November 22, 2024 22:09 (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
Centre to send over 10,000 additional soldiers to violence-hit Manipur amid fresh violence | Chhattisgarh: 10 Maoists killed during encounter with security forces in Sukma | Baba Siddique murder case: Arrested Akashdeep Gill used a labourer's hotspot to evade tracking, say police | Donald Trump picks 'smart and tough' Pam Bondi as new US Attorney General after Matt Gaetz withdraws | Canadian government denies media report that claims PM Modi knew of Khalistani leader Nijjar's killing
Never accepted China's unilaterally defined 1959 Line of Actual Control: India
India-China
Image Credit: IBNS File

Never accepted China's unilaterally defined 1959 Line of Actual Control: India

| @indiablooms | 29 Sep 2020, 08:53 pm

New Delhi/IBNS: India on Tuesday rejected China's interpretation of the Line of Actual Control, the de facto border between the two countries, in Ladakh and said the 'so-called unilaterally defined 1959 LAC' was never accepted.

During a virtual media briefing, Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) spokesperson Anurag Srivastava said: "We have seen a report in the Hindustan Times of 29th August, quoting a Chinese Foreign Ministry statement regarding China’s position on the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in the India-China border areas."


"India has never accepted the so-called unilaterally defined 1959 Line of Actual Control (LAC). This position has been consistent and well known, including to the Chinese side."

Srivastava informed that under various bilateral agreements both India and China have committed to clarification and confirmation of the LAC to reach a common understanding of the alignment of the border.

"In fact, the two sides had engaged in an exercise to clarify and confirm the LAC up to 2003, but this process could not proceed further as the Chinese side did not show a willingness to pursue it," he said.

"Therefore, the insistence now of the Chinese side that there is only one LAC is contrary to the solemn commitments made by China in these agreements," said Srivastava.

 

"As we have previously made clear, the Indian side has always respected and abided by the LAC. As the Hon’ble Raksha Mantri stated in the Parliament recently, it is the Chinese side which by its attempts to transgress the LAC in various parts of the Western Sector, has tried to unilaterally alter the status quo," he said.
 

In the last few months, the Chinese side has repeatedly "affirmed that the current situation in the border areas should be resolved" in accordance with the agreements signed between the two countries, the Ministry noted.

In the agreement reached between External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar and his Chinese counterpart on  Sept 10 also, the Chinese side has reiterated its commitment to abide by all the existing agreements.

"We, therefore, expect that the Chinese side will sincerely and faithfully abide by all agreements and understandings in their entirety and refrain from advancing an untenable unilateral interpretation of the LAC," Srivastava said.

 

India and China have been engaged into border standoff along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in eastern Ladakh since early May.

 

In a deadly clash in 40 years, at least 20 Indian personnel were martyred at Galwan Valley in eastern Ladakh on Jun 15 night.

As per unconfirmed reports, at least 40 Chinese soldiers were killed but the Asian country did not disclose any figure in terms of casualties on its side.

Support Our Journalism

We cannot do without you.. your contribution supports unbiased journalism

IBNS is not driven by any ism- not wokeism, not racism, not skewed secularism, not hyper right-wing or left liberal ideals, nor by any hardline religious beliefs or hyper nationalism. We want to serve you good old objective news, as they are. We do not judge or preach. We let people decide for themselves. We only try to present factual and well-sourced news.

Support objective journalism for a small contribution.