Chinese troops enter Sikkim sector, destroyed two bunkers

[Han Patriot]

China bulldozes Indian bunker in Sikkim :

This is Indian source that says..

So they trespass first or we bulldoze first? Sikkim boundary is not disputed. Means we entered India and bulldozed their structurs??

 

[Hindustani78]

http://www.thehindu.com/news/intern...onstruction/article19162495.ece?homepage=true


In this file picture, Indian vehicles enter China through Nathu La pass on May 2, 2007. | Photo Credit: PTI

Its Ambassador V. Namgyal says the area under construction definitely “lies in an area of dispute.”
Bhutan has refuted Beijing's contention that it (China) was constructing a road at the India-China-Bhutan tri-junction in an “indisputable” part of Indian territory. Thimphu said it had conveyed to the Chinese government that this was not the case.

In an indication that the trigger for the current standoff between India and China at Sikkim, which has led to Beijing closing the Nathu La Pass route for Kailash Mansarovar pilgrims, possibly arose from Bhutan’s concerns, Ambassador of the Royal Bhutanese Embassy in Delhi Major-General V. Namgyal told The Hindu that the road construction by the Chinese Army was “progressing towards” a camp of the Royal Bhutan Army at Zom Pelri.

“Bhutan has conveyed that the road construction by the PLA [People’s Liberation Army] is not in keeping with the agreements between China and Bhutan [over boundary resolution],” Ambassador Namgyal told The Hindu. “We have asked them to stop and refrain from changing the status quo.”

China and Bhutan have held 24 rounds of talks, with the last one in August 2016, to discuss the dispute part of the border.

In a statement on Wednesday, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson said that the current impasse with India, including the area of Donglong (called Doko La by India and Doklam by Bhutan) is a part of Chinese territory since “ancient times”, adding that “If India wants to raise an issue with this part, I would say that it doesn’t belong to Bhutan, nor does it belong to India.”

The spokesperson even accused India of a “hidden agenda”, saying that though “the boundary between China and Bhutan has not been delimited, no third party should interfere in this matter.”

However, Bhutan, which has unique relations with India and maintains and coordinates its diplomatic relations closely with New Delhi, said the area under construction definitely “lies in an area of dispute.”

The PLA had started to construct a motorable road at Doklam towards the Bhutan Army Camp at Zom Pelri,” Ambassador Namgyal confirmed, adding that according to the boundary talks between China and Bhutan, the two sides “had committed to maintain peace and tranquility along the border and refrain from unilateral action to change the status quo.”

The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has refused to comment on the ongoing situation, and maintained silence in the face of a barrage of statements from the Chinese foreign ministry in the last few days.

The remarks by the Ambassador will bolster India’s case in the current skirmish that has seen China roll back one of its most popular goodwill gestures, the opening of a second, motorable route for Indian pilgrims to Kailash Mansarovar.

Dozens of pilgrims who hoped to use this route have been left stranded or turned back disappointed in the past weeks, a measure China says India is responsible for, accusing Indian soldiers of entering Chinese territory at the boundary with Sikkim.

Of concern are Army reports of several skirmishes between Indian and Chinese soldiers at parts of the Line of Actual Control (LAC) that has been mostly calm for the past 20 years, since both countries signed an agreement for “peace and tranquillity”.

The incident comes amidst a series of diplomatic spats between India and China that has seen India refusing to join China’s Belt and Road initiative on sovereignty concerns.

Remarks by the Arunachal Chief Minister claiming his State borders “Tibet, not China” have also angered Beijing, as despite denials from the MEA, seemed to indicate a revision of India’s “One China” policy.

So they trespass first or we bulldoze first? Sikkim boundary is not disputed. Means we entered India and bulldozed their structurs??

Royal Bhutanese Embassy in Delhi Major-General V. Namgyal told The Hindu that the road construction by the Chinese Army was “progressing towards” a camp of the Royal Bhutan Army at Zom Pelri.

“Bhutan has conveyed that the road construction by the PLA [People’s Liberation Army] is not in keeping with the agreements between China and Bhutan [over boundary resolution],” Ambassador Namgyal told The Hindu. “We have asked them to stop and refrain from changing the status quo.”

The Chinese spokesperson even accused India of a “hidden agenda”, saying that though “the boundary between China and Bhutan has not been delimited, no third party should interfere in this matter.”

