Doklam

{{Short description|Disputed area between China and Bhutan}} {{Use dmy dates|date=July 2017}} {{Infobox landform | water = | name = Doklam | other_name = Donglang | type = Plateau | image = Map of Doklam EN.svg | image_size = | alt = | caption = Map of Doklam and the surrounding area | pushpin_map = | map_width = | map_caption = | pushpin_map_alt = | map_image = {{OSM Location map | coord = {{coord|27.276|88.95}}  | float = center | zoom = 10 | width = 280  | height = 300 | caption =  | minimap = file | mini-file = Bhutan location map.svg | mini-width = 100 | mini-height = 73 | minipog-x = 8 | minipog-y = 41 | scalemark = 120 | shape = image | label-colorD = hard gray | label-sizeD = 10  | mark-coord1 = {{coord|27.272328|88.901061}}  | mark1 = Maki-mountain-15.svg | mark-size1 = 14 | label1 = Gipmochi | label-color1 = black | label-pos1 = bottom | mark-title1 = Mount Gipmochi | mark-image1 = | mark-description1 = {{cvt|4427|m}}  | mark-coord2 = {{coord|27.327083|88.920928}}  | mark2 = Mountain pass 12x12 n.svg | mark-size2 = 12 | label2 = Batang La | label-size2 = 10 | label-pos2 = left|ldy2=4|ldx2=4 | mark-title2 = Batang La | mark-image2 = | mark-description2 = Bhutanese claim of trijunction point {{cvt|4600|m}}  | mark-coord3 = {{coord|27.294902|N|88.913102|E}}  | mark3 = Mountain pass 12x12 e.svg | mark-size3 = 12 | label3 = Doka La | label-size3 = 10 | label-pos3 = left |ldx3=2 | mark-title3 = Doka La | mark-image3 = | mark-description3 = Position of standoff  | mark-coord4 = {{coord|27.310497|88.961772}}  | mark4 = Mountain pass 12x12 ne.svg | mark-size4 = 12 | label4 = Sinchela | label-size4 = 10 | label-pos4 = bottom |ldx4 = 3 |ldy4 = -2 | mark-title4 = Sinchela | mark-image4 = | mark-description4 = Part of the prevailing border with pass height {{cvt|4429|m}}  | mark-coord5 = {{coord|27.349324|88.988679}}  | mark-size5 = 0 | label5 = Amo Chu | label-color5 = hard blue | label-pos5 = top | label-angle5 =55 | mark-title5 = Amo Chu river | mark-description5 = Part of the prevailing border between Tibet and Bhutan | ldx5=12 | ldy5=8  | mark-coord6 = {{coord|27.1746|88.8427}} | mark6 = | mark-size6 = 0 | label6 = Di Chu (Jaldhaka) | label-color6 = hard blue | label-pos6 = top | label-angle6 =85 | mark-title6 = Di Chu (Jaldhaka River, Dichu) | mark-image6 = | mark-description6 = River valley leading to Indian plains. River originates in Bhutan and flows into India  | mark-coord7 = {{coord|27.3382507|88.9364553}} | mark7 = Maki-mountain-15.svg | mark-size7 = 12 | label7 = Merug La | label-pos7 = top |ldx7 = 0 |ldy7 = 0 | mark-title7 = Merug La | mark-image7 = | mark-description7 = At {{cvt|4653|m}} the highest point in Doklam  | mark-coord8 = {{coord|27.3853|88.8434}} | mark8 = Geobox Mountain Range.svg | mark-size8 = 14 | label8 = Dongkya^range | label-pos8 = top|ldx8=5|ldy8=4 | mark-title8 = Dongkya range | mark-image8= | mark-description8= border between Sikkim and Tibet  | mark-coord9 = {{coord|27.270636|88.930006}} | mark9 = Geobox Mountain Range.svg | mark-size9 = 18 | label-size9=9 | label9 = Zompelri ridge | label-pos9 = bottom |ldx9 = 26 |ldy9 = 0 | label-angle9 = 55 | mark-title9 = Zompelri (Jampheri) ridge | mark-image9= | mark-description9= claimed by China  | mark-coord10 = {{coord|27.445|88.913}} | mark-size10 = 0 | label10 = Chumbi valley | label-pos10 = right|ldx10=-23 | mark-title10 = Chumbi Valley | mark-image10 = | mark-description10 = Disputed area to the south  | mark-coord11 = {{coord|27.2598|88.986}} | mark-size11 = 0 | label11 = Doklam | label-size11 = 14 | label-color11=black | label-pos11 = center | label-angle11 = 45 | mark-image11 = | mark-title11 = Doklam (Donglang) | mark-description11 = claimed by China  | mark-coord12 = {{coord|27.34|88.80}} | mark-size12 = 0 | label12 = Sikkim^State | label-size12 = 12 | label-pos12 = center | mark-image12 = | mark-title12 = Sikkim | mark-description12 = State of India  | mark-coord13 = {{coord|27.17|88.92}} | mark-size13 = 0 | label13 = Samtse^District | label-size13 = 12 | label-pos13 = center | mark-image13 = | mark-title13 = Samtse District | mark-description13 = District of Bhutan  | mark-coord14 = {{coord|27.35|89.1}} | mark-size14 = 0 | label14 = Haa^District | label-size14 = 12 | label-pos14 = center | mark-image14 = | mark-title14 = Haa District | mark-description14 = District of Bhutan  | mark32 =Nuvola Buthanese flag.svg| mark-size32 =28 | mark-coord32 = {{coord|27.242|89.1}} | label32 =Bhutan| label-size32 =20 | label-color32 = | label-angle32 = | label-pos32 = bottom|ldy32=2|ldx32=0| mark-title32=none | mark33 =Nuvola Chinese flag.svg | mark-size33 =28 | mark-coord33 = {{coord|27.405|88.925}} | label33 =China | label-size33 =20 | label-color33 = | label-angle33 = | label-pos33 =bottom| mark-titles33=none |ldy33=-3|ldx33=5 | mark34 =Nuvola Indian flag.svg| mark-size34 =28 | mark-coord34 = {{coord|27.31|88.80}} | label34 =India | label-size34 =20 | label-color34 = | label-angle34 = | label-pos34 = bottom|ldy34=2|ldx34=3| mark-title34=none }} | pushpin_relief = 1 | pushpin_label = | mark = | marker_size = | location = | grid_ref = | grid_ref_UK = | grid_ref_Ireland = | coordinates = {{coord|27|18|N|88|56|E|type:adm1st|display=inline,title}} | coordinates_ref = | range = Dongkya Range, Zompelri Ridge | part_of = | water_bodies = Doklam river | elevation_ft =  | elevation_ref = | surface_elevation_ft =  | surface_elevation_ref = | highest_point = Merug La | highest_elevation = {{convert|4653|m|ft}} | length = | width = | area = {{convert|89|km2|mi2}} | depth = | drop = | formed_by = | geology =  | age = | orogeny = | volcanic_arc/belt = | volcanic_arc = | volcanic_belt = | volcanic_field = | last_eruption = | topo = | operator = | designation = | free_label_1 = | free_data_1 = | free_label_2 = | free_data_2 = | website =  | embed = }}

