-
周波:中印要从僵局中向前迈进,应回头看看
最后更新: 2021-06-17 14:36:48(以下为2021年6月15日南华早报原文)
China and India should look back to move forward on border impasse
One year has passed since a deadly brawl between Chinese and Indian troops in the Galwan Valley in the China-Indian border areas, which resulted in the death of 20 Indian soldiers and four Chinese troops. The aftermath is still being felt today.
Beijing was given the cold shoulder when it o!ered to help pandemic-devastated India. Such resentment speaks volumes of the frosty relationship, which was described by Indian Minister of External A!airs S. Jaishankar as “profoundly disturbed”.
In a few meetings with Indian scholars, I was surprised to learn how they almost invariably believed that the Galwan clash was the result of a planned attack by China. This is impossible. If China has to compete in an America-initiated great power competition, why would it suddenly divert its attention and strength away from that to take on India?
Since the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in the border areas is not demarcated, it is not rare for face-offs between Chinese and Indian troops. According to the Chinese, Indian troops started to unilaterally build roads and bridges in the valley in April 2020, despite Chinese protests.
The deadly incident was dreadful in that it came closest to breaking a decades-old tacit agreement between the two countries not to use force. “In the last 40 years, not a single bullet has been fired because of [the border dispute],” Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said in 2017. But the Galwan clash, even though no bullet was fired, has changed the whole atmosphere.
The complexity of the China-India border dispute is daunting. Even the length of the border is not necessarily agreed on. China believes it is 2,000km long, while India believes it is 3,488km. According to New Delhi, Pakistan illegally ceded 5,180 sq km of Indian territory in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir to China in 1963. Both China and India maintained that the valley is their own territory.
To makes things worse, the LAC is not verified. A 1993 agreement between the two governments stipulates that “when necessary, the two sides jointly check and determine the segments of the Line of Actual Control where they have different views as to its alignment”. But when is it necessary?
The approaches of China and India seem irreconcilable. China prefers a top-down approach, which is basically a land swap based on mutual accommodation, while India insists on a bottom-up approach of verifying the LAC as the priority.
Beijing suspects that, once the alignment of the LAC is verified, India would take it as a de facto border and refuse further negotiations. Such suspicion is not entirely groundless. India has refused any talks on the position of Arunachal Pradesh, which China holds as part of southern Tibet, citing the reason that Tawang is the birthplace of the 6th Dalai Lama.
How to prevent the dispute from spilling over into a conflict? The way forward is to look
back. Between 1993 and 2013, China and India reached four agreements on confidence-building measures at governmental and military levels. This is more than any bilateral agreements China has signed with other countries.
And they are substantive, too, which is impressive. Both rea"rm that they shall reduce or limit their respective military forces along the LAC to minimum levels; major categories of armaments such as combat tanks, infantry combat vehicles, large-calibre guns, surface-to-surface missiles and surface- to-air missiles are to be reduced; large-scale military exercises involving more than one division in the proximity of the LAC shall be avoided; and combat aircraft should not fly within 10km of the LAC.
If only these measures were being implemented. In fact, both sides are strengthening their military presence in the region. This is no surprise in the wake of a crisis. But when the situation cools down, both countries will have to think about how they can best make the border areas peaceful and tranquil.
One way is to resume the joint working group and ask the diplomatic and military experts working under it to find the low-hanging fruits in the confidence-building agreements. New confidence- building measures could also be ushered in. In the wake of the incident, at least 11 rounds of corps- commander-level talks were held, which helped to de-escalate the situation. Such regular meetings of front-line senior military officers should be maintained.
Both sides should also consider establishing hotlines for real-time communication. China has military hotlines with Russia, the United States, South Korea and Vietnam. Reportedly, China and Japan are considering establishing one as well. India often uses its hotline with Pakistan. There is no reason the two immediate neighbours with territorial disputes should not have similar instruments.
Perhaps the boldest step might be to establish buffer zones in the most dangerous areas along the LAC. Without prejudicing their respective positions on the boundary question, this is the most effective way to disengage and prevent conflict. Both sides agree they shall not follow or tail patrols of the other side in areas where there is no common understanding of the LAC.
Building buffer zones is a step further. And it is possible, too. From the mountains around Pangong Lake, a de facto buffer zone has already been established after the mutual withdrawal of troops.
It is ridiculous if, in the 21st century, Beijing and New Delhi are still hijacked by a dispute that is a colonial remnant, not least because apart from this dispute, they have no outstanding problems with each other.
