1993 India China Agreement – My Virtual Doctor

1993 India China Agreement

by Vasil Popovski

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] However, the framework agreement can only be concluded when China`s position is clear. According to Indian negotiators, China wants India to comply with its requirements not only in the west, i.e. aksai Chin, but also in the east: if not all of Arunachal Pradesh, at least its key city of Tawang, with its important monastery. A negotiation where “what belongs to you is negotiable, and what is mine is mine” is clearly not acceptable to India. The term “effective line of control” was allegedly used by Chinese Prime Minister Zhou Enlai in a 1959 memo to Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. [2] The delimitation existed as an informal ceasefire line between India and China after the Sino-Indian War of 1962-1993, when their existence was officially accepted as an “effective line of control” in a bilateral agreement. [5] Over the past four months, China has moved the LAC, as India understood after 1993, to a well-Indian territory. This ranges from 1.5 km in some places to 4.5 km in others. And as is generally the case, China has put forward a legal argument to justify its new positions on the ground.

It says that the 1993 agreement, which created the LAC, is only a legal document signed by both countries to maintain peace and calm and says nothing on the line. Which, of course, is technically correct. The dialogue between India and China to resolve the border dispute is deadlocked. Although the two sides agreed in 2005 on the policy parameters and guiding principles of a border settlement, they were unable to develop a framework agreement that could be used for border delimitation. The SR, which was appointed in 2003, appears to have developed many of the technical issues necessary to establish a framework agreement, but it requires final pressure from the heads of state and government to win the case for the creation of an international border recognized by the two sides. This issue is undoubtedly related to the strategic calculations of both parties. As recent events have shown, these calculations risk destroying their mutual loss. Note: Aspirants should be aware of the 1993 agreement on peacekeeping and calm along the LAC.

In 1993, India and China signed the LAC agreement without demarcation or demarcation (neither on the map nor on the ground) with the simple aim of maintaining peace and calm.