***********
http://www.thehindu.com/news/nation...ina-sources/article19161953.ece?homepage=true

New Delhi, June 28, 2017 17:40 IST
Updated: June 28, 2017 18:48 IST

China removed an old bunker of the Indian Army located at the tri-junction of India, China and Bhutan in Sikkim by using a bulldozer after the Indian side refused to accede to its request to dismantle it, according to official sources.

The incident that took place in June first week in Doka La general area in Sikkim led to a face-off between the two forces, triggering tension in the Sikkim section of the border, the sources said on Wednesday.

China is believed to have not taken kindly to India building many new bunkers and upgrading older ones along the border in Sikkim in the recent past to augment its defences against the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), the sources said.

Of the 3,488-km-long border from Jammu and Kashmir to Arunachal Pradesh, a 220-km section falls in Sikkim.

Beijing is also upset with New Delhi over the recent visit of the Dalai Lama to Arunachal Pradesh, the sources said, adding they were also trying to escalate tension in the forward areas, including in Sikkim, even though the border in the Northeastern State is demarcated.

The Sikkim government has sent a report to the Central government giving details of the situation along the border following the stand-off in Doka La.

The first batch of Kailash Mansarovar pilgrims, comprising about 50 people, returned from the Nathu La border post as the stand-off between India and China continues.

The pilgrims returned to Gangtok on June 23 after staying in Nathu La for three days awaiting permission from the Chinese side to undertake onward journey.

The second batch did not move from Gangtok while pilgrims were told to go home as the Kailash Mansarovar pilgrimage is unlikely to continue this year via Nathu La.

The Sikkim route to Mansarovar, which is in Tibet, was thrown open to public in 2015.

The visas for the third batch, comprising about 50 pilgrims, are not given yet. A total of 8-10 batches were supposed to go for the pilgrimage through Nathu La this year.

Union Home Secretary Rajiv Mehrishi said on Tuesday that 100 pilgrims were sent back by China despite they having a Chinese visa.

The sources said the Chinese side has mentioned a broken bridge as being the reason for the pilgrims not being able to cross into Tibet for the annual yatra.

Sikkim is a part of the middle sector and experts have been warning the government of increased Chinese activities in this area.

China on Wednesday termed the construction of a road in the Sikkim sector “legitimate”, asserting that it was being built on Chinese territory that neither belongs to India nor Bhutan and no other country has the right to interfere.

China on Tuesday lodged a protest with India over the alleged “crossing of boundary” by its troops in the Sikkim sector and demanded their immediate withdrawal, as Beijing warned that future visits of Indian pilgrims to Kailash Mansarovar will depend on the resolution of the standoff.

The last such transgression happened in Sikkim in November 2008 when Chinese soldiers destroyed some makeshift Indian Army bunkers there.

 

[nang2]

Bhutan has refuted Beijing's contention that it (China) was constructing a road at the India-China-Bhutan tri-junction in an “indisputable” part of Indian territory.

I don't understand this. Why would China construct something on an "indisputable" part of INDIAN territory? There is also another question. Did Indian troops cross the line between China and India or the line between China and Bhutan? If it was the former, then Beijing's contention towards India is valid. If it was the latter, then it is a tri-junction brawl.

 

[Hindustani78]

In this July 2006 file picture Chinese Army personnel meet their Indian counterparts at Nathula Pass, located on the northern part of Sikkim. | Photo Credit: Arunangsu Roy Chowdhury

http://www.thehindu.com/news/intern...kkim-sector/article19159295.ece?homepage=true

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said the Sikkim segment of the China-India border was recognised by both China and India

China has justified the construction of a road in the Sikkim sector, saying the area undoubtedly” is located on its side of the border as per the 1890 Sino-British Treaty.

“According to the treaty, ‘zhe’ is the ancient name of Sikkim,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said in a statement.

“As per this treaty, the area over which the Indian Army has raised objection is undoubtedly located on the Chinese side of the border,” he said on June 27.

The statement came a day after the Chinese military accused the Indian Army of stopping the construction of the road in what it claims to be China’s “sovereign territory” in the Sikkim section of the India-China border.

Mr. Lu said the Sikkim segment of the China-India border was recognised by both China and India.

“Indian leaders, the Indian government-related documents, the Indian side in the Sino-Indian boundary issue Special Representatives meeting confirmed that the two sides signed the treaty in 1890, the ‘Sino-British treaty’ and the China-India boundary of Sikkim to have the direction of a consensus,” he said.

