View source for 2017 China India border standoff

{{For|the 2020 China India skirmishes|2020 China–India skirmishes}}

{{Use dmy dates|date=June 2018}}
{{More citations needed|date=August 2017}}
{{Infobox military conflict
| conflict    = 2017 China–India border standoff
| partof      =
| image       = Chinese photograph of Indian troops at Doklam standoff.png
| caption     = Photograph of Indian soldiers on Doklam Plateau taken by Chinese soldiers – annotations by the Chinese Foreign Ministry showing Chinese claims
| date        = 16 June 2017 – 28 August 2017<br />({{Age in years, months, weeks and days|year1=2017|month1=06|day1=16|year2=2017|month2=08|day2=28}})
| place       = [[Doklam]]
| coordinates =
| map_type    =
| map_relief  =
| latitude    =
| longitude   =
| map_size    =
| map_marksize =
| map_caption =
| map_label   =
| territory   =
| result      = ''[[Status quo ante bellum]]''
* Both sides withdraw their troops from Doklam
* China halts its road construction
| combatant1  = {{flag|India}}<br />(on behalf of {{flag|Bhutan}})
| combatant2  = {{flag|China}}
| combatant3  =
| commander1  =
| commander2  =
| units1      =
| units2      =
| strength1   =
| strength2   =
| casualties1 = Several injured<ref name="India, China soldiers involved in border altercation: Indian sources">{{cite web|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-china-idUSKCN1AV29F|title=India, China soldiers involved in border altercation: Indian sources|work=Reuters|date=18 August 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170815215150/http://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-china-idUSKCN1AV29F|archive-date=15 August 2017|url-status=live}}</ref>
| casualties2 = Several injured<ref name="India, China soldiers involved in border altercation: Indian sources" />
| casualties3 =
| notes       =
| campaignbox =
}}

The '''2017 China–India border standoff''' or '''Doklam standoff''' was a military border standoff between the [[Indian Armed Forces]] and the [[People's Liberation Army]] of China over Chinese construction of a road in [[Doklam]], near a trijunction border area known as Donglang, or Donglang Caochang (meaning Donglang pasture or grazing field), in Chinese. On 16 June 2017 Chinese troops with construction vehicles and road-building equipment began extending an existing road southward in Doklam, a territory that is claimed by both China and [[Bhutan–India relations|India's ally]] Bhutan.<ref name=":5">{{cite web |url=http://www.mfa.gov.bt/press-releases/press-release-272.html |title=Press Release – Ministry of Foreign Affairs |website=mfa.gov.bt |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170630023420/http://www.mfa.gov.bt/press-releases/press-release-272.html |archive-date=30 June 2017 |url-status=dead}}</ref>{{sfn|China Foreign Ministry|2017|p=6}}<ref name=":1">{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/26/world/asia/dolam-plateau-china-india-bhutan.html |title=How India and China Have Come to the Brink Over a Remote Mountain Pass |last1=Barry |first1=Steven Lee Myers, Ellen |date=26 July 2017 |work=The New York Times |last2=Fisher |first2=Max |issn=0362-4331 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170827150313/https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/26/world/asia/dolam-plateau-china-india-bhutan.html |archive-date=27 August 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=":6">{{Cite news |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-india-idUSKBN19O109 |title=China says India violates 1890 agreement in border stand-off |date=3 July 2017 |work=Reuters |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170815072409/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-india-idUSKBN19O109 |archive-date=15 August 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=":7">{{cite web |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/06/china-india-bhutan-standoff-disputed-territory |title=Chinese and Indian troops face off in Bhutan border dispute |first=Michael |last=Safi |date=5 July 2017 |work=The Guardian |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170810170337/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/06/china-india-bhutan-standoff-disputed-territory |archive-date=10 August 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-china-india-doklam-standoff-20170724-story.html |title=Doklam standoff: China sends a warning to India over border dispute |work=Los Angeles Times |agency=Associated Press |date=24 July 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170725110027/http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-china-india-doklam-standoff-20170724-story.html |archive-date=25 July 2017 |url-status=live }}</ref> On 18 June 2017, as part of '''Operation Juniper''',<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://theprint.in/defence/operation-juniper-indian-armys-human-wall-china-doklam/307332/ |title=Operation Juniper — inside story of how Indian Army pushed China back from Doklam |date=17 October 2019 |work=The Print |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191018125032/https://theprint.in/defence/operation-juniper-indian-armys-human-wall-china-doklam/307332/ |archive-date=18 October 2019 |url-status=live}}</ref> about 270 armed Indian troops with two bulldozers crossed the Sikkim border into Doklam to stop the Chinese troops from constructing the road.<ref name=":1" />{{sfn |China Foreign Ministry |2017 |p=1}}<ref name=":8">{{cite web |url=http://accesswdun.com/article/2017/8/566782 |title=China warns Indian troops to get out of contested region |date=August 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170810132801/http://accesswdun.com/article/2017/8/566782 |archive-date=10 August 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref> On 28 August, both India and China announced that they had withdrawn all their troops from the face-off site in Doklam.

