Sikkim Standoff : China can not risk a war in with India says experts

“The countdown to a clash between the two forces has begun, and the clock is ticking away the time to what seems to be an inevitable conclusion”, it said.

But it doesn’t have to be so.

India, she said, is the only country in the world that opposes explicitly China’s One Belt and One Road Initiative.

“For example, Bhutan could thank India very much for its assistance and say for the time being that India can pull back its forces and perhaps even replace some of those troops with its own troops”. China’s Foreign Ministry railed against what it called India’s “irresponsibility and recklessness” on August 3. Allowing “Indian surveillance units” to operate on Nepalese territory was a brazen attack on the country’s sovereignty and dignity. Placing “limited” before an India-China war is as reassuring as adding a “safety” to a grenade.

Yet being at loggerheads serves neither side any good, and a violent clash is still avoidable, even at this late stage. What needs to be singled out from that debate is that Ghulam Nabi Azad, the Congress’s Leader in the Rajya Sabha, ticked off party MP Rajiv Shukla who wanted India to attend the One Belt One Road Forum, by dismissing it as Shukla’s personal view. “It will only have itself to blame if its stubborn refusal to heed the voice of reason leads to consequences it regrets”. Comments like “limits to restraint” and “serious repercussions” by Chinese officials are ploys to derail any meaningful attempt towards talks.

57 founding members, many of them prominent USA allies, will sign into creation the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank on Monday, the first major global financial instrument independent from the Bretton Woods system. This has been created and sustained by various factors and some recent developments have confirmed a long-held belief in India in regard to the nature of Chinese-Pakistani relation.

The article said that what India did can be defined as illegal and that it aims at nothing but making trouble.

The 1962 Sino-Indian war nudged Thimphu even closer to New Delhi, culminating in a formal security guarantee announced by Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru in 1963.

“If the Narendra Modi government continues ignoring the warning coming from a situation spiraling out of control، countermeasures from China will be unavoidable،” it said. However, he has no estimations on the place and time that the war may start. This line appeared in other publications as well.

China’s top diplomat on the boundary issue, Wang Wenli, told a visiting Indian media delegation that Bhutan has conveyed to Beijing through the diplomatic channels that the area of the standoff is not its territory.

“That’s worrisome to me because we’ve seen China over the last couple of years use economic coercion against countries, South Korea being the latest example of that”.

Sr Col Li claimed, “What the Indian troops have done is an invasion of Chinese territory”. Information from both public and non-public sources suggests that talks between China and Bhutan over their border dispute have been smooth and peaceful.

M.K. Bhadrakumar, a former Indian diplomat, said that contrary to the claims of the Indian media, there has been no Chinese “intrusion” onto India’s sacred soil. While it had a special treaty relationship with New Delhi since 1949, the two countries did not share any formal defence arrangement until then.

India believes that a diplomatic solution to border disputes is the way forward. Colonel Ren said this was done as a gesture of goodwill.

Besides the military war, India and China are also facing each other off in the area of trade. We have more than 4,000-km-long global boundary with China and apart from the Doka-La area, we are not having any trouble in any other part of the worldwide boundary at present, ” sources admitted.

Hu said that the military operation would aim to “seize Indian personnel illegally lingering in Chinese territory or to expel them”. Different from previous rhetoric, Indian media included a government statement that stressed dialogue is the only way to resolve the conflict.