“Compliance with these treaties and documents is an international obligation that not to be shirked by the Indian side,” he added.

A Chinese foreign ministry statement, issued on Monday night, said “the Indian border guards crossed the boundary in the Sikkim section of the China-India border and entered the territory of China and obstructed normal activities of the Chinese frontier forces in the Donglang area recently, and the Chinese side has taken counter-measures.”

Mr. Lu, earlier on Tuesday, said China lodged a diplomatic protest with India accusing Indian troops of “crossing the boundary” in the Sikkim section and demanded their immediate withdrawal.

He also asserted that China has shut the Nathu La pass entry for Indian pilgrims travelling to Kailash Mansarovar because of the border standoff.


Also a hard-hitting article posted on the website of the state-run Global Times tonight on the issue said, “Indian troops’ provocation brings disgrace to themselves” and they should be forced to retreat “by all necessary means.”

“The Indian government made no objection to the Sikkim section of the China-India border. Allegations of intrusions along the western section of the China-India border often emerge, but face-offs in the Sikkim section are rare. The Nathu La pass in Sikkim was reopened in 2006, because there is no border dispute between China and India over this area,” it said.

“It remains unclear whether this flare-up is the fault of low-level Indian troops or a tentative strategic move made by the Indian government,” it said.

“Whatever the motive is, China must stick to its bottom line. It must force the Indian troops to retreat to the Indian side by all means necessary and China’s road construction mustn’t be stopped,” the article said.

As the China-India borderline has not been demarcated completely and the two countries have a different understanding about the Line of Actual Control (LAC), troops from both sides often stray across in some areas, it noted.

“However, almost all frictions are fed to the Indian media by the Indian military which they hype time and again.”

“China avoids making an issue of the border disputes, which has indulged India’s unruly provocations. This time the Indian side needs to be taught the rules,” the article said.

“India cannot afford a showdown with China on border issues. It lags far behind China in terms of national strength and the so-called strategic support for it from the U.S. is superficial,” the article said, adding that China has no desire to confront India.

“Maintaining friendly ties with New Delhi is Beijing’s basic policy. But this must be based on mutual respect. It’s not time for India to display arrogance toward China,” it said.

I don't understand this. Why would China construct something on an "indisputable" part of INDIAN territory? There is also another question. Did Indian troops cross the line between China and India or the line between China and Bhutan? If it was the former, then Beijing's contention towards India is valid. If it was the latter, then it is a tri-junction brawl.

“Indian leaders, the Indian government-related documents, the Indian side in the Sino-Indian boundary issue Special Representatives meeting confirmed that the two sides signed the treaty in 1890, the ‘Sino-British treaty’ and the China-India boundary of Sikkim to have the direction of a consensus,” he said.

“Compliance with these treaties and documents is an international obligation that not to be shirked by the Indian side,” he added.

“The Indian government made no objection to the Sikkim section of the China-India border. Allegations of intrusions along the western section of the China-India border often emerge, but face-offs in the Sikkim section are rare. The Nathu La pass in Sikkim was reopened in 2006, because there is no border dispute between China and India over this area,” it said.

“It remains unclear whether this flare-up is the fault of low-level Indian troops or a tentative strategic move made by the Indian government,” it said.

“Whatever the motive is, China must stick to its bottom line. It must force the Indian troops to retreat to the Indian side by all means necessary and China’s road construction mustn’t be stopped,” the article said.

As the China-India borderline has not been demarcated completely and the two countries have a different understanding about the Line of Actual Control (LAC), troops from both sides often stray across in some areas, it noted.

“However, almost all frictions are fed to the Indian media by the Indian military which they hype time and again.”

“China avoids making an issue of the border disputes, which has indulged India’s unruly provocations. This time the Indian side needs to be taught the rules,” the article said.

“India cannot afford a showdown with China on border issues. It lags far behind China in terms of national strength and the so-called strategic support for it from the U.S. is superficial,” the article said, adding that China has no desire to confront India.

“Maintaining friendly ties with New Delhi is Beijing’s basic policy. But this must be based on mutual respect. It’s not time for India to display arrogance toward China,” it said.

