L****r
发帖数: 147 | 1 中文：http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/web/zyxw/P020170802541371281020.pdf
英文：http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/P020170802542676636134.pdf
印度边防部队在中印边界锡金段越界进入中国领土的事实和中国的立场
一
1. 洞朗地区位于中国西藏自治区亚东县，西与印度锡
金邦相邻，南与不丹王国相接。1890 年，中国和英国签订《中
英会议藏印条约》，划定了中国西藏地方和锡金之间的边界。
根据该条约规定，洞朗地区位于边界线中国一侧，是无可争
议的中国领土。长期以来，中国边防部队和牧民一直在该地
区开展巡逻和放牧活动。目前，洞朗地区与锡金之间的边界
是中印边界锡金段的一部分。
2. 2017 年 6 月 16 日，中方在洞朗地区进行道路施工。
6 月 18 日，印度边防部队 270 余人携带武器，连同 2 台推土
机，在多卡拉山口越过锡金段边界线 100 多米，进入中国境
内阻挠中方的修路活动，引发局势紧张。印度边防部队越界
人数最多时达到 400 余人，连同 2 台推土机和 3 顶帐篷，越
界纵深达到 180 多米。截至 7 月底，印度边防部队仍有 40
多人和 1 台推土机在中国领土上非法滞留。
3. 事件发生后，中国边防部队在现地采取了紧急应对
措施。6 月 19 日，中方通过外交途径紧急向印方提出严正交
涉，对印方非法越界行为予以强烈抗议和谴责，要求印方立
即将越界的印度边防部队撤回到边界线印度一侧。中国外交
部、国防部、中国驻印度使馆在北京和新德里先后多次向印
度提出严正交涉，强烈要求印度尊重中国的领土主权，立即
撤回越界的边防部队。中国外交部、国防部发言人多次公开
表态，说明事实真相，表明中方立场，并公布了印军越界的
地图和现场照片（见附件 1）。
二
4. 中印边界锡金段已由 1890 年《中英会议藏印条约》
（以下简称“1890 年条约”，见附件 2）划定。该条约第一
款规定：“藏、哲之界，以自布坦交界之支莫挚山起，至廓尔
喀边界止，分哲属梯斯塔及近山南流诸小河，藏属莫竹及近
山北流诸小河，分水流之一带山顶为界”（注：支莫挚山即今
吉姆马珍山）。此段边界线走向条约叙述清晰准确,实地边界
线沿分水岭而行，走向清晰可辨。
5. 新中国成立和印度独立后，两国政府均继承了 1890
年条约以及据此确定的中印边界锡金段已定界，这反映在印
度总理尼赫鲁给中国总理周恩来的信件、印度驻华使馆给中
国外交部的照会、中印边界问题特别代表会晤印方提交的文
件中（见附件 3）。长期以来，中印两国按 1890 年条约确定
的边界线实施管辖，对于边界线的具体走向没有异议。边界
一经条约确定，即受国际法特别保护，不得侵犯。
6. 6 月 18 日以来，印度边防部队非法越过中印锡金段
边界进入了中国领土，这是不容否认的事实。此次事件发生
在边界线清楚的已定界地区，与过去双方边防部队在未定界
地区发生的摩擦有着本质区别。印度边防部队越过既定边
界，侵犯了中国主权和领土完整，违反了 1890 年条约，违
反了《联合国宪章》，是对国际法基本原则和国际关系基本
准则的粗暴践踏，性质非常严重。
三
7. 事件发生以来，印度炮制种种“借口”为其非法行
为辩护，有关说法在事实和法律上毫无根据，根本不能成立。
8. 中印边界锡金段已经划定，洞朗地区是中国领土。
中国在自己的领土上进行道路施工，目的是为了改善当地的
交通，完全正当合法。中国修路活动没有越过边界线，而且
提前通报了印度，最大限度体现了善意。印度边防部队公然
越过双方承认的边界线，侵入中国领土，侵犯中国的领土主
权。这才是真正企图改变边界现状，也严重破坏了中印边境
地区的和平与安宁。
9. 印度以中国修路活动带来“严重安全风险”为自己
的非法越界行为辩护。联合国大会 1974 年 12 月 14 日通过
的 3314 号决议规定，不得以任何理由，不论是政治性、经
济性、军事性或其他性质理由，为一个国家的武装部队侵入
