Gateway House What the China-India readouts mean

The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation’s Summit in Tianjin on August 31 was preceded by a significant event – the visit of China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi to India for the 24^th Special Representative (SR) talks with India’s National Security Advisor Ajit Doval. The occasion was also used to have a meeting with his counterpart, S Jaishankar, the External Affairs Minister and call on Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Wang Yi’s visit to India comes after three years, and the outcomes from it throw up some interesting issues. There have been three read-outs issued on this visit. One from the Chinese side and two from the Indian side. The diverse nature of the India and Chinese read-outs is striking.

The Chinese read-out is generic and included the usual platitudes on the bilateral relationship. However, it was first on the draw and had four interesting points. First was on the adherence of the dual track progress for resolution of the boundary question, implying that economic and diplomatic ties should go hand-in-hand. Second was setting goals for border control, demarcation negotiations and cross-border exchanges. Third, the Agreement on Political Parameters and Guiding Principles for resolution of the boundary question, which was signed in 2005 (2005 Agreement), is back on focus. Fourth, and the most surprising, is the return to the reference of One China Policy. China used to mention this regularly before 2010. After 2010, India has refrained from mentioning it.

The August 19 Indian read-out on the meeting between the Foreign Ministers had three important points. One, the issue of terrorism raised by Jaishankar with Wang Yi and the latter concurring that counter-terrorism should be handled on the highest priority. Two, the construction of a mega dam near the Great Bend on the Brahmaputra by China and the necessity for transparency on the issue was raised with Wang Yi. The read out is silent on the response from the Chinese side. However, China has agreed to share hydrological data on humanitarian grounds in emergency situations which implies that there is no commitment from the Chinese on being transparent. Three, India stated that there has been no change in India’s stance on Taiwan.

The read-out on the meetings issued by India’s Foreign Ministry late on the night of 19 August, is more revealing. There seemed to be agreement that the situation along the Line of Actual Control has been stable since the 23^rd Special Representative (SR) talks in December 2024. The 2005 Agreement finds a mention and the important aspect in that is the invocation of the “political perspective of the overall bilateral relationship while seeking a fair, reasonable and mutually acceptable framework for settlement of the boundary question”. It may be recalled that it was the lack of progress in the mechanisms like Joint Working group and Experts Group that led to the establishment of the SR mechanism in 2003. This SR mechanism was created specifically to incorporate the political guidance on this issue, as the process had previously been moving slowly.

Now, three new mechanisms are sought to be established, two under the Ministry of External Affairs’ Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination (WMCC) and one Senior Military Commander Level mechanism each for the Eastern and Middle sectors on similar lines to the one existing in the Western sector. The mechanisms proposed to be established under the WMCC are particularly interesting. An expert group for exploring an “early harvest” in boundary delimitation in the India-China border areas has been proposed. This raises the question of what the early harvest in boundary delimitation could be. In the early 2000s, there was an effort made to exchange maps on each other’s perception of the Line of Actual Control (LAC). The maps for the Middle Sector were exchanged but the process went cold after the Chinese pulled back when the maps were to be exchanged for the Western Sector. The Middle Sector is also the least controversial amongst the three sectors. So, the option could be the delimitation of the boundary along the Middle Sector or a combination of Middle Sector and Sikkim.

Second is setting up a Working Group for better border management to maintain peace and tranquility along the LAC. This mechanism is likely to assess the protocols for face-off and escalation management and suggest modifications to the existing procedures. “De-escalation” has been emphasised repeatedly in the read out. The disengagement process was deemed to have been completed after the October 21,2024 agreement. De-escalation and de-induction were to follow, the second step i.e. descalation of this three-step process seems to have been given an impetus in the Indian read out.

The meeting of the foreign ministers brought up a few more issues of importance. Upholding multilateralism and a multilateral trading system found support. It comes at a time when countries like the U.S. are moving away from it. Mutual support for each other’s hosting of BRICS summits and the resumption of bilateral dialogues particularly for regular people-to-people contacts, were agreed upon. Commencement of direct flights, issue of visas and exchange of journalists which have been long term requests from China, have received positive consideration by India. The support for each other on celebrating the events to commemorate the 75 years of diplomatic relationship, expansion of Mansarovar yatra and reopening of border trade, have reinstated some of the bilateral established processes.

Most importantly, Wang Yi’s meeting with PM Modi to personally invite him for the SCO summit in Tianjin was clearly positively received. Wang Yi’s travelling to Pakistan after his visit to India, has not been lost on analysts, for hyphenating the two countries.

Regardless, this visit has yielded benefits. Now the wait begins for the reality of the deliverables to set in.

Lt Gen S L Narasimhan is the Adjunct Distinguished Fellow for China and National Security Studies at Gateway House.

This article was exclusively written for Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations. You can read more exclusive content here.

For permission to republish, please contact outreach@gatewayhouse.in.

Support our work here.