Panchsheel pact did not resolve border issue, says CDS Gen Anil Chauhan

Dehradun: Anil Chauhan, Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), has said that India believed the 1954 Panchsheel Agreement would help resolve boundary issues with China, but Beijing viewed the pact primarily as a trade arrangement and not as a reflection of its position on the border.

Speaking at an event in Dehradun, Gen Chauhan noted that in 1954 India formally recognised Tibet as part of China and both countries signed the Panchsheel Agreement, also known as the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence.

“India believed that through a formal agreement, the northern boundary issue could be settled. However, for China, the agreement was largely about trade and did not in any way reflect its stand on the border,” he said.

He added that even today, the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in the rugged Himalayan terrain remains sensitive and unresolved.

Gen Chauhan recalled that India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and then Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai had signed the Panchsheel Agreement in an effort to lay the foundation for peaceful bilateral ties.

“After the British left, India had to determine where its frontiers lay. In the east, we had the McMahon Line. In Ladakh too, we were articulating our position, but clarity was lacking on the ground. That is perhaps why Nehru wanted to proceed with the Panchsheel Agreement,” the CDS said.

The 890-km-long McMahon Line was earlier the boundary between British India and Tibet in the eastern sector. Following what China termed the “liberation” of Tibet, Beijing sought stability in the region, Gen Chauhan observed.

He noted that the developments in Tibet and Xinjiang created tensions on both sides, prompting China to prioritise stability in certain frontier areas.

According to the CDS, India relinquished certain special privileges inherited from the British after the formation of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, in a bid to foster better relations with Beijing.

He explained that India believed the legitimacy of the boundary would rest on the Panchsheel framework, which identified six passes — including Shipki La, Mana, Niti, Kungri-Bingri, Lipulekh and Dharchula — for trade and pilgrimage routes.

However, Gen Chauhan said China later clarified that its border stance was not linked to the Panchsheel Agreement. Tensions along the LAC escalated sharply in June 2020, when violent clashes between Indian and Chinese troops resulted in the deaths of 20 Indian soldiers. Intelligence reports indicated that more than 30 Chinese soldiers were also killed.

He underlined that while diplomatic frameworks were pursued in good faith, the boundary question has remained complex and continues to require sustained strategic attention.

Also Read: Panchsheel pact did not resolve border issue, says CDS Gen Anil Chauhan