或攻击另一国家的领土作辩解。以所谓的“安全关切”为由
越过已定边界线进入邻国领土，无论从事任何活动，都违反
国际法基本原则和国际关系基本准则，都不会为任何一个主
权国家所容忍，更不是中印两个邻国正常的相处之道。
10. 长期以来，印军在多卡拉山口及其附近地区的边界
线印度一侧修建了道路等大量基础设施，甚至在边界线上修
建碉堡等军事设施。与此相反，中国在该段边界线中国一侧
只进行了少量的基础设施建设。近年来，印度边防部队还阻
挠中国边防部队沿着边界线正常巡逻执勤，并企图越界修建
军事设施，中国边防部队对此多次提出抗议并依法拆除印军
越界设施。实际上，正是印度企图不断改变中印边界锡金段
现状，对中国构成严重的安全威胁。
11. 1890 年条约已确定，中印边界锡金段起自与不丹交
界的吉姆马珍山，这是中印边界锡金段的东端点，也是中国、
印度、不丹的三国交界点。此次印度边防部队越界的地点位
于中印边界锡金段的边界线上,距离吉姆马珍山约有2000多
米之远。此次事件与三国交界点问题并无关系。印度应尊重
1890 年条约及其确定的中印边界锡金段东端点，无权单方面
改变既定边界线及其东端点，更不得以此为由侵犯中国的领
土主权。
12. 边界在国际法上具有稳定性和不可侵犯性。由 1890
年条约确定的中印边界锡金段持续有效，为中印双方一再确
认。任何一方都须严格恪守，不得侵犯。中印双方正在边界
问题特别代表会晤中探讨在锡金段边界实现解决边界问题
的“早期收获”，这主要是考虑到锡金段边界已由 1890 年条
约划定，且该条约由当时的中国和英国签署，中印应该以中
国和印度的名义签订新的边界条约，以代替 1890 年条约。
但这丝毫不影响中印边界锡金段的既定边界性质。
13. 洞朗地区历来属于中国，一直在中国的有效管辖之
下，不存在争议。中国和不丹都是主权独立国家，从上世纪
80 年代开始通过谈判协商解决边界问题，迄今已进行了 24
轮边界会谈，达成了广泛共识。两国虽未正式划界，但双方
已对边境地区实施了联合勘察，对边境地区的实际情况和边
界线走向存在基本共识。中不边界问题是中、不两国的事情，
与印度无关。印度作为第三方，无权介入并阻挠中不边界谈
判进程，更无权为不丹主张领土。印度以不丹为借口侵入中
国领土，不仅侵犯了中国的领土主权，而且是对不丹主权和
独立的挑战。中国和不丹是友好邻邦，中国历来尊重不丹的
主权和独立。在双方的共同努力下，中不两国边境地区一直
保持和平安宁。中国愿继续同不丹一道，在不受外来干涉的
情况下，通过谈判协商解决两国间的边界问题。
四
14. 事件发生以来，中国本着最大善意，保持高度克制， 努
力通过外交渠道与印度沟通解决此次事件。但任何国家都
不应低估中国政府和人民捍卫领土主权的决心。中国将采取
一切必要措施维护自己的正当合法权益。此次事件发生在已
定边界线的中国一侧，印度应立即无条件将越界的边防部队
撤回边界线印度一侧，这是解决此次事件的前提和基础。
15. 中印是两个最大的发展中国家。中国政府一贯重视
发展同印度的睦邻友好关系，致力于维护两国边境地区的和
平与安宁。中方敦促印度政府从两国关系大局和两国人民的
福祉出发，恪守 1890 年条约及其确定的中印既定边界，尊
重中国的领土主权，遵守和平共处五项原则等国际法基本原
则和国际关系基本准则，立即将越界的边防部队撤回边界线
印度一侧，并彻底调查此次非法越界行为，尽快妥善解决此
次事件，恢复两国边境地区的和平与安宁。这符合两国的根
本利益，也是本地区国家和国际社会的共同期待。
附件 1
图一：印军越界地点示意图
图二：印军越界现场照片（一）
图三：印军越界现场照片（二）
附件 2
中英会议藏印条约
一八九〇年三月十七日，光绪十六年二月二十七日，加尔各答。
兹因大清国大皇帝、大英国大君主五印度大后帝，实愿固敦两国睦谊，永远弗替；又因
近来事故，两国情谊有所不协之处，彼此欲将哲孟雄、西藏边界事宜，明定界限，用昭
久远，是以大清国大皇帝、大英国大君主拟将此事订立条款，特派全权大臣议办，由大
清国特派驻藏帮办大臣副都统衔升；由大英国特派总理五印度执政大臣第一等三式各宝
星上议院侯爵兰；各将所奉全权便宜行事之上谕文凭公同校阅，俱属妥协，现经议定条
约八款，胪列于后：
