Top
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
exit_to_app
A model mosque in Gujarat
access_time 2021-04-12T17:13:34+05:30
Revelations about the Rafale deal
access_time 2021-04-12T11:46:42+05:30
bengal politics
access_time 2021-04-10T15:31:56+05:30
Varanasi follows Ayodhyas lead
access_time 2021-04-10T11:16:48+05:30
Why is no one talking about Rafale?
access_time 2021-04-09T11:27:04+05:30
No more bloodshed; not any more
access_time 2021-04-08T19:28:29+05:30
DEEP READ
A model mosque in Gujarat
access_time 2021-04-12T17:13:34+05:30
Towards a digital emergency?
access_time 2021-02-27T14:50:41+05:30
The slaughter of democracy in Puducherry
access_time 2021-02-24T11:27:21+05:30
Populist Fascism
access_time 2021-01-31T17:19:29+05:30
Media Freedom
access_time 2021-01-31T15:47:07+05:30
Sharjeel Imam
access_time 2021-01-30T15:19:40+05:30
exit_to_app
Homechevron_rightWorldchevron_rightChina’s tit for tat,...

China’s tit for tat, says it is also different from 1962

text_fields
bookmark_border
China’s tit for tat, says it is also different from 1962
cancel

Beijing: Amid rising tensions over their border row, Beijing on Monday responded to India in similar fashion, saying the China of 2017 was not the China of 1962.

“To some extent he is right in saying that India in 2017 is different from the India in 1962, just like China is also different,” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Geng Shuang said, referring to Indian Defence Minister Arun Jaitley.

Last week, after China warned India to learn from its military debacle of 1962, Jaitley had said that the India of 2017 was not the India of 1962.

The Indian and Chinese troops had a face-off at Doklam or Donglong, a disputed territory between China and Bhutan.

While Beijing asked New Delhi to withdraw troops from Donglong region, it accused India of infringing upon Bhutan’s sovereignty.

It also said that India was using Bhutan to confuse right with wrong.

“In order to cover up the illegal entry of Indian border troops, they distort the facts,” Geng said.

“And even at the expense of the Bhutan’s independence and sovereignty, they try to confuse right with wrong, which is futile.”

Show Full Article
TAGS:
Next Story