7

Here are the lines I am talking about,

enter image description here

My point is if Pakistan and China control some territory of Kashmir, why are they keeping those issues dangling for years rather than establishing international borders along those lines?

Improve this question
4
  • 3
    Because they don't consider it Indian territory. Pakistan for one has claim over the entire J&K state, formalizing a border on LOC would put an end to that claim. China presumably also has claims beyond the LOAC and so does India, declaring LOAC the border would end both their claims. India consider LOC de-facto border unilaterally but it does no good when the Other side and the UN doesn't accept it as such
    – NSNoob
    Jul 20, 2017 at 14:09
  • 3
    Flip the question around: why would they establish international borders along those lines, when all three claim the entire area? It's not like all three countries are led by peace loving hippies.
    – Denis de Bernardy
    Jul 20, 2017 at 14:09
  • If both sides agreed, they could negotiate partition along those lines. Why they don't would have to be speculation.
    – James K
    Jul 21, 2017 at 21:44
  • 1
    The question seems to presume that establishment of international border is a unilateral action, which it isn't. Please amend the question to clarify this ambiguity.
    – Dynamic Stardust
    Oct 12, 2017 at 15:15

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
4

Simple answer: Politics

Long Answer:

International Border is the line that both countries and the rest of the world have agreed upon. Both LOC and LOAC are unofficial control lines which are taken by the armies.This border is not accepted by either nations as official. India still wants to take back Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir and Aksai Chin while Pakistan wants to take the whole of Jammu and Kashmir and China wants Arunachal Pradesh which it considers to be Southern Tibet.

Now, let's be honest. All 3 countries, being nuclear powers themselves, know that a war in the 21st Century is not possible. Status quo is the only thing that establishes some sort of peace between the countries. However, all 3 countries have to satisfy the nationalistic fervour in their own countries. It has become an emotional issue in the democratic countries. In Indian terms, Kashmir is a "Brahmastara" (Invincible Weapon) for politicians. In either India or Pakistan, if any leader even tries to resolve it, they are just committing political suicide. Because resolving means negotiating and people on both sides of the border want absolute control and no negotiation.

Improve this answer
7
  • 1
    Most Chinese don't give India a thought in their whole life. Now India has successfully roused China's hatred. When people hate you, they will do everything to destroy you. Nuclear doesn't mean anything.
    – George Chen
    Jul 22, 2017 at 15:50
  • 2
    @GeorgeChen Eh, do you actually think most Indians care about China either? It's just some heightened nationalistic passionate guys who spew hatred all around. And both India and China's leaders are sensible enough not to go to war over some border dispute.
    – Sid
    Jul 22, 2017 at 15:53
  • Please don't compare everything with China. You guys should compare with the US and leave China alone.
    – George Chen
    Jul 22, 2017 at 16:07
  • This answer doesn't cover the Cinese LOAC part. Politics is certainly not a problem from Chinese side.
    – user4514
    Jul 23, 2017 at 5:07
  • 3
    @Sid, China has border issues with just about everyone in its vicinity.- so does India. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_disputed_territories_of_India
    – user4514
    Jul 30, 2017 at 21:11
1

There are many reasons.

  1. Politics

Kashmir is used as a political weapon in the countries. Any yield or comprise would be political suicide.

  1. Legality

The land occupied by Pakistan and China was occupied by force. If these borders were recognised, The Crimean occupation of Russia, China's occupation of the South China Sea, Houthi insurgency in Yemen, Syrian insurgency, Islamic State, etc. would have legal precedent to be recognised.

  1. Practicality

There is no point for the recognition and it would not directly benefit any of those countries.

EDIT: For references:

  1. Chinese Occupation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War
  2. Pakistani Occupation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pakistani_War_of_1947%E2%80%931948

As you can see in both the wars Pakistan and China were the initiators, in fact, the Accession of Kashmir was forced as Kashmir was unable to defend itself, if Pakistan had not started the war, Kashmir may have been independent and this border dispute probably would not have happened.

Improve this answer
2
  • It would help if you can support your answer with references.
    – JJJ ♦
    Sep 18, 2019 at 12:57
  • @JJJ Well most of my answer is based on my personal views as a citizen of India. link for Pakistani occupation link Chinese occupation
    – JERRY_XLII
    Sep 18, 2019 at 14:36

You must log in to answer this question.