 

[nang2]

In this July 2006 file picture Chinese Army personnel meet their Indian counterparts at Nathula Pass, located on the northern part of Sikkim. | Photo Credit: Arunangsu Roy Chowdhury

http://www.thehindu.com/news/intern...kkim-sector/article19159295.ece?homepage=true

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said the Sikkim segment of the China-India border was recognised by both China and India

China has justified the construction of a road in the Sikkim sector, saying the area undoubtedly” is located on its side of the border as per the 1890 Sino-British Treaty.

“According to the treaty, ‘zhe’ is the ancient name of Sikkim,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said in a statement.

“As per this treaty, the area over which the Indian Army has raised objection is undoubtedly located on the Chinese side of the border,” he said on June 27.

The statement came a day after the Chinese military accused the Indian Army of stopping the construction of the road in what it claims to be China’s “sovereign territory” in the Sikkim section of the India-China border.

Mr. Lu said the Sikkim segment of the China-India border was recognised by both China and India.

“Indian leaders, the Indian government-related documents, the Indian side in the Sino-Indian boundary issue Special Representatives meeting confirmed that the two sides signed the treaty in 1890, the ‘Sino-British treaty’ and the China-India boundary of Sikkim to have the direction of a consensus,” he said.

“Compliance with these treaties and documents is an international obligation that not to be shirked by the Indian side,” he added.

A Chinese foreign ministry statement, issued on Monday night, said “the Indian border guards crossed the boundary in the Sikkim section of the China-India border and entered the territory of China and obstructed normal activities of the Chinese frontier forces in the Donglang area recently, and the Chinese side has taken counter-measures.”

Mr. Lu, earlier on Tuesday, said China lodged a diplomatic protest with India accusing Indian troops of “crossing the boundary” in the Sikkim section and demanded their immediate withdrawal.

He also asserted that China has shut the Nathu La pass entry for Indian pilgrims travelling to Kailash Mansarovar because of the border standoff.


Also a hard-hitting article posted on the website of the state-run Global Times tonight on the issue said, “Indian troops’ provocation brings disgrace to themselves” and they should be forced to retreat “by all necessary means.”

“The Indian government made no objection to the Sikkim section of the China-India border. Allegations of intrusions along the western section of the China-India border often emerge, but face-offs in the Sikkim section are rare. The Nathu La pass in Sikkim was reopened in 2006, because there is no border dispute between China and India over this area,” it said.

“It remains unclear whether this flare-up is the fault of low-level Indian troops or a tentative strategic move made by the Indian government,” it said.

“Whatever the motive is, China must stick to its bottom line. It must force the Indian troops to retreat to the Indian side by all means necessary and China’s road construction mustn’t be stopped,” the article said.

As the China-India borderline has not been demarcated completely and the two countries have a different understanding about the Line of Actual Control (LAC), troops from both sides often stray across in some areas, it noted.

“However, almost all frictions are fed to the Indian media by the Indian military which they hype time and again.”

“China avoids making an issue of the border disputes, which has indulged India’s unruly provocations. This time the Indian side needs to be taught the rules,” the article said.

“India cannot afford a showdown with China on border issues. It lags far behind China in terms of national strength and the so-called strategic support for it from the U.S. is superficial,” the article said, adding that China has no desire to confront India.

“Maintaining friendly ties with New Delhi is Beijing’s basic policy. But this must be based on mutual respect. It’s not time for India to display arrogance toward China,” it said.



“Indian leaders, the Indian government-related documents, the Indian side in the Sino-Indian boundary issue Special Representatives meeting confirmed that the two sides signed the treaty in 1890, the ‘Sino-British treaty’ and the China-India boundary of Sikkim to have the direction of a consensus,” he said.

“Compliance with these treaties and documents is an international obligation that not to be shirked by the Indian side,” he added.

“The Indian government made no objection to the Sikkim section of the China-India border. Allegations of intrusions along the western section of the China-India border often emerge, but face-offs in the Sikkim section are rare. The Nathu La pass in Sikkim was reopened in 2006, because there is no border dispute between China and India over this area,” it said.

“It remains unclear whether this flare-up is the fault of low-level Indian troops or a tentative strategic move made by the Indian government,” it said.

“Whatever the motive is, China must stick to its bottom line. It must force the Indian troops to retreat to the Indian side by all means necessary and China’s road construction mustn’t be stopped,” the article said.

As the China-India borderline has not been demarcated completely and the two countries have a different understanding about the Line of Actual Control (LAC), troops from both sides often stray across in some areas, it noted.

