Introduction
Before the BRICS Summit held on October 22, senior officials from China and India announced progress in their ongoing border dispute. Following the announcements, Xi Jinping and Narendra Modi, who attended the summit, held bilateral meetings. It is notable that in 2020, clashes broke out in the Galwan area on the Aksai Chin border after 45 years, resulting in the deaths of 20 Indian soldiers and four Chinese soldiers.
The 2020 clashes led India to adopt a cautious approach toward Chinese investments, ban Chinese mobile applications, suspend air traffic between the two countries, and negatively impact bilateral trade relations. At the 2023 BRICS Summit, which both leaders attended, moderate and solution-oriented approaches were exhibited. Both leaders emphasized efforts to reduce tension in the border areas and pursue disengagement. Indeed, before the 2024 BRICS Summit, these approaches bore fruit, and the two countries reached a common understanding regarding their border disputes. The announced agreement focuses on patrol arrangements in the contentious border areas along the Line of Actual Control (LAC).
China-India Relations; Historical Background
Relations between the two countries gained diplomatic significance following China’s independence in 1947, between 1949 and 1957. During this brief period of cooperation, high-level visits, trade agreements, and mutual support on the international stage were prominent. In fact, India was the first non-socialist country to recognize the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and supported China’s presence in the United Nations Security Council. Up until the war of 1962, India consistently voted in favour of China in UN sessions.
Bilateral relations were formalized particularly with the signing of the Trade and Intercourse Agreement on April 29, 1954, which was based on the principles known as Panchsheel, or the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence. These principles included (1) mutual respect for each other’s territorial integrity and sovereignty, (2) mutual non-aggression, (3) mutual non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, (4) equality and mutual benefit, and (5) peaceful coexistence.
However, relations between the two countries deteriorated towards the end of the 1950s due to tensions over undefined borders, eventually leading to war in 1962.
Source: https://www.drishtiias.com/to-the-points/Paper2/disputed-territories-of-india
However, relations between the two countries deteriorated towards the end of the 1950s due to tensions over undefined borders, eventually leading to war in 1962.
The emergence of border disputes began, particularly with Tibet coming under Chinese control in 1950. Tibet had previously acted as a buffer zone between the two countries, and its occupation created a borderline that can be divided into three sectors. The western sector, known as the Western Line, spans 2,152 km between China’s Xinjiang region and Ladakh. Aksai Chin, a region claimed by both nations, is located in this sector. India claims Aksai Chin as part of the former Kashmir, while China views it as part of Xinjiang. The root of this division lies in two proposals made during British rule: (1) the Johnson Line proposed in 1865, which showed Ladakh under Indian control, and (2) the McDonald Line proposed in 1893, which allocated the area to the Chinese. From the national interest standpoint, India argues for the accuracy of the Johnson Line, while China asserts the McDonald Line as the correct boundary. The currently accepted LAC aligns with China’s claims. The central sector is a 625 km borderline extending between Ladakh and Nepal, where border disputes are not frequent. The eastern sector encompasses the 1,140 km boundary, known as the McMahon Line.
The origin of this border issue lies in an agreement made while India was a British colony. The Simla Conference took place in 1913-14, attended by representatives from British India, Tibet, and the Republic of China. Despite sending representatives, the Beijing administration did not sign the agreement, which contained ambiguities regarding watersheds and natural borders between British India and Tibet. These ambiguities contributed to the formation of the McMahon Line, which China subsequently rejected. In 1950, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) advanced to Lhasa and brought Tibet under Chinese control, legitimizing this control through subsequent agreements. This action resulted in one of the world’s longest undefined borders, particularly between China and India.
The 1954 agreement did not resolve the border issues, and India attempted to address the dispute through the Panchsheel principles, which were initially intended to last eight years. However, by 1959, uprisings against China in Tibet intensified, casting doubt on the Panchsheel principles.[iv] Due to the Tibet uprising, leader Dalai Lama sought asylum in India, which was granted. China viewed this as a provocative act.[v]
In 1962, during the war between China and India, China’s PLA forces defeated Indian troops in both the eastern and western sectors. As a result,15,000 square miles of Aksai Chin came under Chinese control.
Following China’s successful nuclear tests in 1964, India shifted its nuclear development efforts, which had been developing since the 1950s, towards the creation of nuclear weapons. During this period, the Nathu La Pass, which connects Sikkim to China’s Tibet Autonomous Region, was closed to commercial traffic. This pass, a natural border that offers a tactical observation advantage to the Indian Army, remained closed until 2006. Five years later, China attacked an Indian post located at this mountain pass. The clashes at Cho La and Nathu La, characterized by some sources as conflicts and others as a war, ended in victory for India. India’s victory in these clashes reinforced the balance of power between the two nations and strengthened India’s position.