== Background ==
{{Main|Doklam#Sino-Bhutanese border dispute at Doklam}}
{{OSM Location map
| coord = {{coord|27.3|88.95}}   <!-- Map center -->
| float = right
| zoom = 10
| width = 230 <!-- width and height of the frame. numeric input - do not add px -->
| height = 350
| caption = Location of [[Doklam]] and border of Bhutan on [[OpenStreetMap]]; [[Sikkim]] to the west and [[Chumbi Valley]] to the north
| mark-coord1 = {{coord|27.272328|88.901061}} <!-- Gipmochi -->
| mark1 = BlackRedMountain.svg
| mark-size1 = 20
| label1 = Gipmochi
| label-size1 = 10
| label-color1 = black
| label-pos1 = left
| mark-title1 = Mount Gipmochi
| mark-image1 =
| mark-description1 = Mount Gipmochi
| mark-coord2 = {{coord|27.327083|88.920928}} <!-- Batang La -->
| mark2 = Red pog.svg
| mark-size2 = 8
| label2 = Batang La
| label-size2 = 10
| label-color2 = black
| label-pos2 = top
| mark-title2 = Batang La
| mark-image2 =
| mark-description2 = Bhutanese claim of trijunction point
| mark-coord3 = {{coord|27.291118|88.914941}} <!-- Doka La -->
| mark3 = Red pog.svg
| mark-size3 = 8
| label3 = Doka La
| label-size3 = 10
| label-color3 = black
| label-pos3 = right
| mark-title3 = Doka La
| mark-image3 =
| mark-description3 = Position of standoff
| mark-coord4 = {{coord|27.310497|88.961772}} <!-- Sinchela -->
| mark4 = Red pog.svg
| mark-size4 = 8
| label4 = Sinchela
| label-size4 = 10
| label-color4 = black
| label-pos4 = right
| mark-title4 = Sinchela
| mark-image4 =
| mark-description4 = Part of the prevailing border
| mark-coord5 = {{coord|27.349324|88.988679}} <!-- Amo Chhu river -->
| mark5 = AS-rzeka-icon.svg
| mark-size5 = 20
| label5 = Amo Chu
| label-size5 = 10
| label-color5 = black
| label-pos5 = right
| mark-title5 = Amo Chu river
| mark-image5=
| mark-description5= Part of the prevailing border
| mark-coord6 = {{coord|27.385772|88.858668}} <!-- Dongkya range -->
| mark6 = Geobox Mountain Range.svg
| mark-size6 = 14
| label6 = Dongkya range
| label-size6 = 10
| label-color6 = black
| label-pos6 = right
| mark-title6 = Dongkya range
| mark-image6=
| mark-description6= border between Sikkim and Tibet
| mark-coord7 = {{coord|27.270636|88.930006}} <!-- Zompelri ridge -->
| mark7 = Geobox Mountain Range.svg
| mark-size7 = 14
| label7 = Zompelri ridge
| label-size7 = 10
| label-color7 = black
| label-pos7 = bottom
| mark-title7 = Zompelri ridge
| mark-image7=
| mark-description7= claimed by China
}}

Doklam is an area disputed between China and [[Bhutan]] located near their tri-junction with India.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article7350.html |title=Doklam Standoff: Beyond Border Dispute – Mainstream Weekly |website=mainstreamweekly.net |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170802131956/http://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article7350.html |archive-date=2 August 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://thewire.in/154449/expert-gyan-india-china-bhutan/ |title=Expert Gyan: On India, China Stand-Off At Border Tri-Junction With Bhutan |first=Devirupa |last=Mitra |website=[[The Wire (Indian web publication)|The Wire]] |date=5 July 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170731014229/https://thewire.in/154449/expert-gyan-india-china-bhutan/ |archive-date=31 July 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref> Unlike China and Bhutan, India does not claim Doklam but supports Bhutan's claim.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/26/world/asia/dolam-plateau-china-india-bhutan.html |title=How India and China Have Come to the Brink Over a Remote Mountain Pass |first1=Steven Lee Myers, Ellen |last1=Barry |first2=Max |last2=Fisher |date=26 July 2017 |work=The New York Times |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170827150313/https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/26/world/asia/dolam-plateau-china-india-bhutan.html |archive-date=27 August 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.firstpost.com/world/sikkim-standoff-beijing-should-realise-bhutan-is-as-important-to-india-as-north-korea-is-to-china-3760997.html |title=Sikkim standoff: Beijing should realise Bhutan is as important to India as North Korea is to China |date=30 June 2017 |website=[[Firstpost]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170729024538/http://www.firstpost.com/world/sikkim-standoff-beijing-should-realise-bhutan-is-as-important-to-india-as-north-korea-is-to-china-3760997.html |archive-date=29 July 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="bunker">{{Cite news |url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/indian-bunker-in-sikkim-removed-by-china-sources/articleshow/59354787.cms |title=Indian bunker in Sikkim removed by China: Sources |author=Staff |date=28 June 2017 |newspaper=[[The Times of India]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170628175449/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/indian-bunker-in-sikkim-removed-by-china-sources/articleshow/59354787.cms |archive-date=28 June 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref>

China's claim on Doklam is based on the 1890 [[Convention of Calcutta]] between China and Britain, which states in Article I:{{sfn |China Foreign Ministry |2017 |p=12–13}}

<blockquote>
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.
</blockquote>

China asserts that by this convention, the starting point of the [[Sikkim]]-Tibet border is "Mount Gipmochi on the Bhutan frontier" and that this clearly defines the tri-junction point.{{sfn |China Foreign Ministry |2017 |p=5}}<ref name=":32">{{Citation |last=CGTN |title='The Border': A debate between China & India |date=14 August 2017 |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSr0w6hD2Bg}}</ref> As per Chinese claims, Doklam is located in the [[Xigaze]] area of [[Tibet]], bordering the state of [[Sikkim]].<ref>{{cite web |title=关系：洞郎地区 (3964647)S |url=http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3964647 |website=OpenStreetMap |access-date=7 August 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170718210936/http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3964647 |archive-date=18 July 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref> However Bhutan was not a party to the convention.

