Beijing: Responding to Indian Ministry of External Affairs’ concern about Beijing’s new land border law, the Chinese Foreign Ministry today told “relevant countries” (read India) to abide by norms of international relations, and asked them to “refrain from wanton speculations on China’s “normal domestic legislation”.
The Indian MEA had asked China not use the new land border law to alter areas along its border with India.
Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin today said the new law offers “clear provisions” regarding delineation and demarcation of national land boundaries, defense and management of national land boundaries and borders, and international cooperation in national land boundary affairs”.
China’s National Land Boundary Law was adopted at the 31st Session of the Standing Committee of the Thirteenth National People’s Congress of China on October 23, 2021. On the same day, President Xi Jinping signed Order No. 99 of the President of the People’s Republic of China and issued the document, which is proclaimed to be enforced from January 1, 2022. This law consists of seven chapters and 62 articles. It stipulates clearly the leadership system and division of duties among different departments as well as between military and civilian authorities.
Yesterday, the Indian Foreign Ministry had stated that China’s unilateral decision to bring about a legislation which can have implication on the existing bilateral arrangements on border management as well as on the boundary question was of concern to India. Noting that India and China have still not resolved the boundary question, the MEA spokesperson Arindam Bagchi had made it loud and clear that the passage of this new law “does not in our view confer any legitimacy to the so-called China Pakistan “Boundary Agreement” of 1963 which Government of India has consistently maintained is an illegal and invalid agreement”.
He pointed out that China’s new Land Boundary Law states among other things that China abides by treaties concluded with or jointly acceded to by foreign countries on land boundary affairs. It also has provisions to carry out reorganisation of districts in the border areas.
Reminding China that both sides had agreed to seek a fair, reasonable and mutually acceptable resolution to the Boundary Question through consultations on an equal footing, Bagchi pointed out that both countries had concluded several bilateral agreements, protocols and arrangements to maintain peace and tranquillity along the LAC in India-China border areas in the interim.
He made it clear to China that such “unilateral move will have no bearing on the arrangements that both sides have already reached earlier, whether it is on the Boundary Question or for maintaining peace and tranquillity along the LAC [Line of Actual Control] in India-China Border areas”.
Bagchi said India also expected that “China will avoid undertaking action under the pretext of this law which could unilaterally alter the situation in the India-China border areas”.
Wenbin though today claimed that the new law has “clear provisions” on conducting cooperation with countries sharing a national land boundary with China and handling boundary affairs on the basis of adhering to relevant treaties related to national land boundary affairs and the principle of equality and mutual benefit.
“It will not affect China’s compliance with existing treaties related to national land boundary affairs China has already signed or change China’s current mode of boundary management and cooperation with countries sharing a land boundary with it. Nor will it alter China’s position and proposition on relevant boundary issues,” he claimed.
China has a land boundary of approximately 22,000 kilometers adjourning 14 countries. Wenbin said the main purpose for formulating and promulgating this law” is to further coordinate, regulate and strengthen boundary management and advance international cooperation in relevant fields”. According to Wenbin, this was an “important measure China has taken to implement rule of law and a normal domestic legislative activity”.
He asseted that it was in keeping with the “practical needs in China’s national boundary work and consistent with international law and practice”.
– global bihari bureau