'''Doklam''' ({{bo|t=འབྲོག་ལམ།|w=‘brog lam|s=drok lam}}),<ref name="van Driem"> {{cite book |first=George L. |last=van Driem |date=2021 |title=Ethnolinguistic Prehistory: The Peopling of the World from the Perspective of Language, Genes and Material Culture |publisher=BRILL |page=53 |isbn=978-90-04-44837-7 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=6EswEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA53}} </ref>{{efn|Alternative phonetic spellings: '''Droklam'''<ref name="van Driem"/> and '''Zhoglam'''.<ref name=Pradhan>Ramakrushna Pradhan, [http://www.mainstreamweekly.net/article7350.html Doklam Standoff: Beyond Border Dispute], Mainstream Weekly, 29 July 2017.</ref> An alternative English spelling '''Dolam''' is also witnessed.<ref name="geography"/><ref>{{Cite news |author=Sushant Singh |title=Simply put: Where things stand on the Dolam plateau |newspaper=The Indian Express |date=25 July 2017|url=http://indianexpress.com/article/explained/india-china-standoff-sikkim-doka-la-simply-put-where-things-stand-on-the-dolam-plateau-4763892/}}</ref>}} called '''Donglang''' ({{lang-zh|c=洞朗}}) by China,<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 |url-status=live |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}}</ref><ref name="Chinese Perspective">{{citation |author=Liu Lin |title=India-China Doklam Standoff: A Chinese Perspective |newspaper=The Diplomat |date=27 July 2017 |url=https://thediplomat.com/2017/07/india-china-doklam-standoff-a-chinese-perspective/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170729095432/https://thediplomat.com/2017/07/india-china-doklam-standoff-a-chinese-perspective/ |archive-date=29 July 2017}}</ref> is an area in Chumbi Valley with a high plateau and a valley, lying between China's Yadong County to the north, Bhutan's Haa District to the east and India's Sikkim state to the west. Since the 1960s, China and Bhutan have disputed sovereignty over the Doklam area. The dispute has not been resolved despite several rounds of border negotiations between Bhutan and China.<ref name=geography/><ref name="Natl_Assembly">{{cite web |url=http://www.nab.gov.bt/assets/uploads/docs/resolution/2014/82nd_Session.pdf |title=Translation of the Proceedings and Resolutions of the 82nd Session of the National Assembly Of Bhutan |date=June–August 2004 |access-date=20 July 2017 |page=84 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151007072910/http://www.nab.gov.bt/assets/uploads/docs/resolution/2014/82nd_Session.pdf |archive-date=7 October 2015 |df=dmy-all }}</ref> The area is of strategic importance to all three countries.<ref name=geography/><ref name=Banyan>{{citation |author=Banyan |url=https://www.economist.com/news/asia/21725588-xi-jinping-and-narendra-modi-must-tread-warily-himalayan-spat-between-china-and-india-evokes |title=A Himalayan spat between China and India evokes memories of war |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170808195239/https://www.economist.com/news/asia/21725588-xi-jinping-and-narendra-modi-must-tread-warily-himalayan-spat-between-china-and-india-evokes |archive-date=8 August 2017 |newspaper=The Economist |date=27 July 2017}}</ref><ref>{{citation |url=http://indianexpress.com/article/india/people-say-in-doklam-india-is-better-placed-why-do-we-think-chinese-could-only-act-here-shyam-saran-4794147/ |title=People say in Doklam, India is better placed. Why do we think Chinese could only act here? says Shyam Saran |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170813055849/http://indianexpress.com/article/india/people-say-in-doklam-india-is-better-placed-why-do-we-think-chinese-could-only-act-here-shyam-saran-4794147/ |archive-date=13 August 2017 |newspaper=The Indian Express |date=12 August 2017}}</ref>

