for disengagement from all friction areas in Eastern Ladakh were discussed and will be taken forward by both the sides," the Indian source said.

 

In previous rounds of talks, China had asked India to stop all construction work in what it says is Chinese territory.

 

For its part, India has been pushing China to withdraw its troops back to where they were in April.

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-06-23

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

[Geoffggi]

14 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

Speaking in Beijing, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said the two sides had agreed to take measures to ease tensions.

Don't trust the Chinese they will be looking for another route is all .........

[soalbundy]

punch up to be continued, 8 o'clock down the pub, bring your own club.

[Kerryd]

The Chinese started this, deliberately. 
They moved something like 8,000 troops into the area after decades of basically ignoring it. They then started building fortifications, which is what lead to the confrontation between them and the Indian troops.

In the Chinese (state controlled) media, this has barely made the headlines. Meanwhile in India it has become a political football. The Indian PM was elected on a "nationalistic" platform and that nationalism is being tested.

The Chinese know that India is having a major problem with the Covid crisis, just as they know that things between them and the Pakistanis are still simmering over the Kashmir. Most of the world's attention is elsewhere and the Chinese know most of the world could care less about an uninhabited region far away from civilization. 

So why is it important then ? Well, the Chinese want to flex their muscle for one, to show that they, not the USA, are "the power" in the region. It seems they have Pakistan and Nepal in their pockets already but it doesn't hurt to let others in the area know that they are in China's backyard, not America's.

Resources. At lot of that area hasn't really been surveyed/explored/mined - ever. Mostly due to it's remoteness and harsh climate (and hostile locals is some areas). The mountainous regions of Afghanistan are similar. I always thought it odd that Iran exported so much oil but there was virtually no fossil fuel industry in Afghanistan, even before the Russians invaded. In many areas of Afghanistan, the only difference between them and Iran is a line drawn on a map.

It was mentioned that (American) experts thought the mountains of Afghanistan could hold trillions in various ores alone. (But that may have been an exaggeration to try and get the government to agree to mining concessions which, of course, would have mainly been favourable to the Americans - and certain high level Afghans of course.)

Regardless of backroom politics, it is quite likely that the Himalayas do hold massive amounts of profitable ores. It's mainly a matter of getting to them and then extracting/transporting them.

A process that is much harder to do if you don't control the land you want to mine in.
                                                                                As you can see, the disputed area is pretty remote.
  
(Note: not the same "Na Kula" or "Naklua" is in Thailand !)

Interesting to me is how I've looked at a number of maps in a number of news articles about this incident, and most of them don't even acknowledge Tibet's existence, despite this conflict literally being in it's border.

This really isn't much different to what the Chinese are doing in the South China seas, with those rocks they've converted into islands and then built runways on.
Those are about asserting control over a patch of ocean (and all the resources therein). A patch that they actually have zero rights to as it is well outside of their territorial zone (12 mile limit) and is in the Economic zones of a number of other countries.

China's "9 Dash Line" (referring to an area they are claiming in the South China sea, marked by 9 dashes on a map) literally claims the entire South China Sea all the way to the coast of Malaysia, over 1,600 kms away.
They are building up atolls and turning them into military bases to try and legitimize their claims (and project force in the area).

Think "Falkland Islands". The UK controls them and maintains control because that gives them access to the resources in the waters around those islands.
Those (real) islands are over 500 kms from Argentina (which claims them of course) but more than 12,000 kms from the UK !!

The difference is, the UK isn't claiming control over the whole ocean between the Falklands and England. (Well, they aren't anymore at least ! Different story a few centuries ago though !)

You can see by the dashes on the map, China is basically telling other countries in the region that they can have the 12 mile territorial zone off their own coasts, but everything past that belongs to China.

      

[Isaan sailor]

Best way to stop Chinese aggression—boycott Chinese goods.

[Burma Bill]

21 hours ago, Isaan sailor said:

Best way to stop Chinese aggression—boycott Chinese goods.

This is on-going in India at the moment, a campaign telling people not to buy goods labelled "Made in China". Who knows, maybe one day labels might read "A quality Chinese product Made in Bangladesh/Sri Lanka/Myanmar/Thailand etc." ?????

[Morch]

22 hours ago, Isaan sailor said:

Best way to stop Chinese aggression—boycott Chinese goods.

 

Perhaps, but good luck with that. Hard to avoid, even if concentrating just on labeled products. If talking component level, almost impossible. 

 

I think China would be better handled and deterred on the diplomatic level, but this requires international cooperation and leadership from potential participants.

[tonbridgebrit]

On 6/24/2020 at 5:50 AM, Kerryd said:

The Chinese started this, deliberately. 
They moved something like 8,000 troops into the area after decades of basically ignoring it. They then started building fortifications, which is what lead to the confrontation between them and the Indian troops

Thanks for putting this up. Okay, the map you've put up, we can see that the problem is on a bit of land that is in Kashmir.
Now, India and Pakistan have had a confrontation going back decades over who actually owns Kashmir. As in, does Kashmir belong to Pakistan or India ?  And basically, most people outside of India and Pakistan don't really care about who owns it. As in, let them fight their wars, and winner takes it. And if they want to fight a war once every two decades, well, that's up to them.

Now, China is also involved. As in, China itself claims ownership over a small bit of Kashmir.  But, as far as I know, India claims ownership over all of Kashmir. And I think Pakistan also claims ownership over all of Kashmir. By the way, Pakistan is almost fully aligned with China in the Kashmir dispute. As in, there isn't really a problem between Pakistan and China. The problem is between Pakistan and India, and also India and China.

So, China is claiming only a small bit of Kashmir. I say with a grin, why is it, people don't want to side with either Pakistan or India in the Kashmir dispute. But, but as soon as China is involved over a small bit, then most people are against China.   ????

By the way, what about Britain, and when Britain conquered the entire area ? How about we look at some old maps, from the 1800s. How about, land that Britain had under the British Empire, that land can be disputed by Pakistan and India. And all land in that area that Britain did not take, well, that land does not belong to India, or Pakistan ?  So, land that was not part of British India in the 1800s, well, that shouldn't be land that belongs to India today ?   ???? 

Edited June 26, 2020 by tonbridgebrit

[Morch]

 

@tonbridgebrit

 

China's territorial claims encompass more than "only a small bit". People being "against" China on this may have to do with China's numerous other territorial claims and issues with it's neighbors.

 

For all your whataboutism, the topic ain't about the British Empire. Try keeping up.

[tifino]

to Disengage means more likely they are no longer talking to each other? 

 

 - but the killing will go on...