“However, almost all frictions are fed to the Indian media by the Indian military which they hype time and again.”

“China avoids making an issue of the border disputes, which has indulged India’s unruly provocations. This time the Indian side needs to be taught the rules,” the article said.

“India cannot afford a showdown with China on border issues. It lags far behind China in terms of national strength and the so-called strategic support for it from the U.S. is superficial,” the article said, adding that China has no desire to confront India.

“Maintaining friendly ties with New Delhi is Beijing’s basic policy. But this must be based on mutual respect. It’s not time for India to display arrogance toward China,” it said.

You are not answering my question. Why quote my post when you are not answering it?

 

[Han Patriot]

You are not answering my question. Why quote my post when you are not answering it?

Well, I hope there is no war, but India is pushing their luck.....their air force readiness is only 50% and dependent on Russian spares. In the event of the skirmish, we will need to annihilate tezpur.

 

[Hindustani78]

You are not answering my question. Why quote my post when you are not answering it?

I am giving you official statements from Chinese, Bhutanese and Indian Officials, Is it not enough for you ?

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india...on-thursday/story-7squmVUBSLYxOavYhyEMmI.html

Indian Army chief Gen Bipin Rawat will visit Sikkim on Thursday against the backdrop of a standoff between Indian troops and the Chinese army along the Sino-India border in the sensitive sector which is threatening to further strain bilateral ties.

The army chief will take stock of the operational matters and interact with top commanders in the formation headquarters of the force in the border state.

Gen Rawat’s visit to Sikkim comes amid mounting tension between the two armies along the border in Sikkim following a scuffle between Indian troops and the personnel of China’s People’s Liberation Army in a remote area earlier this month.

The genesis of the latest face-off is understood to have had a link to Donglang, a narrow but strategically important tri-junction of India, China and Bhutan.

Official sources described Gen Rawat’s visit as routine.

During the two-day-long visit, Gen Rawat will travel to a number of other formation headquarters in the Northeast and review various operational matters in the region -- a strategically key region having most of the 3,488-km-long- border with China.

Of the 3,488-km-long India-China border from Jammu and Kashmir to Arunachal Pradesh, a 220-km section falls in Sikkim.

China has accused Indian troops of “crossing the boundary” in the Sikkim section and demanded their immediate withdrawal, while asserting that it has shut down the Nathu La pass entry for Indian pilgrims travelling to Kailash Mansarovar because of the border standoff.

China also said that it has lodged diplomatic protests with India, both in New Delhi and Beijing, alleging that the Indian troops trespassed into Chinese territory in the Sikkim sector.

The Indian Army has not commented on the face-off.

Chinese defence ministry spokesman Ren Guoqiang said on Monday that recently China has begun the construction of a road in Donglang region, but was stopped by Indian troops crossing the Line of Actual Control (LAC).

 

[nang2]

I am giving you official statements from Chinese, Bhutanese and Indian Officials, Is it not enough for you ?

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india...on-thursday/story-7squmVUBSLYxOavYhyEMmI.html

Indian Army chief Gen Bipin Rawat will visit Sikkim on Thursday against the backdrop of a standoff between Indian troops and the Chinese army along the Sino-India border in the sensitive sector which is threatening to further strain bilateral ties.

The army chief will take stock of the operational matters and interact with top commanders in the formation headquarters of the force in the border state.

Gen Rawat’s visit to Sikkim comes amid mounting tension between the two armies along the border in Sikkim following a scuffle between Indian troops and the personnel of China’s People’s Liberation Army in a remote area earlier this month.

The genesis of the latest face-off is understood to have had a link to Donglang, a narrow but strategically important tri-junction of India, China and Bhutan.

Official sources described Gen Rawat’s visit as routine.

During the two-day-long visit, Gen Rawat will travel to a number of other formation headquarters in the Northeast and review various operational matters in the region -- a strategically key region having most of the 3,488-km-long- border with China.

Of the 3,488-km-long India-China border from Jammu and Kashmir to Arunachal Pradesh, a 220-km section falls in Sikkim.

China has accused Indian troops of “crossing the boundary” in the Sikkim section and demanded their immediate withdrawal, while asserting that it has shut down the Nathu La pass entry for Indian pilgrims travelling to Kailash Mansarovar because of the border standoff.

China also said that it has lodged diplomatic protests with India, both in New Delhi and Beijing, alleging that the Indian troops trespassed into Chinese territory in the Sikkim sector.

