Latest world news

Doklam standoff: China scales up the rhetoric

Published

9 years ago

July 25, 2017

Doklam standoff: China scales up the rhetoric

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi on Tuesday said India has admitted to entering Chinese territory and the Doklam standoff in the Sikkim sector can only reach its logical conclusion if Indian troops ‘conscientiously withdraw’ from the area.

On Monday, spokesman for China’s Defence Ministry had warned India “not to push its luck” and “not harbour any illusions”, saying it was easier to shake a mountain that the PLA (People’s Liberation Army).

After sending out signals mainly through Chinese state-run media for some weeks, in these two days the Chinese government has come out with statements affirming them. Chinese Foreign Minister’s statement on Tuesday was his first comment, also the first by a Chinese minister, in the ongoing standoff between India and China over Doklam.

Wang Yi was quoted by news agency as making a statement to the media in Thailand’s capital Bangkok on Monday, saying: “The rights and wrongs are very clear and even senior Indian officials have openly stated that Chinese troops did not enter into the Indian territory.”

India had said they had entered Bhutan territory at a tri-junction of crucial strategic importance to India.

The brief quote in Chinese, posted on China’s Foreign Ministry’s website, added, “In other words, the Indian side admitted to entering the Chinese territory. The solution to this problem is very simple: conscientiously withdraw.”

The statement, a first by the minister, comes ahead of National Security Adviser Ajit Doval’s visit to Beijing for a BRICS summit, where he is expected to have a one-on-one bilateral meeting with his Chinese counterpart Yang Jiechi on the sidelines.

The editorial in China’s state-run Global Times, said India should not entertain high hopes of any major outcome from Doval’s visit. Describing Doval as “believed to be one of the main schemers behind the current border standoff between Chinese and Indian troops”, it said, “the Indian media is pinning high hopes on the trip to settle the ongoing dispute”.

It said, “…India’s withdrawal from Chinese territory is a precondition and a basis for any meaningful dialogue between the two sides. New Delhi should give up its illusions, and Doval’s Beijing visit is most certainly not an opportunity to settle the standoff in accordance with India’s will.”

It said the BRICS National Security Advisers’ meeting “is not a platform to address Sino-Indian border skirmishes”.

“Doval will inevitably be disappointed if he attempts to bargain with Beijing over the border disputes,” asserted the article.

Ruling out any accommodation or meeting India half-way, it said, “Indian media outlets are exploring “dignified” ways to pull back its troops. We believe that if India complies with international laws, then the withdrawal will display dignity.”

“Beijing has no obligation to coordinate with New Delhi to withdraw its troops or suspend its road construction,” it added.

It went on to indulge in some sabre rattling: “People’s Liberation Army (PLA) forces are being deployed to the border area, and will take effective countermeasures if India refuses to pull back voluntarily. The PLA is capable enough to take actions that neither Indian troops nor the government can afford.”

It said India’s voluntary withdrawal “will incur the least cost” to it. “If Beijing takes countermeasures, New Delhi will be mired in a more passive political and military situation, and face its most serious strategic setback since 1962,” said the Global Times editorial.

An opinion piece in the newspaper struck an even more strident note, talking of “teaching India a second lesson”. It said: “As India continues down this intransigent path, perhaps it is time that it be taught a second lesson.” Recalling a statement made by China’s former consul general in Mumbai, Liu Youfa, the writer said India’s troops in Doklam “could either withdraw voluntarily, be captured or may be killed when border disputes escalate”.

Chinese and Indian soldiers have been locked in a face- off in the Dokalam area of the Sikkim sector for over a month after Indian troops stopped the Chinese army from building a road in the disputed area. China claimed that they were constructing the road within their territory and has been demanding immediate pull-out of the Indian troops from the disputed Dokalam plateau. New Delhi has expressed concern over the road building, apprehending that it may put Chinese troops in a position to cut India’s access to its northeastern states.

India has conveyed to the Chinese government that the road construction would represent a significant change of status quo with serious security implications for it.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Related Topics:BRICS Dokalam National Security Adviser (NSA)People’s Liberation Army (PLA)

Up Next

Congress curtails Trump’s authority on Russia

Don't Miss

China to India: Ready to Defend Sovereignty at All Cost

Latest world news

Iranian President Pezeshkian at UN says Iranians have been victims of US terrorism

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said at the UN General Assembly that Iranians had been victims of US terrorism and insisted that Iran had acted in self-defence.

Published

2 days ago

September 23, 2026

APNLive Desk

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian accused the United States of subjecting Iranians to what he described as terrorism while addressing the United Nations General Assembly on Wednesday.

Pezeshkian said Iran had defended itself against attacks and rejected the characterisation of the country as a terrorist actor. His remarks came during a rare wartime appearance at the UN as tensions between Iran and the United States remain high.

Pezeshkian accuses US and Israel of attacks

Speaking at the General Assembly, Pezeshkian said Iranian civilians had been targeted by attacks and described the actions against his country as aggression.