第一款 藏、哲之界，以自布坦交界之支莫挚山起，至廓尔喀边界止，分哲属梯斯塔及
近山南流诸小河，藏属莫竹及近山北流诸小河，分水流之一带山顶为界。
第二款 哲孟雄由英国一国保护督理，即为依认其内政外交均应专由英国一国径办；该
部长暨官员等，除由英国经理准行之事外，概不得与无论何国交涉来往。
第三款 中、英两国互允以第一款所定之界限为准，由两国遵守，并使两边各无犯越之
事。
第四款 藏、哲通商，应如何增益便利一事，容后再议， 务期彼此均受其益。
第五款 哲孟雄界内游牧一事，彼此言明，俟查明情形后，再为议订。
第六款 印、藏官员因公交涉，如何文移往来，一切彼此言明，俟后再商另订。
第七款 自此条款批准互换之日为始，限以六个月，由中国驻藏大臣、英国印度执政大
臣各派委员一人，将第四、第五、第六三款言明随后议订各节，兼同会商，以期妥协。
第八款 以上条款既定后，应送呈两国批准，随将条款原本在伦敦互换，彼此各执，以
昭信守。
光绪十六年二月二十七日，即西历一千八百九十年三月十七日，在孟腊城缮就华、英文
各四份，盖印画押。
附件 3
一、1959 年 3 月 22 日印度总理尼赫鲁给中国总理周恩来的信
“印度的保护国锡金同中国西藏地方的边界，是由 1890年的英中专约所确定，1895 年
共同在地面上标定。”
二、1959 年 9 月 26 日印度总理尼赫鲁给中国总理周恩来的信
“1890 年的这个条约也确定了锡金和西藏之间的边界；这条线后来在 1895 年加以标
定。因此，关于锡金同西藏地方的边界，不存在任何纠纷。”
三、1960 年 2 月 12 日印度驻华使馆给中国外交部的照会
“中国政府知道印度政府同不丹和锡金所有的特殊的条约关系。因此印度政府欢迎中国
照会中对于锡金和不丹为一方和西藏为另一方之间的边界的解释。照会说，锡金和中国
西藏地方之间的边界早经正式划定，在地图上既没有任何分歧,在实践中也没有任何争
论。印度政府愿意补充说明，这条边界在地面上也已标定了。”
四、2006 年 5 月 10 日印方在中印边界问题特别代表工作组会议上提交的非文件
“五、双方同意锡金段的边界走向。”
(Translation)
The Facts and China’s Position
Concerning the Indian Border Troops’ Crossing of the China-India
Boundary in the Sikkim Sector into the Chinese Territory
I
1. The Dong Lang area (Doklam) is located in Yadong county of the
Tibet Autonomous Region of China. It borders India’s Sikkim state on the
west and the Kingdom of Bhutan on the south. In 1890, China and the
UK signed the Convention Between Great Britain and China Relating to
Sikkim and Tibet which delimited the boundary between the Tibet region
of China and Sikkim. According to the Convention, the Dong Lang area,
which is located on the Chinese side of the boundary, is indisputably
Chinese territory. For long, China’s border troops have been patrolling the
area and Chinese herdsmen grazing livestock there. At present, the
boundary between the Dong Lang area and Sikkim is a part of the
China-India boundary in the Sikkim Sector.
