 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Foreign Ministry spokesman on Friday objected to India's attempts to stir up disputes over the Doklam region. The Indian sides claims that, according to a 2012 India-China agreement, the tri-junction point of China, India and Bhutan will be decided by consulting with the Bhutan side, which means China and India have recognized their divergence on the issue. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said the so-called tri-junction point, just as its name implies, is a point, rather than a line or an area. He said, on the tri-junction, the Convention Between Great Britain and China Relating to Sikkim and Tibet(1890) stipulates that the Sikkim section of the China-India boundary commences at Mount Gipmochi in the east. However, the trespass by the Indian troops took place at the Sikkim section of the China-India boundary over 2,000 meters away from Mount Gipmochi and has nothing to do with the tri-junction, said Geng. The Indian side, by disregarding of the boundary convention, assumes the whole Doklam region as part of the tri-junction. This is obviously an attempt to confuse the public, he added. Some opinions hold that the 1890 convention has ceased to have any significance, because the situation changed after the Sino-Indian Border Conflict in 1962. In response to a question on whether India has recognized the delimitation of the Sikkim section of the China-India boundary since 1962, Geng said successive Indian governments had repeatedly confirmed the 1890 convention in written form, with no disagreement on the boundary alignment at the Sikkim section. Once the border treaty was signed, its legitimacy and effectiveness was not affected by changes of governments or state systems, said Geng. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