“We have only defended ourselves. We are not terrorists,” he said, according to the report.

Pezeshkian also accused the United States and Israel of attacking Iran, while maintaining that Tehran’s response was an act of self-defence.

The Iranian president displayed photographs of former Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and more than 150 schoolchildren who, according to his account, were killed during the early days of the conflict.

Iran’s message at the UN

Pezeshkian’s address came against the backdrop of the ongoing conflict between Iran and the United States and heightened tensions in the region.

Iranian officials had indicated ahead of the UN visit that they intended to highlight what Tehran considers attacks against its people and raise concerns over the international response to the conflict.

The Iranian delegation’s visit to New York also comes amid restrictions imposed by the United States on the delegation’s movement and other aspects of its stay, according to reporting ahead of the address.

Pezeshkian says Iran defended itself

Pezeshkian’s central message at the UN was that Iran’s military actions should be viewed as a response to attacks rather than terrorism.

His description of the conflict and the allegations against the United States and Israel represent the Iranian government’s position. They should therefore be attributed to Pezeshkian rather than presented as independently established facts.

Latest world news

PM Modi’s Canada visit could help wrap trade talks, says Canada PM Mark Carney

Canadian PM Mark Carney said he is looking forward to hosting PM Narendra Modi, with both countries aiming to conclude their ongoing trade negotiations.

Published

3 days ago

September 23, 2026

APNLive Desk

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has said he is looking forward to hosting Prime Minister Narendra Modi, as India and Canada continue efforts to advance their bilateral relationship and conclude ongoing trade negotiations.

The two countries have been working towards a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA), with both sides previously setting a target to conclude the negotiations in 2026.

Carney and Modi have held discussions on strengthening economic ties between India and Canada, including trade and investment. Their engagement has gained momentum following Carney’s visit to India earlier this year.

India-Canada trade talks

India and Canada formally resumed efforts towards a broader trade agreement after a period of strained bilateral ties. The two sides have committed to advancing negotiations on a CEPA covering their economic relationship.

In June, Carney and Modi reviewed progress in bilateral economic cooperation during their meeting on the sidelines of the G7 Summit in France. They expressed satisfaction with the progress in CEPA negotiations and reaffirmed their shared objective of concluding the talks in 2026.

During Carney’s visit to India in March, the two leaders had also agreed to accelerate negotiations on the CEPA and work towards finalising the agreement during 2026.

Modi’s proposed Canada visit

Carney had invited PM Modi to visit Canada in 2026, and the two leaders agreed to remain engaged through diplomatic channels to work towards a mutually convenient date for the visit.

The proposed visit comes as New Delhi and Ottawa seek to build on renewed diplomatic and economic engagement, with trade negotiations remaining a key part of the relationship.

The focus on completing the trade talks comes as both countries look to expand commercial ties and establish a broader economic framework through the proposed CEPA.

Latest world news

Trump issues fresh Iran warning at UN General Assembly, signals deal after midterms

US President Donald Trump issued a fresh warning to Iran during his UN General Assembly address, saying he faces a choice between a deal and further escalation.

Published

3 days ago

September 22, 2026

APNLive Desk

US President Donald Trump used his address to the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday to outline what he described as a major decision over Iran, putting the possibility of a deal against further military escalation.

Speaking at the UN in New York, Trump said he had a “big decision” to make. He questioned whether the United States should pursue an agreement that would allow Iran to rebuild or instead take further action against the Islamic Republic.

Trump later indicated that he believed an agreement with Iran could be reached after the US midterm elections, which are scheduled for November 3.

Trump says deal with Iran remains possible

During his speech, Trump presented two possible paths. He said a deal could allow Iran to rebuild and become a stronger country, while also raising the possibility of destroying the Islamic Republic if an agreement was not reached.

Trump said he believed a deal could eventually be reached, arguing that Iran was waiting to see the outcome of the US midterm elections.

His comments came amid the continuing US-Iran conflict and renewed diplomatic activity surrounding the confrontation. Trump’s UN appearance came as Washington was also engaged in discussions with multiple international leaders over the Iran conflict and other global issues.

Iranian delegation walks out during Trump’s speech

The Iranian delegation reportedly left the General Assembly chamber as Trump began describing the military confrontation with Iran.

According to the report, only one person from the Iranian delegation remained seated as Trump spoke about the conflict and the military strikes of the past six months.

The walkout came as tensions between Washington and Tehran remained high, with both sides facing pressure over the continuation of the conflict.

Trump’s latest warning follows earlier comments

Trump’s UN remarks came days after he said he was approaching a major decision over whether to intensify military action against Iran or pursue another route.

He had also indicated before his UN appearance that he could be open to meeting Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian during the UN General Assembly in New York.

The possibility of renewed negotiations comes against the backdrop of continuing military and diplomatic tensions between the two countries.