2. On 16 June 2017, the Chinese side was building a road in the
Dong Lang area. On 18 June, over 270 Indian border troops, carrying
weapons and driving two bulldozers, crossed the boundary in the Sikkim
Sector at the Duo Ka La (Doka La) pass and advanced more than 100
meters into the Chinese territory to obstruct the road building of the
Chinese side, causing tension in the area. In addition to the two
bulldozers, the trespassing Indian border troops, reaching as many as over
400 people at one point, have put up three tents and advanced over 180
meters into the Chinese territory. As of the end of July, there were still
over 40 Indian border troops and one bulldozer illegally staying in the
Chinese territory.
3. After the outbreak of the incident, Chinese border troops took
contingency response measures on the spot. On 19 June, the Chinese side
made prompt and serious representations with the Indian side through
diplomatic channels to strongly protest and condemn the illegal trespass
by the Indian side and demand the immediate withdrawal of the
trespassing Indian border troops back to the Indian side of the boundary.
China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of National Defense and the
Chinese Embassy in India made serious representations with India for
multiple times in Beijing and New Delhi, strongly urging India to respect
China’s territorial sovereignty and immediately pull back its trespassing
border troops. The spokespersons of the Chinese foreign and defense
ministries spoke in public on various occasions, laid out the facts and
truth, stated China’s position and released a map and on-the-scene photos
showing Indian troops’ trespass (see Appendix I). II
4. The China-India boundary in the Sikkim Sector has already been
delimited by the 1890 Convention Between Great Britain and China
Relating to Sikkim and Tibet (hereinafter referred to as the 1890
Convention, see Appendix II). Article I of this Convention stipulates that
“The boundary of Sikkim and Tibet shall be the crest of the mountain
range separating the waters flowing into the Sikkim Teesta and its
affluents from the waters flowing into the Tibetan Mochu and northwards
into other Rivers of Tibet. The line commences at Mount Gipmochi on
the Bhutan frontier, and follows the above-mentioned water-parting to the
point where it meets Nipal territory.” (Mount Gipmochi is currently
known as Mount Ji Mu Ma Zhen.) The Convention gives a clear and
precise description of the alignment of the boundary in this sector. The
actual boundary on the ground follows the watershed and its alignment is
easily identifiable. 5. After the founding of the People’s Republic of
China and the
independence of India, the governments of both countries inherited the
1890 Convention and the delimited China-India boundary in the Sikkim
Sector as established by the Convention. This is evidenced by Indian
Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru’s letters to Chinese Premier Chou
En-lai, diplomatic notes from the Indian Embassy in China to the Chinese
Foreign Ministry, and documents provided by the Indian side in the
Special Representatives Talks on China-India Boundary Question (see
Appendix III). Each of the two sides has for long exercised jurisdiction
over its side of the boundary delimited by the 1890 Convention without
any dispute over the specific alignment of the boundary. Once a boundary
is established by a convention, it is under particular protection of
international law and shall not be violated. 6. Since 18 June, the Indian
border troops have illegally crossed the
China-India boundary in the Sikkim Sector and entered the Chinese
territory. This is an undeniable fact. The incident occurred in an area
where there is a clear and delimited boundary. This makes it
fundamentally different from past frictions between the border troops of
the two sides in areas with undelimited boundary. The Indian border
troops’ crossing of the already delimited boundary is a very serious
incident, as it violates China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,
contravenes the 1890 Convention and the UN Charter, and tramples
grossly on the basic principles of international law and basic norms
governing international relations.
III
7. Since the incident broke out, India has invented various excuses to
justify its illegal action, but its arguments have no factual or legal
grounds at all and are simply untenable. 8. The China-India boundary in the
Sikkim Sector has already been
delimited, and the Dong Lang area is Chinese territory. China’s road
building on its own territory is aimed at improving local transportation,
which is completely lawful and legitimate. China did not cross the
boundary in its road building, and it notified India in advance in full
reflection of China’s goodwill. The Indian border troops have flagrantly
crossed the mutually-recognized boundary to intrude into the Chinese
territory and violated China’s territorial sovereignty. This is indeed a
real
attempt to change the status quo of the boundary, and it has gravely
undermined peace and tranquility of the China-India border area.
9. India has cited “serious security implications” of China’s road
building as a justification for its illegal crossing of the boundary.