In 1949, Bhutan signed a [[Bhutan–India relations#1949 Treaty|treaty with India]] giving allowance to India to guide its diplomatic and defense affairs.<ref>{{Cite news |url=http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/amid-india-china-standoff-army-chief-in-sikkim-today-10-facts-1718311 |title=At Heart of India-China Standoff, A Road Being Built: 10 Points |last=Som |first=Vishnu |date=29 June 2017 |publisher=NDTV |url-status=live |editor-last=Shukla |editor-first=Shuchi |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170629084547/http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/amid-india-china-standoff-army-chief-in-sikkim-today-10-facts-1718311 |archive-date=29 June 2017}}</ref>{{failed verification |date=August 2017}} In 2007, the treaty was superseded by a [[Bhutan–India relations#2007 treaty|new Friendship Treaty]] that replaced the provision that made it mandatory for Bhutan to take India's guidance on foreign policy, provided broader sovereignty but also stated in its Article 2:<ref>{{cite web |url=https://mea.gov.in/Images/pdf/india-bhutan-treaty-07.pdf |title=INDIA-BHUTAN FRIENDSHIP TREATY |date=2 March 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160509040714/http://mea.gov.in/Images/pdf/india-bhutan-treaty-07.pdf |archive-date=9 May 2016 |url-status=live}}</ref>

<blockquote>
In keeping with the abiding ties of close friendship and cooperation between Bhutan and India, the Government of the Kingdom of Bhutan and the Government of the Republic of India shall cooperate closely with each other on issues relating to their national interests.
</blockquote>From 1958, Chinese maps started showing large parts of Bhutanese territory as part of China.<ref name="Bharadwaj">Sandeep Bharadwaj, [http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/GXIc4NLACn5jxHv6RkkX7I/Doklam-may-bring-Bhutan-closer-to-India.html Doklam may bring Bhutan closer to India] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170816110000/http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/GXIc4NLACn5jxHv6RkkX7I/Doklam-may-bring-Bhutan-closer-to-India.html  |date=16 August 2017 }}, ''livemint'', 9 August 2017.</ref> Localized tensions arose in the 1960s but in the 1970s negotiations between China and Bhutan, with India sometimes playing a supporting role, failed to create a consensus on the status of the Doklam plateau. Bhutan and China have held 24 rounds of boundary talks since they began in 1984, with notable agreements reached in 1988 and 1998, the latter also prohibiting the use of force and encouraging both parties to strictly adhere to peaceful means.

In the early 2000s, China built a road up the Sinchela pass (in undisputed territory) and then over the plateau (in disputed territory), leading up to the Doka La pass, until reaching within 68 metres distance to the Indian border post on the Sikkim border. Here, they constructed a turn-around facilitating vehicles to turn back. This road has been in existence at least since 2005.<ref name="geography">Ankit Panda, [https://thediplomat.com/2017/07/the-political-geography-of-the-india-china-crisis-at-doklam/ The Political Geography of the India-China Crisis at Doklam] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170714232229/https://thediplomat.com/2017/07/the-political-geography-of-the-india-china-crisis-at-doklam/  |date=14 July 2017 }}, The Diplomat, 13 July 2017.</ref> It is the southward extension of this road that sparked the 2017 standoff.<ref name=":1"/>

== Timeline ==
On 16 June 2017, Chinese troops with construction vehicles and road-building equipment began extending an existing road southward on the Doklam plateau.<ref name=":5" /><ref name=":1" /><ref name=":6" /><ref name=":7" />

On 18 June 2017, around 270 Indian troops, with weapons and two bulldozers, entered Doklam to stop the Chinese troops from constructing the road.<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":8" />

On 29 June 2017, Bhutan protested to China against the construction of a road in the disputed territory.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.mfa.gov.bt/press-releases/press-release-272.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170821165720/http://www.mfa.gov.bt/press-releases/press-release-272.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=21 August 2017 |title=Press Release – Ministry of Foreign Affairs |date=21 August 2017}}</ref> According to the Bhutanese government, China attempted to extend a road that previously terminated at Doka La towards the Bhutan Army camp at Zornpelri near the Jampheri Ridge 2&nbsp;km to the south; that ridge, viewed as the border by China but as wholly within Bhutan by both Bhutan and India, extends eastward approaching India's highly-strategic [[Siliguri Corridor]].<ref name="Siliguri2">Shaurya Karanbir Gurung [http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/border-face-off-why-china-tries-to-break-chickens-neck-to-isolate-northeast/articleshow/59420472.cms/ Behind China's Sikkim aggression, a plan to isolate Northeast from rest of India] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170824145907/http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/border-face-off-why-china-tries-to-break-chickens-neck-to-isolate-northeast/articleshow/59420472.cms  |date=24 August 2017 }}, ''The Economic Times'', 3 July 2017.</ref> The Bhutanese border was reportedly put on high alert and border security was tightened as a result of the growing tensions.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.firstpost.com/india/bhutan-issues-scathing-statement-against-china-claims-beijing-violated-border-agreements-of-1988-1998-3760587.html |title=Bhutan issues scathing statement against China, claims Beijing violated border agreements of 1988, 1998 |date=30 June 2017 |work=Firstpost |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170702075512/http://www.firstpost.com/india/bhutan-issues-scathing-statement-against-china-claims-beijing-violated-border-agreements-of-1988-1998-3760587.html |archive-date=2 July 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref>

