China said it agreed with India to peacefully resolve the tensions


China says it has agreed with India to peacefully resolve their Himalayan border tensions following violent clashes in decades. Ministry of foreign affairs spokesman Zhao Lijian told reporters at a Wednesday briefing that ” the two parties agree to resolve this issue through dialogue and consultation, and make efforts to ease the situation and safeguard peace and tranquility in the border area. ”

Zhao repeated Chinese claims that the clashes, in which an Indian officer and 19 soldiers were reportedly killed and several others were injured, came after Indian forces were ” provoked and attacked the Chinese staff, which lead to fears, the physical confrontation between the two sides of the border, troops, and resulted in the loss of human lives. ”

China has not said if any of its soldiers have been wounded or killed.

“China has made strong protests and to the rear of the representations with the Indian side. Once again, we ask the Indian party to act on our consensus, the strict discipline of his first line troops not to cross the line, not to provocations and not to take unilateral actions that could complicate the situation., “Zhao said.

This IS A breaking NEWS UPDATE. AP’s earlier story follows below:

As some commentators have called for revenge, the government of India has been silent on Wednesday in the aftermath of clashes with the Chinese army in an area disputed border in the top of the Himalayas, the Indian army has said claimed 20 soldiers of life.

An official of the Communist Party newspaper, said the clash occurred because India had misjudged the Chinese army, the strength and the will to respond. The Global Times, which often reflects nationalistic views within the leadership of the party, said that China has not indicated whether he had been injured in the fighting, to avoid comparisons and avoid a new escalation.

The indian security forces said, no party has fired no shots in the conflict in the Ladakh region on Monday night, it was the first confrontation deadly on the border area between India and China since 1975.

While the experts said that the two nations were unlikely to head in a war, they also believe that the easing of tensions quickly will be difficult.

Indian Defence Ministry spokesman Colonel Aman Anand did not respond immediately to questions about the situation Wednesday, or if talks have been planned in order to ease tensions.

“This will probably be a turning point in India-China relations and the geopolitics of the Indo-Pacific region,” said Abraham Denmark, the Asia program director at the Wilson Center. “We have already seen the worst of the clash on the China-India border more than 50 years, the two countries are headed by men who have embraced nationalism, and both countries are faced with enormous national and international upheaval as a result of COVID-19, and other long-standing problems. ”

The main questions are now if one of the parties may find a path to deescalation, and whether India, the allies such as the united States is going to help. “It is a very volatile and dangerous situation between the two nationalists, the nuclear powers, at a time when American influence is badly diminished,” Denmark said.

The editorial in the Global Times on Wednesday, said India’s reaction was in large part due to the encouragement of the UNITED states, China’s chief strategic rival that has continued to develop relationships with India’s military.

“The arrogance and recklessness of the Indian side, is the main reason of the consistency of the tensions along the China-India borders,” the editorial said. China, “and do not create conflicts, but is not afraid of the conflict or the other,” he said.

China claims around 90,000 square kilometers (35,000 square miles) of territory in India’s north-east, while India says China occupies 38,000 square kilometers (15,000 square miles) of its territory in the Aksai Chin Plateau of the Himalayas, the contiguous parts of the Ladakh region.

India has unilaterally declared Ladakh a federal territory while separating the disputed Kashmir in August 2019. China is among the few countries to strongly condemn the move, raising it in international fora, including the U. N. Security Council.

Thousands of soldiers of the two camps were confronted with a month, along a secluded part of the 3,380-kilometre (2,100-mile) Line of Actual Control, the border established after war between India and China in 1962, which resulted in an uneasy truce.

The Indian Army said that three soldiers are dead at the beginning. The other 17 are dead after having been “severely wounded in the line of duty, and exposed to sub-zero temperatures high in the mountains,” he said in a statement Tuesday, which did not disclose the nature of the wounded soldiers.

The troops clashed with fists and rocks, Indian security officials said on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to disclose the information.

After the shock, the two parties have “cleared” the area where the fighting happened, the Indian Army said.

The United Nations has urged both parties ” to exercise maximum restraint. ”

“We are concerned by reports of violence and deaths at the Line of Actual Control between India and China,” U. N. associate spokesman Eri Kaneko said. “We take positive note of the reports that the two countries have engaged in to defuse the situation. ”

Michael Kugelman, an expert on South Asia at the Wilson Center, said that the two countries are unlikely to go to war because they can’t ” afford a conflict. ”

“But let’s be clear: It is amazing to think that they can magically deescalate after a deadly exchange with a higher number of deaths,” he said. “This crisis is not ending anytime soon. ”

Vivek Katju, a former Indian diplomat, said the deadly violence represented a dramatic departure from the four-decades-old status quo of troops of the two countries staring each other down without any deaths.

“The political class and the security of the class as a whole will have to do very serious thinking about the road ahead,” he said.

The indian Ministry of External Affairs, said in a statement that the incident occurred “as the result of an attempt by the Chinese side to unilaterally change the status quo” in the Galwan Valley.

Thousands of soldiers of the two countries, supported by armored personnel carriers, trucks and artillery, were stationed a few hundred metres (yards) outside for more than a month in the Ladakh region, which is located nearTibet. Military and diplomatic meetings have yielded no breakthrough.

The indian authorities have officially maintained near-silence on issues related to the confrontation

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has had a televised meeting with state officials Tuesday and did not comment on the clash.

The tense standoff, which began in early May, when the Indians said that Chinese soldiers have crossed the border in Ladakh at three different points, to erect tents and guard posts, and ignoring the verbal warnings to leave. That triggered shouting matches, the stone-throwing and fistfights, a lot of replayed on television news channels and social media.

China has sought to minimize the importance of the confrontation while saying the two sides were communicating through their front line military units and their respective embassies to resolve issues.

Although skirmishes are not new, along the border standoff in Ladakh is Galwan Valley, where India is building a strategic road linking the region to an airstrip near China, has intensified in recent weeks.

The last to die, along the disputed border was in 1975, when the Chinese troops have killed four Indian soldiers in an ambush in the Twang of the northeast region of India, the state of Arunachal Pradesh, a state, said the Lieutenant General. D. S. Hooda, a former chief of the Indian army’s Northern Command.

“It is very complicated and the seriousness of the situation, and it will take real, hard negotiating skills to resolve this issue,” Hooda said.


This story has been corrected to show a reference to the 17 injured is a description of the manner in which some fatalities occurred, and not a report of more casualties.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here