The Indian Army has not commented on the face-off.

Chinese defence ministry spokesman Ren Guoqiang said on Monday that recently China has begun the construction of a road in Donglang region, but was stopped by Indian troops crossing the Line of Actual Control (LAC).

Looks like Chinese is correct. Indian troops did cross Sikkim-China border.

 

[Hindustani78]

**********
http://www.hindustantimes.com/india...f-in-sikkim/story-fGygCbDjZbPi33qSPRBw6H.html

Bhutan issued a demarche to the Chinese envoy, asking Beijing to restore status quo in the Doklam area where a section of Chinese soldiers tried to unilaterally build a road towards its Army camp in Zomplri area, the Bhutanese ambassador to India said on Wednesday.

The Chinese soldiers’ action led to a face-off with Indian soldiers, and escalated when Beijing halted the Kailash Mansoravar pilgrimage.

The demarche, a formal statement, was served through the Chinese embassy in Delhi on June 20 since Bhutan and China do not have diplomatic relations. The two countries have a long-standing border dispute.

Talking to Hindustan Times, Major General (Retd) Vetsop Namgyel, ambassador of Bhutan to India, said: “The PLA (Peoples Liberation Army) started motorable road construction in the Doklam area towards Bhutanese Army camp at Zomphlri. We are in boundary resolution talks with China and have written agreements that pending final boundary settlement, peace and tranquillity be maintained along the boundary and both sides refrain from unilaterally altering the status on ground. Bhutan has conveyed to China that road construction is not keeping with the agreements between two countries. We have asked China to stop road constructions and refrain from changing the status quo. Doklam area is near the tri-junction is part of the boundary talks between Bhutan and China.”

Diplomatic sources told Hindustan Times that the PLA activity had increased in the tri-junction area near the Chumbi Valley area, which is also at the core of Indian defence interests. On June 8, the PLA dismantled Indian temporary outposts in the Doka La area.

Later on June 16, the Royal Bhutanese Army patrol engaged a section of PLA personnel and civil construction works who were trying to build a road in the Doklam area.

China has territorial claims on that area with the matter still not resolved despite 24 rounds of boundary-dispute negotiations. Given the proximity of Chumbi Valley, the Indian Army coordinated with Bhutanese Army against the PLA road-construction activity as it was deemed as unilaterally altering the status quo on ground.

The face-off between the India Army in support of Bhutan Army and PLA continues.

The Chumbi Valley area is of military significance to India as Yatong area in Tibetan Autonomous Region is dagger shaped aimed at the Indian chicken-neck area of Siliguri with a thin strip of land separating India and Bangladesh.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/world...a-and-india/story-w7FtdFNqGST2SEOeL6SP2O.html

Bhutan could be the key to the ongoing China-India stand-off along the frontier in Sikkim, where troops from the two countries have accused each other of trespassing territorial borders, according to a Chinese expert.

China has accused Indian troops of disrupting the construction of a road in Donglang area of Yadong County of the Tibet Autonomous Region. Donglang is located at the narrow but strategically important tri-junction of India, China and Bhutan, with the three countries barely separated by mountains and passes.

Donglang or Doklam is also part of a border dispute between China and Bhutan. While the area is in China, Bhutan has claims over it. Thimphu doesn’t have diplomatic ties with Beijing and the dispute has persisted despite 24 rounds of negotiations.

With India and China giving conflicting versions of the incident, it is difficult to ascertain the exact sequence of events in the flare-up over the weekend.

A PTI report from New Delhi on Monday, quoting sources, said Indian and Chinese troops scuffled near Doka La area in the first week of June before soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) damaged bunkers on the Indian side.

China denied the allegation. “Indian troops recently crossed the border with China in an attempt to block a road construction in Donglang (Doklam) area by the Chinese side,” China's defence ministry said late on Monday night.

Hu Shisheng, director of the Institute of South and Southeast Asia and Oceania Studies at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, told Hindustan Times: “Another confusing element (of the Nathu La incident) is that it (according to the Chinese side) is in a place called Donglang.

“But Donglang is a major issue between China and Bhutan, not between China and India,” he said when asked about the importance of Donglang. “It is located just at the junction among the three countries China, Bhutan and India.

“Why has this became an issue between India and China? If there is an accident or incident, it should be between China and Bhutan,” Hu said.

