In the first official statement in Parliament on the India-China standoff at the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in eastern Ladakh, defence minister Rajnath Singh laid out India’s case. He provided a quick backdrop of the border conflict, outlined the post-1988 template where the two sides agreed to maintain peace and tranquillity at the border and deepen bilateral relations without necessarily compromising their positions on the dispute itself, chronicled the series of violations of this broad understanding by China over the last five months, and described the current state of negotiations where the onus fundamentally rests on China to disengage.
After months of political ambiguity over the exact situation at the border, Mr Singh’s speech came across as a sharp, comprehensive, and effective intervention from the highest levels in government. Three features of India’s position stand out. One, New Delhi is clear that China has amassed troops, it has not adhered to LAC, it has violated border pacts, it has been violent in its conduct, it has attempted transgressions, and it has attempted to change the status quo unilaterally. Two, India considers this unacceptable, it has conveyed its position to China unambiguously, and New Delhi will pursue dialogue and hope for a peaceful resolution of the issue. Three, while relying on talks, India will continue to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Mr Singh pointedly spoke of counter-deployments, friction points and face-offs, including moves at the end of August when India successfully resisted Chinese attempts and gained tactical advantage.
There were gaps in the speech too, some of it understandable given the sensitive nature of the situation. Mr Singh refrained from asserting that China was currently in Indian territory — which has drawn criticism. But while more details would have been good, this is also a time when the government needs to be given the benefit of doubt because of the complex nature of the crisis. One way to, however, provide more information is to have a closed door briefing for leaders of other parties, which, as a report in this newspaper suggested on Wednesday, is under consideration. The defence minister did well. The government should now build a national consensus to deal with the challenge.
{{/usCountry}}There were gaps in the speech too, some of it understandable given the sensitive nature of the situation. Mr Singh refrained from asserting that China was currently in Indian territory — which has drawn criticism. But while more details would have been good, this is also a time when the government needs to be given the benefit of doubt because of the complex nature of the crisis. One way to, however, provide more information is to have a closed door briefing for leaders of other parties, which, as a report in this newspaper suggested on Wednesday, is under consideration. The defence minister did well. The government should now build a national consensus to deal with the challenge.
{{/usCountry}}