According to UN General Assembly Resolution 3314 adopted on 14
December 1974, no consideration of whatsoever nature, whether political,
economic, military or otherwise, may serve as a justification for the
invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of
another State. To cross a delimited boundary and enter the territory of a
neighboring country on the grounds of so-called “security concerns”, for
whatever activities, runs counter to the basic principles of international
law and basic norms governing international relations. No such attempt
will be tolerated by any sovereign State, still less should it be the normal
way of conduct between China and India as two neighboring States.
10. Over the years, Indian troops have constructed a large number of
infrastructure facilities including roads at the Duo Ka La pass and its
nearby areas on the Indian side of the boundary, and even built
fortifications and other military installations on the boundary. China, on
the contrary, has only had very little infrastructure built on its side of
the
boundary in the same sector. In recent years, Indian border troops have
also obstructed the normal patrols along the boundary by Chinese border
troops, and attempted to build military installations across the boundary.
In response, Chinese border troops lodged repeated protests and took
lawful actions to dismantle the facilities installed by the Indian military
on the Chinese side of the boundary. The fact of the matter is it is India
that has attempted time and again to change the status quo of the
China-India boundary in the Sikkim Sector, which poses a grave security
threat to China.
11. The 1890 Convention has made it abundantly clear that the
China-India boundary in the Sikkim Sector commences at Mount Ji Mu
Ma Zhen on the Bhutan frontier. Mount Ji Mu Ma Zhen is the eastern
starting point of the China-India boundary in the Sikkim Sector and it is
also the boundary tri-junction between China, India and Bhutan. The
Indian border troops’ trespass occurred at a place on the China-India
boundary in the Sikkim Sector, which is more than 2,000 meters away
from Mount Ji Mu Ma Zhen. Matters concerning the boundary
tri-junction have nothing to do with this incident. India should respect the
1890 Convention and the eastern starting point of the China-India
boundary in the Sikkim Sector as established by the Convention. It has no
right to unilaterally alter the delimited boundary and its eastern starting
point, still less should it violate China’s territorial sovereignty on the
basis of its untenable arguments. 12. The stability and inviolability of
boundaries is a fundamental
principle enshrined in international law. The China-India boundary in the
Sikkim Sector as delimited by the 1890 Convention has been
continuously valid and repeatedly reaffirmed by both the Chinese and
Indian sides. Either side shall strictly abide by the boundary which shall
not be violated. The Chinese and Indian sides have been in discussion on
making the boundary in the Sikkim Sector an “early harvest” in the
settlement of the entire boundary question during the meetings between
the Special Representatives on the China-India Boundary Question. This
is mainly in view of the following considerations. The boundary in the
Sikkim Sector has long been delimited by the 1890 Convention, which
was signed between then China and Great Britain. China and India ought
to sign a new boundary convention in their own names to replace the
1890 Convention. This, however, in no way alters the nature of the
boundary in the Sikkim Sector as having already been delimited. 13. The Dong
Lang area has all along been part of China and under
China’s continuous and effective jurisdiction. There is no dispute in this
regard. Since the 1980s, China and Bhutan, as two independent sovereign
States, have been engaged in negotiations and consultations to resolve
their boundary issue. The two sides have, so far, had 24 rounds of talks
and reached broad consensus. Although the boundary is yet to be formally
delimited, the two sides have conducted joint surveys in their border area
and have basic consensus on the actual state of the border area and the
alignment of their boundary. The China-Bhutan boundary issue is one
between China and Bhutan. It has nothing to do with India. As a third
party, India has no right to interfere in or impede the boundary talks
between China and Bhutan, still less the right to make territorial claims
on Bhutan’s behalf. India’s intrusion into the Chinese territory under the
pretext of Bhutan has not only violated China’s territorial sovereignty but
also challenged Bhutan’s sovereignty and independence. China and
Bhutan are friendly neighbors. China has all along respected Bhutan’s
sovereignty and independence. Thanks to the joint efforts of both sides,
the border area between China and Bhutan has always enjoyed peace and
tranquility. China will continue to work with Bhutan to resolve the
boundary issue between the two countries through negotiations and
consultations in the absence of external interference.