On the same day, China Foreign Ministry released a map depicting Doklam as part of China. Using the map as illustration, China's Spokesperson Lu Kang read Article I of the 1890 [[Convention of Calcutta]] and asserted that it proved that the Donglang (Doklam) area, a territory North East of Gipmochi as shown on the map, belongs to China.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/china-releases-new-map-territorial-claims-stand-off-site/1/991733.html |title=EXCLUSIVE: China releases new map showing territorial claims at stand-off site |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170704223115/http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/china-releases-new-map-territorial-claims-stand-off-site/1/991733.html |archive-date=4 July 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref>

On 30 June, [[Ministry of External Affairs of India]] released the statement entitled ''Recent Developments in Doklam Area'' stating its official position.<ref name=":4">{{cite web |url=http://mea.gov.in/press-releases.htm?dtl/28572/Recent_Developments_in_Doklam_Area |title=Recent Developments in Doklam Area |website=mea.gov.in |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170816104552/http://mea.gov.in/press-releases.htm?dtl%2F28572%2FRecent_Developments_in_Doklam_Area |archive-date=16 August 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref> It charges China of changing status quo in violation of a 2012 understanding between the two governments regarding finalizing the tri-junction boundary points and causing security concerns, widely understood as at its strategic [[Siliguri Corridor]].<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://thediplomat.com/2017/07/whats-driving-the-india-china-standoff-at-doklam/ |title=What's Driving the India-China Standoff at Doklam? |last=Diplomat |first=Ankit Panda, The |work=The Diplomat |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170719092125/https://thediplomat.com/2017/07/whats-driving-the-india-china-standoff-at-doklam/ |archive-date=19 July 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref> It says that "Indian personnel" at Doka La coordinated with Bhutan and "approached the Chinese construction party and urged them to desist from changing the status quo."<ref name=":4" />

On 30 June, answering a question about Bhutan's protest, China's Spokesperson Lu Kang made the following statement about Doklam's history after asserting that the area where the construction activities are underway is totally under the jurisdiction of China because it is completely located on the Chinese side of the China-Bhutan traditional customary line:<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1474637.shtml |title=Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lu Kang's Regular Press Conference on June 30, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180201110831/http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1474637.shtml |archive-date=1 February 2018}}</ref>

<blockquote>
Before the 1960s, if border inhabitants of Bhutan wanted to herd in Doklam, they needed the consent of the Chinese side and had to pay the grass tax to China. Nowadays the Xi Zang [[Tibet]] Archives still retain some receipts of the grass tax.
</blockquote>

On 3 July 2017, China Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang stated that former Indian prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru accepted the 1890 Britain–China treaty:<ref name="fmprc1">{{cite web |url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1475054.shtml |title=Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang's Regular Press Conference on July 3, 2017 |website=fmprc.gov.cn |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170819081220/http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1475054.shtml |archive-date=19 August 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref><blockquote>On September 26 of the same year, when writing back to Premier Zhou Enlai, Prime Minister Nehru unequivocally stated "the boundary between Sikkim and Xi Zang, China was defined by the 1890 Convention. This boundary was demarcated in 1895. There is no dispute over the boundary between Sikkim and Xi Zang ([[Tibet]]), China".</blockquote>Indian media reported that Nehru's 26 September 1959 letter to Zhou, cited by China, was in fact a point-by-point refutation of the claims made by the Zhou on 8 September 1959. In the letter, which was accessed by Indian press albeit not published in its entirety, Nehru wrote:<ref>[http://www.pib.nic.in/archive/docs/DVD_18/ACC%20NO%20291-BR/EXT-1959-10-04_8160.pdf Full letter EXT-1959-10-04_8160] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170826031854/http://www.pib.nic.in/archive/docs/DVD_18/ACC%20NO%20291-BR/EXT-1959-10-04_8160.pdf  |date=26 August 2017 }}, Government of India. Retrieved 25 August 1947.</ref>
<blockquote>
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.
</blockquote>

China Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang replied to India media's question about disputed tri-junction with the following comment:<ref name="fmprc1"/><blockquote>
The so-called tri-junction, as the name suggests, is a point. It is not a line, much less an area. India misinterprets tri-junction point as an area, from ulterior motives. This time, the trespassing point of Indian army, is on the Sikkim-China border, which is 2000 metres away from the tri-junction point, Mount Gipmochi, by the 1890 Treaty.
</blockquote>On 5 July 2017, the Chinese government said that it had for the past 24 months a basic consensus with Bhutan that Doklam belongs to China, and there was no dispute between the two countries.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/no-dispute-with-bhutan-in-doklam-china/articleshow/59456533.cms |title=No dispute with Bhutan in Doklam: China |last=PTI |date=5 July 2017 |newspaper=The Economic Times |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170729030244/http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/no-dispute-with-bhutan-in-doklam-china/articleshow/59456533.cms |archive-date=29 July 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref>

