1993 And 1996 India China Agreement Upsc
The specification of this Phantom LAC as a starting point and central simpere has rendered virtually unusable several important provisions and articles of the four agreements for more than a quarter of a century. In fact, many of these articles have no influence on the reality on the ground. For example, Article XII of the 1996 Convention states that “this agreement is subject to the ratification reserve and enters into force on the day of the exchange of ratification instruments.” We don`t know if and when it happened. The Government of the Republic of India and the Government of the People`s Republic of China (hereafter referred to as both parties), convinced that they serve the fundamental interests of the peoples of India and China to promote a long-term constructive and cooperative partnership based on the five principles of peaceful coexistence, mutual respect and sensitivity to the concerns and aspirations of the other and equality, with the desire to qualitatively improve bilateral relations at all levels and in all areas, while addressing differences in a fair, reasonable and mutually acceptable manner through peaceful means, and reaffirming their commitment to respect and implement the agreement on maintaining peace and tranquillity along the effective line of control in the India-China border areas , signed on 7 September 1993 and the agreement on confidence-building measures in the military field, signed on 29 September 1996, along the effective line of control in the India-China border regions, signed on 29 November 1996, Reaffirming the statement on the principles of relations and comprehensive cooperation between India and China, recalling that both sides have appointed special representatives to review the framework for the settlement of the India-China border issue and that the two special representatives have consulted in a friendly, cooperative and constructive atmosphere, and notes that both sides are seeking a political solution to the border issue within the framework of their general and long-term interests. , and note that aspirants should be aware of the 1993 Agreement on Peacekeeping and Calm within the Board, Unfortunately, these are profoundly erroneous agreements that, at best, make the search for a solution to the border issue a strategic illusion and, at worst, a cynical diplomatic sleight of hand. Ironically, India and China continue to see these agreements as the basis for the vision of progress on the issue of borders. Under the 1993 agreement (on peacekeeping and calm along the effective line of control (LAC) in Indian border areas), “until a definitive solution is found), “both sides must scrupulously respect and respect the LAC between the two parties… No activity by both parties shall exceed the LAC. In the eastern sector, where the Chinese have not accepted the bulk McMahon line, which follows the watershed principle, and in the western sector, which is experiencing another episodic impasse, the LAC is two hypothetical lines. The first is what Indian troops consider, to what extent they can dominate by patrols, which goes far beyond the point where they are actually deployed and present. The second thing is what the Chinese think they control effectively, it is well south of the line on which they were positioned in 1993.
If the word blacksmiths of the 1993 agreement had strictly complied with and adhered to the exercise with the phrase “Until a final solution, each party must respect the existing line of control/use” instead of the “LAC”, it would have been easier to maintain the peace.