IV
14. Since the incident occurred, China has shown utmost goodwill
and great restraint and sought to communicate with India through
diplomatic channels to resolve the incident. But no country should ever
underestimate the resolve of the Chinese government and people to
defend China’s territorial sovereignty. China will take all necessary
measures to safeguard its legitimate and lawful rights and interests. The
incident took place on the Chinese side of the delimited boundary. India
should immediately and unconditionally withdraw its trespassing border
troops back to the Indian side of the boundary. This is a prerequisite and
basis for resolving the incident.
15. China and India are the world’s largest developing countries. The
Chinese government always values the growth of good-neighborly and
friendly relations with India and is committed to maintaining peace and
tranquility in the border area between the two countries. The Chinese side
urges the Indian government to keep in mind the larger interest of
bilateral relations and the well-being of the two peoples, abide by the
1890 Convention and the delimited China-India boundary established
therein, respect China’s territorial sovereignty, observe the Five
Principles
of Peaceful Coexistence and other basic principles of international law
and basic norms governing international relations, immediately withdraw
its trespassing border troops back to the Indian side of the boundary and
conduct a thorough investigation into the illegal trespass so as to swiftly
and appropriately resolve the incident and restore peace and tranquility to
the border area between the two countries. This would serve the
fundamental interests of both countries and go along with the shared
expectations of countries in the region and the wider international
community.
Appendix I
1. Sketch Map of the Site of the Indian Troops’ Trespass
2. On-the-Scene Photo I Showing the Indian Troops’ Trespass
3. On-the-Scene Photo II Showing the Indian Troops’ Trespass
Appendix II
CONVENTION BETWEEN GREAT BRITAIN AND CHINA
RELATING TO SIKKIM AND TIBET
WHEREAS Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland, Empress of India, and His Majesty the Emperor of
China, are sincerely desirous to maintain and perpetuate the relations of
friendship and good understanding which now exist between their
respective Empires; and whereas recent occurrences have tended towards
a disturbance of the said relations, and it is desirable to clearly define
and
permanently settle certain matters connected with the boundary between
Sikkim and Tibet, Her Britannic Majesty and His Majesty the Emperor of
China have resolved to conclude a Convention on this subject, and have,
for this purpose, named Plenipotentiaries, that is to say:
Her Majesty the Queen of Great Britain and Ireland, his Excellency
the Most Honourable Henry Charles Keith Petty Fitzmaurice, G.M.S.I.,
G.C.M.G., G.M.I.E., Marquess of Lansdowne, Viceroy and
Governor-General of India;
And His Majesty the Emperor of China, his Excellency Shêng Tai,
Imperial Associate Resident in Tibet, Military Deputy
Lieutenant-Governor;
Who, having met and communicated to each other their full powers,
and finding these to be in proper form, have agreed upon the following
Convention in eight Articles:
ARTICLE I.
The boundary of Sikkim and Tibet shall be the crest of the mountain
range separating the waters flowing into the Sikkim Teesta and its
affluents from the waters flowing into the Tibetan Mochu and northwards
into other Rivers of Tibet. The line commences at Mount Gipmochi on
the Bhutan frontier, and follows the above-mentioned water-parting to the
point where it meets Nipal territory.
ARTICLE II.
It is admitted that the British Government, whose Protectorate over
the Sikkim State is hereby recognized, has direct and exclusive control
over the internal administration and foreign relations of that State, and
except through and with the permission of the British Government,
neither the Ruler of the State nor any of its officers shall have official
relations of any kind, formal or informal, with any other country.
ARTICLE III.
The Government of Great Britain and Ireland and the Government of
China engage reciprocally to respect the boundary as defined in Article I,
and to prevent acts of aggression from their respective sides of the
frontier.
ARTICLE IV.
The question of providing increased facilities for trade across the
Sikkim-Tibet frontier will hereafter be discussed with a view to a
mutually satisfactory arrangement by the High Contracting Powers.
ARTICLE V.
The question of pasturage on the Sikkim side of the frontier is
reserved for further examination and future adjustment.
ARTICLE VI.
The High Contracting Powers reserve for discussion and
arrangement the method in which official communications between the
British authorities in India and the authorities in Tibet shall be conducted.
ARTICLE VII.