In India, the focus has been on the face-off between the two armies at Nathu La in Sikkim, the suspension of the Kailash Mansarovar Yatraand resulting harassment of Indian pilgrims.

Chinese officials army at Nathula Pass. (HT File Photo)

If China was building a road in an area disputed with Bhutan, India would have been watching closely because of its strategic importance.

There is not much of a dispute between India and China in the Sikkim sector despite the unmarked border that stretches 3,488 km.

“After we recognised Sikkim as one part of India (in 2003), the two governments made sure that there were no problems. Not like the other parts of the border,” Hu said.

Hu speculated it was possible Bhutan asked for India’s help in patrolling the area. “So, one thing is that Bhutan asking India to take the responsibility to patrolling on the border. We know that Bhutan is under the protection of India,” he added.

 

[Hindustani78]

I don't understand this. Why would China construct something on an "indisputable" part of INDIAN territory? There is also another question. Did Indian troops cross the line between China and India or the line between China and Bhutan? If it was the former, then Beijing's contention towards India is valid. If it was the latter, then it is a tri-junction brawl.

China has removed an old bunker of the Indian Army located at the tri-junction of India, China and Bhutan in Sikkim by using a bulldozer after the Indian side refused to accede to its request, according to official sources.

The incident that broke out in the first week of June in Doka La general area in Sikkim had led to a face-off between the two forces, triggering tension in the Sikkim section of the India-China border, the sources said today.

The forcible removal of the old bunker by using heavy machinery like a bulldozer came when the Indian side did not agree to a request by the Chinese authorities to dismantle it, the sources said.

China is believed to have not taken kindly to India building many new bunkers and upgrading older ones along the border in Sikkim in the recent past to augment its defences against the People's Liberation Army (PLA), the sources said.

 

[nang2]

China has removed an old bunker of the Indian Army located at the tri-junction of India, China and Bhutan in Sikkim by using a bulldozer after the Indian side refused to accede to its request, according to official sources.

The incident that broke out in the first week of June in Doka La general area in Sikkim had led to a face-off between the two forces, triggering tension in the Sikkim section of the India-China border, the sources said today.

The forcible removal of the old bunker by using heavy machinery like a bulldozer came when the Indian side did not agree to a request by the Chinese authorities to dismantle it, the sources said.

China is believed to have not taken kindly to India building many new bunkers and upgrading older ones along the border in Sikkim in the recent past to augment its defences against the People's Liberation Army (PLA), the sources said.

I heard the bunker story was a fake one, or probably some old news recycled. What are your official sources on bunker removal during THIS particular stand-off?

 

[Jlaw]

What, do you mean the same Donald Trump who constantly boasts about his "close friend" Xi Jinping, and who keeps saying that China is doing an "amazing job in the region"?

I guess you missed Trump's pivot to China.

India played the USA card already by signing the LEMOA, and all Trump did was wreck India's IT industry with the H1B1 visa policy.

True dat.

 

[Hindustani78]

Cluster C consists of Skkim, West Bengal (14 Blocks)

The existing guidelines namely the implementation of the scheme in a phased manner (first 10 km then the next 10 km and so on)should be reviewed in favour of a method that takes into account the population density and difficulties faced in scheme implementation.

The entire North-Eastern region which is strategically important, is underdeveloped in terms of economic security and infrastructure. It still lacks basic infrastructure including good road connectivity. The region needs more support, planning and funds.

The Ministry stated that the purpose of these guidelines is to ensure that the focus of development in the border areas does not get diluted. It also added that 0 to 10 does not mean only the villages located at 0 km on the border. It also stated that development of skill of people living border areas is already included on the scheme. It also agreed that there is a need to accord appropriate publicity to the scheme to make people aware of the scheme.

Some part of West Bengal’s border that it shares with Bhutan in the Kalimpong sub -division of Darjeeling district, is inaccessible for being a mountainous region. Here,no BADP work has been carried out .

(i) length of international border,
(ii)population of border blocks, and
(iii) area of border blocks. Each of these criteria will be given equal weightage

Status of infrastructure projects undertaken under BADP schemes, process of implementation, and representation of people’s needs in the selected border villages of Sikkim.

 

[Jlaw]

You literally think that ppl in China talk about india?

Chinese only mention Indians when the issue of public defecation is the topic.

 

[Han Patriot]

Chinese only mention Indians when the issue of public defecation is the topic.

Wrong, and also when we talk about starvation.