![]() Saturday, Jul 26, 2003 |
| Front Page | ||||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Front Page
By Our New Delhi Bureau
This and earlier such incursions could have been avoided if the two countries had a common perception of the LAC, he said. The Minister told the House that the Government had taken up the issue of the latest incursion with China and a response was awaited. Mr. Sinha was responding to an adjournment motion moved by Ramjilal Suman and Chandranath Singh, both from the Samajwadi Party (SP), in the wake of a furore in the media during the past few days. Mr. Sinha told the House that the Government was aware of the transgression of the LAC by a Chinese patrol on June 26 in the Asaphila area of Upper Subansiri district of Arunachal Pradesh. This, he said, ``is an area where there are differences in perception of the LAC between the two countries''. The Minister said the Chinese patrol had not observed the specific provision laid down in the 1996 agreement between the two countries that concern situations involving face to face contact between patrols of the two sides. He said the process of clarification of the LAC is under way. According to him ``the Government regularly took up with the Chinese authorities the violations of the LAC, according to our perception, by the Chinese side through the established mechanism.'' Earlier, speaking on his amendment motion, Mr. Suman said that newspaper reports had mentioned that China did not even recognise Sikkim as being part of India. ``While the Prime Minister was in China, the Chinese were making incursions into Indian territory,'' he said. Jagmeet Singh Brar (Congress) and Mr. Chandranath Singh referred to the fact that 10 Intelligence Bureau members were interrogated by the Chinese patrol. Both members said the matter was related to national security and urged the Government to take it seriously. After listening to the Minister of External Affairs, the Speaker, Manohar Joshi, rejected the adjournment motion India meanwhile responded in a restrained manner to comments made by the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman that Arunachal Pradesh was not a part of India and that it was the ``Indian side'' which had crossed the LAC in the eastern sector. In response to questions on the issue, the Indian External Affairs Ministry spokesman said that India had made its position clear on the June 26 ``transgression'' of the LAC by the Chinese side. While the spokesman did not offer a detailed response to the Chinese Foreign Ministry's comments today, official sources said there was no exchange of fire during the June 26 incident. They added that the ``encounter'' in Arunachal Pradesh should not be blown out of proportion given the fact that the LAC is a lengthy one. This, again, pointed to the urgent need to clarify the LAC, the sources added. They said that just because the Chinese had a certain view about the status of Arunachal Pradesh it did not mean that the State was not a part of the Indian Union.
Related Stories:
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | Home |
Copyright © 2003, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|