Two joint Commissioners shall, within six months from the
ratification of this Convention, be appointed, one by the British
Government in India, the other by the Chinese Resident in Tibet. The said
Commissioners shall meet and discuss the questions which, by the last
three preceding Articles, have been reserved.
ARTICLE VIII.
The present Convention shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall
be exchanged in London as soon as possible after the date of the signature
thereof.
In witness whereof the respective negotiators have signed the same,
and affixed thereunto the seals of their arms.
Done in quadruplicate at Calcutta, this 17th day of March, in the
year of our Lord 1890, corresponding with the Chinese date, the 27th day
of the 2nd moon of the 16th year of Kuang Hsü.
Appendix III
A. Letter from Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru to Chinese Premier
Chou En-lai dated 22 March 1959: “The boundary of Sikkim, a protectorate of
India, with the Tibet Region of China was defined in the Anglo-Chinese
Convention 1890 and jointly demarcated on the ground in 1895.”
B. Letter from Indian Prime
Minister Jawaharlal Nehru to Chinese Premier Chou En-lai dated 26 September
1959: “This Convention of 1890 also defined the boundary between Sikkim and
Tibet; and the boundary was later, in 1895, demarcated. There is thus no
dispute regarding the boundary of Sikkim with the Tibet region.”
C. Note of the Indian Embassy in China to the Chinese Ministry of Foreign
Affairs dated 12 February 1960: “The Chinese Government are aware of the
special treaty relations which the Government of India have with Bhutan and
Sikkim. In view of this the Government of India welcome the explanations
given in the Chinese note relating to the boundaries between Sikkim and
Bhutan on the one hand and Tibet on the other. The note states that the
boundary between Sikkim and the Tibet region of China has long been formally
delimited, and that there is neither any discrepancy on the maps nor any
dispute in practice. The Government of India would like to add that this
boundary has also been demarcated on the ground.”
D. Non-paper provided by the Indian side during the Meeting of the Working
Teams of the Special Representatives on China-India Boundary Question on 10
May 2006: “(e) Both sides agree on the boundary alignment in the
SikkimSector.” | c*****y
发帖数: 1028 | | x***e
发帖数: 844 | 3 显然是不想打了，中国政府一向是对外上兵伐谋，对内血腥镇压。 | p*a
发帖数: 7676 | | t****n
发帖数: 10724 | 5 中不领土争议在别的地方， 不在洞朗。
【在 p*a 的大作中提到】
: 避而不谈中不领土争议。
| l******t
发帖数: 55733 | | c********e
发帖数: 4283 | 7 哪里看得出“显然”？
按照中共的土包子脾气，不打的话就会刻意避免提起。
【在 x***e 的大作中提到】
: 显然是不想打了，中国政府一向是对外上兵伐谋，对内血腥镇压。
| c********e
发帖数: 4283 | 8 有一句讲一句，洞朗是中不有争议的6个地区之一。
【在 t****n 的大作中提到】
: 中不领土争议在别的地方， 不在洞朗。
| T******y
发帖数: 14506 | | s*x
发帖数: 8041 | 10 因为没关系啊
【在 p*a 的大作中提到】
: 避而不谈中不领土争议。
| m*****u
发帖数: 15526 | 11 估计打不了。阿三已经由４００人撤到剩下４０人。阿三如果增兵，那才是打的架试 | z***t
发帖数: 10817 | 12 这是应该谈妥了 不然说出来不解决多没面子
19大前不会打仗
非核心利益地区不会打仗 | s******d
发帖数: 9806 | 13 这个不好讲。前线脱离接触经常是要打的先兆（或者预计到对方要打）。脱离接触的目
的是为了避免最前线这些人第一分钟就当了炮灰。但具体到中印这个情况，既然印度已
经成功的阻止了中国修路的行为，目的达到了之后确实也没有必要留那么多人，有个岗
哨监视就是了。
【在 m*****u 的大作中提到】
: 估计打不了。阿三已经由４００人撤到剩下４０人。阿三如果增兵，那才是打的架试
| s*********2
发帖数: 1572 | 14 这是印度越界，关不丹鸟事。为啥要提中不领土。
【在 p*a 的大作中提到】
: 避而不谈中不领土争议。
|
|