Gone are the days when India said “Hindi Chini bhai bhai”, which means, in Hindi, “Indians and Chinese are brothers”. But China and India have every reason not to become foes. The border issue should not be a perennial curse. The two nuclear neighbours can ill-afford even a conventional war.
Senior Colonel Zhou Bo (ret) is a senior fellow at the Centre for International Security and Strategy at Tsinghua University and a China Forum expert
本文系观察者网独家稿件,文章内容纯属作者个人观点,不代表平台观点,未经授权,不得转载,否则将追究法律责任。关注观察者网微信guanchacn,每日阅读趣味文章。
-
本文仅代表作者个人观点。
- 责任编辑: 戴苏越 
-
普京不敢直视拜登?俄外交官驳斥CNN
2021-06-17 13:46 普京 -
美国会两院表决通过将黑奴解放日定为联邦假日
2021-06-17 13:46 美国政治 -
抗议军方的缅甸国足队员在日比赛后拒绝回国
2021-06-17 13:25 -
50万剂中国科兴疫苗运抵菲律宾
2021-06-17 11:38 新冠肺炎抗疫战 -
怒斥CNN记者后,拜登道歉
2021-06-17 10:52 美国一梦 -
“我听了特朗普总统的…呃…普京的发布会”
2021-06-17 10:48 美国政治 -
除了联合声明,他俩还谈了啥?
2021-06-17 10:44 -
被美媒问“你怕什么?”普京怼回去
2021-06-17 10:10 俄罗斯之声 -
拜登挑拨:俄罗斯受到中国“挤压”
2021-06-17 10:06 俄罗斯之声 -
普京反问:谁才是凶手?
2021-06-17 09:09 普京 -
美国新增确诊12747例、死亡420例
2021-06-17 06:23 新冠肺炎抗疫战 -
中俄牵头,2035年在月球建成国际科研站
2021-06-16 23:36 航空航天 -
泽连斯基:西方若是不帮,乌克兰将被迫发展出欧洲最强军队
2021-06-16 23:05 乌克兰之殇 -
比利时议员提涉疆议案,外交部:已决定对其实施制裁
2021-06-16 22:55 欧洲乱局 -
祈福疫情早日结束,日本57米巨型观音像戴上口罩
2021-06-16 22:44 日本 -
“不好意思,不收中国人” 加拿大种族歧视连孩子都不放过
2021-06-16 21:27 -
俄罗斯考虑向中国空间站派遣宇航员
2021-06-16 20:39 航空航天 -
中俄联合发布《国际月球科研站路线图》和《合作伙伴指南》
2021-06-16 20:26 航空航天 -
“了解中国成功的秘诀,关键在于了解中国共产党”
2021-06-16 19:56 建党百年 -
“中俄正与多方商讨合作建设月球站,其中欧洲航天局为最大伙伴”
2021-06-16 19:49 航空航天
相关推荐 -
俄罗斯要求美方“撤人”:将猛攻基辅决策中心 评论 208
用人民币买俄油?斯里兰卡最新回应 评论 88
阻挠中国投资,澳媒敲警钟:小心自废武功 评论 60
“再突破,中国登月迈出关键一步” 评论 151最新闻 Hot-
特朗普“按头”6国承认以色列,巴基斯坦拒绝
-
美媒预警:重大危险信号!
-
“中国兴趣浓厚”,哈萨克斯坦:重点安排!
-
中国新突破:巴掌大设备或可筛癌,灵敏度暴涨1万倍
-
中国反超,日本再降一位
-
40次提及!特朗普大吹宴会厅,被批无视美国人痛苦
-
“通行费?没有的事儿,我们要收的是服务费”
-
俄罗斯要求美方“撤人”:将猛攻基辅决策中心
-
呵呵,“日本还想威慑中国,无能为力”
-
石油大省闹“独立”,卡尼警告:你们会后悔的
-
美国拒绝伊朗国家队过夜,墨西哥接手
-
“中国消费者不再仰望西方文化,开始回望自己”
-
黎巴嫩多地遭空袭,内塔尼亚胡:与真主党处于战争中
-
“若美国对华态度变了,谁还搭理印度”
-
闻所未闻!“特朗普让美国科学家闭嘴”
-
美军称在伊朗南部实施自卫打击
-

观察员

上海市互联网违法与不良信息举报中心