By 1975, Indian and Chinese border troops engaged in violent clashes at the Tulung La pass, resulting in the deaths of four Indian soldiers. The incident was initially considered accidental, as two Indian soldiers lost their way in the fog during a patrol. In 1986 and 1987, military activity intensified near the problematic border area close to Arunachal Pradesh, escalating the risk of conflict. This tension arose from both nations’ troop deployments along the border. The anticipated escalation was diffused following a visit to Beijing by the Indian Foreign Minister. In 1988, Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi visited China, helping to establish a Joint Working Group (JWG) for normalizing relations and addressing border issues.
By 1993, an agreement was signed between China and India, first introducing the term “Line of Actual Control”. Entitled “Agreement on the Maintenance of Peace and Tranquility Along the Line of Actual Control in the India-China Border Areas,” it aimed to provide a framework for peace along the disputed border. Both China and India emphasized that border issues should be resolved through peaceful and friendly consultations. The agreement aimed to prevent the use of force or threats and included commitments to respect the LAC and maintain mutual balance. In 1996, the “Agreement on Confidence-Building Measures in the Military Field Along the Line of Actual Control in the India-China Border Areas” was signed, reaffirming the Panchsheel principles. This 12-article agreement addressed specific topics, especially the prevention of border conflicts, and required each party to notify the other of military exercises. A key provision aimed to prevent dangerous military activities. According to this provision, neither side would open fire within two kilometres of the LAC, cause biological degradation, use hazardous chemicals, conduct explosive operations, or hunt with weapons or explosives. Recognizing that both China and India possess nuclear weapons and could cause significant destruction in the event of conflict, the use of firearms along their borders was banned. In the 2020 and subsequent conflict, both sides adhered to this rule by using stones and sticks instead of firearms.
By 2003, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao invited the Indian Prime Minister to China. During this official visit, the border issue was addressed, and both leaders emphasized the search for a reasonable and mutually agreed common solution under equal conditions. Both nations agreed to appoint political representatives, allowing the issue to be examined from a political perspective. The Declaration on the Relationship and Comprehensive Cooperation Principles between the Republic of India and the People’s Republic of China opened the door for diplomacy to be used as a confidence-building measure and consultation tool. In 2005, India and China signed the Agreement on Political Parameters and Guiding Principles, with the goal of achieving long-term solutions to the border dispute. In 2013, the Border Defence Cooperation Agreement was signed, renewing the provisions of all previous agreements. This agreement placed particular emphasis on cooperation in border defence.
The question arises as to whether any conflicts occurred during the process of implementing these agreements. Since 1975, the two sides have faced multiple diplomatic and military deadlocks. Consequently, mutual forces have occasionally been positioned near the LAC. However, these tensions have been addressed through confidence-building measures and initiatives from both countries to resolve issues before they escalate into conflict.
In 2017, tensions arose between China, India, and Bhutan in the Doklam region, which is located at the intersection of the three countries. When China attempted to construct a road in the disputed area with Bhutan, Indian troops intervened in support of Bhutan. China accused Indian forces of crossing into its territory, while India claimed that China was demolishing an old Indian post in Doklam. These allegations led to military buildups on both sides but ultimately resulted in the withdrawal of troops from both parties.
Escalation of Tensions
Between China and India, certain developments have disrupted the relatively conflict-free military stalemate since 1975 and laid the groundwork for deadly clashes in the Galwan Valley. China has objected to India’s road construction in the Galwan River Valley and various Indian infrastructure projects. This road construction is strategically important for India as it connects to a significant airbase. China’s objections stem from perceiving these projects as threatening its territorial claims in the region. Additionally, in 2019, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) made over 660 incursions across the LAC and violated Indian airspace 108 times. In the same year, India revoked Article 370 of its constitution, which granted a degree of autonomy to Jammu and Kashmir, including the disputed Ladakh regions. China viewed this move as a unilateral violation of its territory and condemned it at the United Nations Security Council.
As depicted on the map above, the conflict occurred in the Galwan Valley in Ladakh. This crisis between China and India intensified in April and May when PLA soldiers crossed the LAC into India’s territory in Galwan Valley, Pangong Tso, Gogra-Hot Springs, Depsang, and Demchok with tanks and armoured vehicles. The Chinese PLA not only set up tents in these areas but also obstructed Indian patrols, which escalated into bloody clashes on June 14-15.
The clashes involving stones and sticks resulted in the deaths of 20 Indian soldiers and 4 Chinese soldiers. The Indian public reacted strongly to the deaths, expressing their anger in street protests. The fact that both sides possess nuclear weapons raised international concerns, prompting the UN to call for “maximum restraint.” Later that year, both parties withdrew troops from certain disputed border areas. In 2021, new clashes occurred in the Sikkim region, followed by more in the Tawang area in 2022.
Both countries implemented various measures and sanctions in response to these clashes. India not only suspended air traffic with China but also began conducting more detailed reviews of Chinese investments. In 2022, India increased its ban on Chinese mobile applications from 59 to 321, extending the rift in relations into the economic and technological realm.