On 19 July 2017, China renewed its call for India to withdraw its troops from Doklam.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.arabnews.com/node/1131641/world |title=China holds live-fire drills in disputed Himalayan territory, tells India to withdraw |date=19 July 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170719153717/http://www.arabnews.com/node/1131641/world |archive-date=19 July 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref>

On 24 July 2017, Chinese Foreign Minister [[Wang Yi (politician)|Wang Yi]] told reporters that it is very clear who is right and who is wrong in the standoff in Doklam, and that even senior Indian officials have publicly said that Chinese troops have not intruded into Indian territory.<ref name=":2">{{Citation |last=CCTV中文国际 |title=[Focus Today] 20170726 {{!}} CCTV-4 |date=25 July 2017 |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KT9IX_xM14 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190302011519/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KT9IX_xM14 |archive-date=2 March 2019 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=":3">Wang Zihao, [https://www.ecns.cn/voices/2017/08-03/267944.shtml U.S. scholar: India should remember the history] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170806232020/http://www.ecns.cn/voices/2017/08-03/267944.shtml  |date=6 August 2017 }}, [[China Daily]], 3 August 2017</ref> "In other words, India admitted that it has entered Chinese territory. The solution to this issue is simple, which is that they behave themselves and withdraw," Wang said.<ref name=":2" /><ref name=":3" />

On 2 August 2017, the Chinese foreign ministry released a 15-page official position statement ''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''.{{sfn|China_Foreign_Ministry|2017}} According to this document, there were still over 40 Indian troops and one bulldozer in Doklam (Donglang) region.{{sfn|China_Foreign_Ministry|2017}} Beijing accused India of using Bhutan as "a pretext" to interfere and impede the boundary talks between China and Bhutan. The report referred to India's "trespassing" into Doklam as a violation of the territorial sovereignty of China as well as a challenge to the sovereignty and independence of Bhutan.{{sfn|China Foreign Ministry|2017|p=5}} China says in the 15-page document that it notified India regarding its plan to construct road "in advance in full reflection of China's goodwill".

On 3 August 2017, China charged with four reasons that "India is certainly not for peace" though it always puts peace on its lips.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2535_665405/t1482345.shtml |title=Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang's Remarks on the Indian Border Troops' Illegal Crossing of the China-India Boundary into the Chinese Territory |website=fmprc.gov.cn |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170825102648/http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2535_665405/t1482345.shtml |archive-date=25 August 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-india-border-idUSKBN1AJ1TP |title=China says India building up troops amid border stand off |date=4 August 2017 |work=Reuters |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170816151341/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-india-border-idUSKBN1AJ1TP |archive-date=16 August 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref>

On 4 August 2017, The Ministry of External Affairs of India refused to confirm or deny when asked why, if India received notification from China in advance on its plan to construct road, it had not used diplomatic channels before sending its troops across the border since it was asking for diplomatic solution.<ref>{{Citation |last=Ministry of External Affairs, India |title=Weekly Media Briefing by Official Spokesperson (August 4, 2017) |date=4 August 2017 |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJnAoru8VsY |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190302011516/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJnAoru8VsY |archive-date=2 March 2019 |url-status=live}}</ref>

On 8 August 2017, Chinese diplomat Wang Wenli claimed that Bhutan had conveyed to China through diplomatic channels that the area of the standoff is not its territory, saying, "After the incident, the Bhutanese made it very clear to us that the place where the trespassing happened is not Bhutan's territory."<ref>{{cite web |url=https://thewire.in/165934/bhutan-doklam-india-china/ |title=Bhutan Acknowledges Doklam is Under Chinese Territory, Claims Top Chinese Official |last=Joseph |first=K.J.M Varma and Anil K. |website=thewire.in |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170825233124/https://thewire.in/165934/bhutan-doklam-india-china/ |archive-date=25 August 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref> On the next day, the Bhutanese government denied this, saying over the phone "Our position on the border issue of Doklam is very clear" and referring to the governments 29 June statement.<ref>{{Cite news |url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/bhutan-rejects-beijings-claim-that-doklam-belongs-to-china/articleshow/60001311.cms |title=Bhutan rejects Beijing's claim that Doklam belongs to China |work=The Times of India  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170810161706/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/bhutan-rejects-beijings-claim-that-doklam-belongs-to-china/articleshow/60001311.cms |archive-date=10 August 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref>

On 15 August 2017, several Indian and Chinese soldiers were alleged to have been injured after a melee broke out between them when a group of Chinese soldiers were alleged to have attempted to infiltrate across the border near [[Pangong Lake]] into Indian controlled territory in [[Ladakh]].<ref name="India, China soldiers involved in border altercation: Indian sources" /> An Indian intelligence officer said the confrontation occurred after Indian soldiers intercepted a Chinese patrol that veered into Indian-held territory after losing its way apparently due to bad weather.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/china-india-soldiers-hurl-stones-kashmir-49243886 |title=China, India soldiers hurl stones at each other in Kashmir |date=16 August 2017 |work=ABC News |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170816103920/https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/china-india-soldiers-hurl-stones-kashmir-49243886 |archive-date=16 August 2017}}</ref>

