The loss of the Army Commanding Officer is especially destructive and he had been directly involved in countermine talks with the Chinese side, including one hours before the clash took place. 20 Indian soldiers martyred China Violates LAC
MEA Official Statement
• “On the last evening and night of 15th June, 2020 a violent face-off happened as a result of an attempt by the Chinese side to unilateralist change the status quo there. Both sides suffered casualties that could have been avoided had the agreement at the higher level been painstaking followed by the Chinese side,” a statement reads.
China departed from LAC consensus, wanted to unilaterally change status quo, says India
According to the MEA, the ‘violent face-off could have been avoided if the agreement that was reached at the level was ‘scrupulously followed by the Chinese side’.
• China through its military action at Galwan in Ladakh (India), which resulted in 3 killed on the Indian side, has violated three key bilateral agreements – 1993, 1996 and 2013 that have been central to maintaining peace and tranquility on the disputed Line of Actual Control (LAC).
Chinese Military action violates 1993, 1996, and 2013 border agreements
The 1993 pact clearly states that both sides will “jointly check” the alignment of MC where there is a doubt.
• The key extract from the 1993 agreement:
“No activities of either side shall infringe the line of actual control (LAC). In case personnel of one side cross the Line of Actual Control (LAC), upon being cautioned by the other side, they shall immediately pull back to their own side of the Line of Actual Control (LAC). When mandatory, the two sides shall jointly check and determine the segments of the Line of Actual Control (LAC) where they have different views as to its alignment.”
• Key extract (1996):
“If the border personnel of the two sides army come in a face-to-face situation due to differences on the alignment of the line of actual control (LAC) or any other reason, they shall exercise self-restraint and take all necessary steps to avoid an hike of the situation. Both sides (India-China) shall also enter into immediate consultations through diplomatic and/or other available channels to review the situation and prevent any hike of tension.”
• Key extract (2013):
“The two sides (India-China) agree that they shall not follow or tail patrols of the other side in areas where there is no common understanding of the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in the India-China border areas.”
India wanted to establish Hotline
• China’s track record on adhering to agreed CBMs (Confidence Building Measures) and protocols on the Line of Actual Control (LAC) has been poor in the past few years. Having agreed to establish a hotline between the two military headquarters in 2013, the Chinese side scramble the proposal by saying its embassy in Delhi should be notified first in case the Indian side wanted to make a call. Then, there were differences on encryption codes and translation arrangements. As a result, a hotline is still to be operationalized despite positive noises from the Indian side.
• In the past, the Doklam (India) crisis in 2017 saw tensions building up along the Pangong Tso lake as well with soldiers engaging in a fight with sticks and stones. However, the Eastern Ladakh standoff is of a much more serious nature, with over 6000 Chinese troops lined up with tanks and artillery, faced off with a larger Indian forces. Troop build up has also been reported across the borders in Sikkim, Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh and Arunachal Pradesh. 20 Indian soldiers martyred China Violates LAC