Regional and Global Impact of Border Conflicts
The China-India border disputes have significant geopolitical implications. Although the border issue has not reached a permanent solution, the agreement on border patrols between the two countries will produce new effects regionally and globally. In response to China’s growing influence globally, India has also revoked Article 370, changing the status of Ladakh, observed improvements in U.S.-India relations, and witnessed warming ties between India and Taiwan. India is working to reduce its dependence on China through the “Atmanirbhar Bharat” initiative and is cautious regarding Chinese investments. While Indian officials may not demonstrate military power against China, they have called for restricting Chinese investments to show economic strength. Although the 2020 conflicts and ongoing tensions have strained economic relations, trade and investment remain integral components of the relationship between the two countries. Particularly, the deadlock over borders has led India to strengthen relationships with countries such as Australia, Japan, Indonesia, Vietnam, France, and the United Kingdom.[1] Meanwhile, China has strengthened its ties with Pakistan, India’s regional rival. This situation has influenced the context of China-U.S. competition in the region, shaped by the China-Pakistan partnership and the U.S.-India alliance. How this balance affects competition will unfold over time.
The Process from Conflict to Agreement
After the violent clashes in the Galwan Valley in 2020, which resulted in 20 fatalities, India and China reached an agreement regarding patrol arrangements along the disputed Ladakh border. Indian Foreign Minister Vikram Misri announced that they had specifically agreed with China on border patrols in the 3,440 km boundary dispute. By July of that year, 21 rounds of discussions were held at the military commander level to resolve the dispute. While tensions eased at some conflict points, a permanent and comprehensive solution was not expected. China and India planned to withdraw their troops from various conflict points and comply with joint patrol arrangements.
From 2020 to 2024, India and China established significant contacts and conducted diplomatic discussions to resolve the border issue. They held 16 rounds of military talks resulting in the withdrawal of troops from “friction points” in Galwan Valley (July 2020), Pangong Tso (February 2021), Gogra Post (August 2021), and Hot Springs (September 2022). Buffer zones were created at these friction points, with withdrawals ranging from 3 to 10 km, and areas where both sides withdrew equally were closed to patrols.
In August 2023, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese leader Xi Jinping met during the BRICS Summit in Johannesburg. The meeting followed an announcement by Indian Foreign Minister Vinay Kwatra regarding Xi’s absence from an important event. Both leaders agreed on “intensive efforts” to reduce tensions at the disputed border.
In July 2024, Indian Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi met at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Summit in Astana. They expressed a shared view that the prolonged border dispute is not in the interest of either side. The discussions emphasized the importance of complete withdrawal from the remaining areas in eastern Ladakh and restoring peace and tranquillity to normalize bilateral relations. Jaishankar later noted about 75% success in resolving border issues and talks on resuming direct passenger flights were highlighted by India’s Civil Aviation Ministry. These developments indicate a shift from tension to rapprochement in Sino-Indian relations.
Agreement and BRICS Summit
The easing of tensions and agreement on border disputes between China and India has raised expectations for improving the political and commercial ties between these two Asian giants. Indeed, this has been the case. The leaders of China and India held their first official meeting this year at the BRICS summit in Russia/Kazan after the deadly clashes in 2020, which resulted from violent altercations involving stones and sticks. During this meeting, it was emphasized that cooperation between China and India could be effective in redirecting economic recovery and promoting multipolarity in the face of a complex international landscape. Both leaders noted progress through intensive communication and contacts regarding the resolution of issues in border areas and appreciated this advancement. They stated their agreement on effectively utilizing the Special Representative mechanism for the border issue, ensuring peace and tranquillity in border regions, and finding a fair and reasonable solution.
Russian President Putin, a member of BRICS, said at the summit; ‘‘Right now, in a restricted format, we suggest considering the most important items on the global agenda and exchange views on cooperation between the BRICS countries in the international arena, including in the resolution of ongoing regional conflicts.’’ and emphasised the resolution of regional conflicts. Putin also stated that BRICS has assumed an active responsibility for the future of the world and referred to the contributions of BRICS in addressing urgent regional problems.
BRICS also acts as an intermediary organisation and as a catalyst in the reconciliation process between China and India. Especially after the 2020 conflicts, presidential-level meetings were only held through the BRICS Summit, and the leaders of the two countries had an unscheduled meeting at the summit in 2023. The above speech of Putin, one of the founding member leaders of BRICS, also proves that the organisation acts as a mobiliser/catalyst in the process of conflict to reconciliation. Even if only the LAC patrol arrangement is agreed upon in the agreement, it may be inevitable that the BRICS organisational goals will be instrumental in finding a permanent solution to the border dispute between the two countries in the medium term. This is a necessity of the new balance of power brought about by multipolarity.
Conclusion
The agreement between China and India aims to restore the status quo before the 2020 conflicts rather than completely and permanently resolve the long-standing border issues. The 2020 clashes represented a shift in India’s role in the international system, affecting both national security and foreign policy strategies. This conciliatory move is significant in preventing fatal incidents along the borders where military confrontations had been largely avoided for 45 years.