On 16 August 2017, the state run news agency released a segment of its show "The Spark" on Twitter racially attacking India, the video named the "Seven Sins of India" portrayed a stereotypical Indian with a turban and beard and a typical Indian accent, the segment spoke of Indians having "thick skin" and "pretending to sleep" on the matter of the border standoff between the two countries. The video went on to claim India was physically threatening Bhutan, and compared India to a "robber who breaks into a house and does not leave". The content of the video were factually incorrect. The video has received strong backlash on Twitter as well as from the international media.<ref>{{cite web  |author=Nyshka Chandran  |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/17/chinese-media-xinhua-mocks-indians-and-pm-narendra-modis-policies-in-racist-video.html  |title=Chinese media Xinhua mocks Indians and PM Narendra Modi's policies in racist video  |publisher=CNBC  |date=17 August 2017  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170817122438/https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/17/chinese-media-xinhua-mocks-indians-and-pm-narendra-modis-policies-in-racist-video.html  |archive-date=17 August 2017  |url-status=live }}</ref>

On 9 October 2017 China announced that it was ready to maintain peace at frontiers with India reacting to Indian Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman's visit to Nathu La.<ref>{{Cite news |url=http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/ready-to-maintain-peace-at-frontiers-with-india-china-on-sitharaman-s-visit-to-nathu-la/story-EVdlopKMXl0rkre9mRlzqM.html |title=Ready to maintain peace at frontiers with India: China on Sitharaman's visit to Nathu La |date=9 October 2017 |work=hindustantimes.com/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171009144710/http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/ready-to-maintain-peace-at-frontiers-with-india-china-on-sitharaman-s-visit-to-nathu-la/story-EVdlopKMXl0rkre9mRlzqM.html |archive-date=9 October 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref>

== Disengagement ==
On 28 August 2017, India and China announced that they had agreed to pull their troops back from the face-off in Doklam. By the end of the day, it was reported that the withdrawal was completed.<ref name="WP agree"/><ref name="NYT ease tensions"/>

The Indian troops withdrew back to their original positions at their outpost at Doka La, located in a militarily advantageous position on the Bhutanese border, less than 500 meters away down the ridge slope.<ref name="toi">{{Cite news  |url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/indian-troops-can-swiftly-intervene-if-china-attempts-to-build-road-at-doklam-again/articleshow/60264898.cms  |title=Indian soldiers withdraw but hold vantage point, ready to step in again  |last=Pandit  |first=Rajat  |work=The Times of India  |date=29 August 2017  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170903022642/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/indian-troops-can-swiftly-intervene-if-china-attempts-to-build-road-at-doklam-again/articleshow/60264898.cms  |archive-date=3 September 2017  |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="thediplomat"/> ''[[The Times of India]]'', citing a source, reported: "Our soldiers sit on the top, hold the ridge and can swiftly intervene, as they pro-actively did in mid-June, if the People's Liberation Army once again tries to unilaterally change the status quo by constructing a road near the Sikkim-Bhutan-Tibet tri-junction."<ref name="toi"/>

Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) of India released a press statement stating that India and China had mutually agreed to disengage. It said that India and China had maintained diplomatic communication in recent weeks and that India was able to convey its "concerns and interests". In Beijing, the foreign ministry spokeswoman said that the Chinese forces on site have verified that the Indian troops pulled out, and implied that Chinese troop numbers would be reduced. She said that the Chinese troops would continue to patrol the area, to garrison it and to exercise "sovereign rights". However, she made no mention of road-building activities. The statement from the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, as ''[[The Diplomat]]'' reported, "offered Beijing a face-saving way out of the impasse."<ref name="thediplomat">{{Cite news  |url=https://thediplomat.com/2017/08/what-china-learned-about-india-at-doklam/  |title=What China Learned About India at Doklam  |work=The Diplomat  |date=31 August 2017  |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170903000450/https://thediplomat.com/2017/08/what-china-learned-about-india-at-doklam  |archive-date=3 September 2017  |url-status=live }}</ref> Indian MEA issued a second statement later in the day that both the sides have withdrawn "under verification". The Indian news channel [[NDTV]] reported that, by the end of the day, Chinese road-building equipment was removed from the face-off site. Some experts warned that one shouldn't be overly optimistic as another standoff is entirely possible.<ref name="WP agree"/><ref name="NYT ease tensions">[https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/28/world/asia/china-india-standoff-withdrawal.html China and India Agree to Ease Tensions in Border Dispute] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170828234241/https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/28/world/asia/china-india-standoff-withdrawal.html  |date=28 August 2017 }}, ''The New York Times'', 28 August 2017.</ref>

