India and China agreed on five points to guide their approach to the situation on the effective line of control (LAC), including the withdrawal of troops and easing tensions, following talks between Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar and his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi on Thursday on the sidelines of a meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization in Moscow. Here are the five points that he repeats the process of dialogue, withdrawal and relaxation of the situation. All of this has been comprehensively addressed in the following five agreements: 3. Both sides will respect all existing agreements and protocols on China-India border issues, preserve peace and calm in border areas, and avoid any dissemination that could make matters worse. There is no need for additional agreements. The point of contention is their implementation, which were violated by the PLA in the follow-up to its “Nibble and Negotiate” strategy. In fact, all these agreements have only helped China consolidate its claims over a long period of time by waging a bullet-less war. However, eyes have turned to bilateral talks between India and China. The two ministers spoke by telephone after the fatal collision over the Galwan Valley.
But this time it was a three-hour face-to-face conversation between the two sides, which took place two days after the meeting of the defence ministers of the two nations. The two sides are having many discussions at the highest level, but this is the first time that the two sides have made a joint statement, which is also of very high level. An hour later, the Indian Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a “joint statement” listing five points of agreement reached by the two foreign ministers after two and a half hours of “frank and constructive” discussion. A positive interpretation of the five-point agreement would result in a qualitative change in engagement between the two countries. What could be the nature of the new confidence-building measures (RCMs) that are provided for in Article 5 of the agreement? For some time, there has been talk of moving away from the use of the “effective line of control.”