India China Agreement 1996

December 10, 2020 at 5:29 pm

Since the 1962 war, the two countries have concluded various bilateral agreements as confidence-building measures (CBM) to avoid an escalation of the situation, including the high-profile 1996 agreement and the “dominant practice” of not using weapons near the LA, which stems from this agreement and others. We outlined below the various bilateral agreements and the government and the international sources in which they are accessible: the 15 June border conflict is said to have taken place during an obvious “de-escalation process”, weeks after “high-ranking military commanders of both nations” agreed on 6 June to “peacefully resolve the situation in the border areas”. , in accordance with various bilateral agreements.” The collision on the ridge reportedly involved hand-to-hand combat with iron bars, stones and fists, resulting in the deaths of 20 Indian soldiers and an unknown number of Chinese soldiers. While neither side carried rifles, most of the soldiers killed in the fighting lost their footing or were pushed by the narrow back of the Himalayas and fell to death. These are the first deaths along the LAC since 1975. “All border service troops always carry weapons, especially when they leave their posts. Those in Galwan on June 15 did so,” the foreign minister said. But, he added, the reason Indian soldiers did not use their service weapons was “a long-standing practice (in accordance with the 1996 and 2005 agreements) not to use firearms during faceoffs.” The term “LAC” was legally recognized in the Salino-Indian agreements signed in 1993 and 1996. The 1996 agreement states that “no activity by both parties shall cross the line of effective control.” [8] However, Clause 6 of the 1993 Agreement on Peacekeeping and Calm along the effective line of control in Indian border areas states that “both parties agree that references to the effective line of control of this agreement do not affect their respective positions on the issue of borders.” [9] “The Chinese side has repeatedly abused this article of the agreement. We know that they laboriously developed the infrastructure on their side of the border against the spirit of the agreement, but when India tried to follow that example, they used that article to warn the Indians that the agreement had not been respected. In this context, the Minister of Foreign Affairs` statement that firearms are not used as a long-standing practice is at the bottom of the day, as several agreements signed over time reinforce this practice of restraint. On the issue of the India-China border, the two countries reaffirmed the need to maintain peace at the borders and to continue the implementation of the agreements signed above, with border issues at the point of final solution.

In addition to the 1996 agreement, Dr. Jaishankar also refers to the 2005 agreement. The non-resolution of the border conflict led to the Salino-Indian war in 1962 and there was no definitive agreement between the countries on the exact location of the LAC. According to Alyssa Ayres, South Asia specialist at the Council on Foreign Relations, “China and India have different views of where they should be, resulting in regular border crossings. Often these tensions do not escalate; A serious border demarcation situation, such as the one we have at the moment, is less common, although it is the fourth since 2013. The first agreement of 1993 aimed to maintain peace along the effective line of control (LAC) along the India-China border and to work towards a peaceful settlement of border disputes between countries.