''[[The Washington Post]]'' commented that it was not clear if China had offered any concessions in return for the Indian withdrawal, such as agreeing to halt road construction. It said that the deal allowed both sides to save face. However China was continuing to be "cagey" in its official remarks.<ref name="WP agree">[https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/india-withdraws-troops-from-disputed-himalayan-region-defusing-tension-with-china/2017/08/28/b92fddb6-8bc7-11e7-a2b0-e68cbf0b1f19_story.html India, China agree to pull back troops to resolve tense border dispute] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170829011815/https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/india-withdraws-troops-from-disputed-himalayan-region-defusing-tension-with-china/2017/08/28/b92fddb6-8bc7-11e7-a2b0-e68cbf0b1f19_story.html  |date=29 August 2017 }}, The Washington Post, 28 August 2017</ref><ref name="WP who blinked">[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/08/30/who-blinked-in-china-india-military-standoff/ Who blinked in the China-India military standoff?] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170830152147/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/08/30/who-blinked-in-china-india-military-standoff/  |date=30 August 2017 }}, The Washington Post, 30 August 2017</ref> ''[[Al Jazeera]]'' said that China was not giving up its historical claims and it expected India to respect its "historical borders".<ref name="Al Jazeera agree">[http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/08/india-troops-disengaging-china-standoff-170828075130658.html India and China agree on Doklam troop 'disengagement'] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170829104753/http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/08/india-troops-disengaging-china-standoff-170828075130658.html  |date=29 August 2017 }}, Al Jazeera, 28 August 2017.</ref> Scholar [[Taylor Fravel]] pointed out that there are plenty of options available to China to garrison the area other than extending the road.<ref>Taylor Fravel, [https://warontherocks.com/2017/09/why-india-did-not-win-the-standoff-with-china/ Why India Did Not ‘Win’ the Standoff with China] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170903073740/https://warontherocks.com/2017/09/why-india-did-not-win-the-standoff-with-china/  |date=3 September 2017 }}, ''War on the Rocks'', 1 September 2017.</ref>

On 29 August, Bhutan welcomed the disengagement and hoped that it would lead to the maintenance of peace and tranquility as well as status quo along the borders.<ref>[http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/bhutan-welcomes-end-of-dokalam-standoff/articleshow/60274631.cms Bhutan welcomes end of Doklam standoff] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170829202116/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/bhutan-welcomes-end-of-dokalam-standoff/articleshow/60274631.cms  |date=29 August 2017 }}, ''The Times of India'', 29 August 2017.</ref>

On 5 September, Prime Minister [[Narendra Modi]] and President [[Xi Jinping]] held hour-long discussions on the sidelines of the [[9th BRICS summit|BRICS summit]]. They agreed on a "forward-looking" approach and vowed to make efforts to ensure that situations like the Doklam standoff do not recur. They reaffirmed that maintaining peace and tranquility in the border areas was essential for the relations between the two countries.<ref>[http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/doklam-discussed-pakistan-skipped-heres-what-happened-at-the-1-hour-meet-between-xi-and-modi/articleshow/60372716.cms Doklam discussed, Pakistan skipped: Here's what happened at the 1 hour meet between Xi and Modi] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170907085605/http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/doklam-discussed-pakistan-skipped-heres-what-happened-at-the-1-hour-meet-between-xi-and-modi/articleshow/60372716.cms  |date=7 September 2017 }}, The Economic Times, 5 September 2017.</ref>

On 7 September, some media reports claimed that both nation's troops still were patrolling the area at the face-off site, simply having moved 150 meters back from their previous position.<ref>{{Cite news |url=http://www.financialexpress.com/india-news/doklam-standoff-indian-chinese-troops-still-on-face-off-site-they-have-merely-stepped-back-150-meters-each/844812/ |title=troops steeped back 150 meters each |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170908111754/http://www.financialexpress.com/india-news/doklam-standoff-indian-chinese-troops-still-on-face-off-site-they-have-merely-stepped-back-150-meters-each/844812/ |archive-date=8 September 2017 |url-status=live}}</ref>

== Bhutanese reaction ==
After issuing a press statement on 29 June, the Bhutanese government and media maintained a studious silence.<ref name="NYT squeezed"/> ''[[The Bhutanese]]'' clarified that the territory on which China was building a road was "Bhutanese territory" that was being claimed by China, and it is part of the ongoing border negotiations.<ref>Tenzing Lamsang, [http://thebhutanese.bt/understanding-the-doklam-border-issue/ Understanding the Doklam border issue] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170903025510/http://thebhutanese.bt/understanding-the-doklam-border-issue/  |date=3 September 2017 }}, ''The Bhutanese'', 1 July 2017.</ref> It also defended the policy of silence followed by the Bhutanese government, saying "Bhutan does not want India and China to go to war, and it is avoiding doing anything that can heat up an already heated situation."<ref>Tenzing Lamsang, [http://thebhutanese.bt/the-third-leg-of-doklam-2/ The Third Leg of Doklam] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170903030355/http://thebhutanese.bt/the-third-leg-of-doklam-2/  |date=3 September 2017 }}, ''The Bhutanese'', 5 August 2017.</ref> However, ''ENODO Global'', a risk management firm, having done a study of social media interactions in Bhutan, recommended that the government should "proactively engage" with citizens and avoid a disconnect between leaders and populations. ENODO found considerable anxiety among the populace regarding the risk of war between India and China, and the possibility of annexation by China similar to that of Tibet in 1951. It found a strengthening of Bhutanese resolve, identity and nationalism, not wanting to be "pushovers".<ref name="Diplomat Bhutanese">Akhilesh Pillalamarri & Aswin Subanthore, [https://thediplomat.com/2017/08/what-do-the-bhutanese-people-think-about-doklam/ What Do the Bhutanese People Think About Doklam?] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170903031155/https://thediplomat.com/2017/08/what-do-the-bhutanese-people-think-about-doklam/  |date=3 September 2017 }}, The Diplomat, 14 August 2017.</ref>

''[[The New York Times]]'' said that it encountered more people concerned about India's actions than China's. It found expressions of sovereignty and concern that an escalation of the border conflict would hurt trade and diplomatic relations with China.<ref name="NYT squeezed">{{cite news  |title=Squeezed by an India-China Standoff, Bhutan Holds Its Breath  |author=Steven Lee Myers  |date=15 August 2017  |newspaper=[[The New York Times]]  |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/15/world/asia/squeezed-by-an-india-china-standoff-bhutan-holds-its-breath.html   |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170907000925/https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/15/world/asia/squeezed-by-an-india-china-standoff-bhutan-holds-its-breath.html  |archive-date=7 September 2017  |url-status=live }}</ref> Scholar Rudra Chaudhuri, having toured the country, noted that Doklam is not as important an issue for the Bhutanese as it might have been ten years ago. Rather the Bhutanese view a border settlement with China as the top priority for the country. While he noticed terms such as "pro-Chinese" and "anti-Indian" often used, he says that what they mean is not well-understood.<ref name=Chaudhuri>Rudra Chaudhuri, [http://indianexpress.com/article/india/looking-for-godot-doklam-standoff-india-china-bhutan-neighbours/lite/ Looking for Godot] {{Webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170904065653/http://indianexpress.com/article/india/looking-for-godot-doklam-standoff-india-china-bhutan-neighbours/lite/  |date=4 September 2017 }}, The Indian Express, 3 September 2017.</ref>

==Other==
India pays Beijing for supplying data on cross-border flows of the [[Brahmaputra River]]. During the standoff - which coincided with the peak flood season - China refused to transmit this data to India, saying that the measuring stations had been washed away.<ref>{{cite web |author1=Archana Chaudhary |author2=Faseeh Mangi |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2020-indus-river |title=New Weather Patterns Are Turning Water Into a Weapon |newspaper=Bloomberg Businessweek  |date=11 March 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200313114113/https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2020-indus-river/ |archive-date=13 March 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref>

== See also ==
* [[China–India relations]]
* [[Bhutan–China relations]]
* [[Nathu La and Cho La clashes]]
* [[Siliguri Corridor]]
* [[Sino-Indian War]]
* [[Tetulia Corridor]]

== References ==
{{Reflist|30em}}

== Bibliography ==
* {{citation |title=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 (2017-08-02) |last=China Foreign Ministry |date=2 August 2017 |url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/P020170802542676636134.pdf |publisher=Government of China |access-date=15 August 2017 |ref={{sfnref|China Foreign Ministry|2017}}}}

== External links ==
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20170709135501/http://treaties.fco.gov.uk/docs/pdf/1894/TS0011.pdf Convention Between Great Britain and China relating to Sikkim & Tibet]
* [http://www.mea.gov.in/press-releases.htm?dtl/28893/press+statement+on+doklam+disengagement+understanding  Press Statement on Doklam disengagement understanding], Ministry of External Affairs (India), 28 August 2017.
* [http://www.mea.gov.in/Uploads/PublicationDocs/28895_Doklam_new.pdf In Response to Questions on the Doklam Disengagement Understanding], Ministry of External Affairs (India), 28 August 2017.
* {{Cite web |title=Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying's Regular Press Conference on August 28, 2017 |url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1487932.shtml |publisher=China Foreign Ministry |access-date=31 August 2017}}
* {{Cite web |url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1488261.shtml |title=Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hua Chunying's Regular Press Conference on August 29, 2017 |website=www.fmprc.gov.cn |access-date=31 August 2017}}
* {{Cite web |url=http://www.mfa.gov.bt/?p=4948 |title=Press Statement on Doklam Disengagement – Ministry of Foreign Affairs |website=www.mfa.gov.bt  |access-date=31 August 2017}}

{{China–India relations}}
{{Military of India}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:2017 China-India border standoff}}

{{#seo:
|keywords=Conflicts in 2017, 2017 in Bhutan, Bhutan–China border, Bhutan–China relations, Bhutan–India relations, June 2017 events in China, June 2017 events in India, July 2017 events in China, July 2017 events in India, August 2017 events in China, August 2017 events in India, Territorial disputes of China, June 2017 events in Asia, July 2017 events in Asia, August 2017 events in Asia, China–India military relations
|description=
}}

[[Category:Conflicts in 2017]]
[[Category:2017 in Bhutan]]
[[Category:Bhutan–China border]]
[[Category:Bhutan–China relations]]
[[Category:Bhutan–India relations]]
[[Category:June 2017 events in China]]
[[Category:June 2017 events in India]]
[[Category:July 2017 events in China]]
[[Category:July 2017 events in India]]
[[Category:August 2017 events in China]]
[[Category:August 2017 events in India]]
[[Category:Territorial disputes of China]]
[[Category:June 2017 events in Asia]]
[[Category:July 2017 events in Asia]]
[[Category:August 2017 events in Asia]]
[[Category:China–India military relations]]