In 1988, the Chinese People's Liberation Army entered the Doklam plateau and successfully took control of the area.<ref name="Benedictus" /><ref name=":0" /> In June 2017, China attempted to extend a road on the Doklam Plateau southward, prompting Indian troops to enter the area in an attempt to stop the project, which triggered a two-month border standoff between the two sides.<ref name=geography/><ref name=Banyan/>{{sfnp|Walcott, Bordering the Eastern Himalaya|2010|p=75}} On 28 August, India and China withdrew their troops from the standoff in Doklam.<ref name=":1" /> Since then, China has continued to control most of the Doklam area and built a village called Pangda there.<ref name=":2" /><ref name=":3" /> <!-- in the tri-junction region of Bhutan, China and India. Doklam lies close to the modern day Yadong county of Tibetan Autonomous Region and the Ha Valley of Bhutan. It is a disputed territory claimed by both Bhutan and China. Doklam is situated roughly 15 kilometers southeast of the Nathu La pass that connects India and Tibet and about 30 kilometers southwest of the Dramana Chhu (river) area often shown (Google Maps, World Factbook map on this page) as disputed between Bhutan and China. Doklam borders the Chumbi Valley on the south. On the western edge of the Doklam plateau is '''Doka La''', marked as '''Troka La''' on some old maps, a pass at {{coord|27.294902|N|88.913102|E|display=inline}} connecting the Indian state of Sikkim with either Tibet in China according to numerous Chinese government statements and maps

The Anglo-Chinese treaty of 1890 was signed between the British Commissioner A.W. Paul and the Chinese Commissioner Ho Chang-Jung to negotiate trade relations and demarcate boundary along the Chumbi Valley.<ref name="Anglo-Chinese treaty"/> China and Bhutan have agreed via written agreements of 1988 and 1998 that both countries will maintain peace and the status quo in the region.<ref name=Bhutan/>{{cite web |url=http://www.mfa.gov.bt/press-releases/press-release-272.html|title=Press Release – Ministry of Foreign Affairs|website=www.mfa.gov.bt|access-date=6 July 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bhutanobserver.bt/2335-bo-news-about-bhutanchina_talks_end_in_agreement.aspx|title=Bhutan-China talks end in agreement - Bhutan Observer|last=greenmindz.com|website=www.bhutanobserver.bt|access-date=6 July 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bhutannewsnetwork.com/2017/06/india-enters-into-bhutan-china-border-conflict/|title=India enters into Bhutan-China border conflict – Bhutan News Network|website=www.bhutannewsnetwork.com|access-date=6 July 2017}}</ref> In 2017, China attempted to extend a road in a sector of Doklam triggering a stand-off between China and India and a demarche against China from Bhutan.<ref name=Bhutan/> -->

== Geography == The ''Imperial Gazetteer of India'', representing the 19th century British view of the territory, states that the Dongkya range that separates Sikkim from the Chumbi Valley bifurcates at Mount Gipmochi into two great spurs, one running south-west and the other running south-east. Between these two spurs runs the valley of the Dichu or Jaldhaka river.<ref>{{citation |title=Imperial Gazetteer of India: Provincial Series |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=8ga2AAAAIAAJ |year=1984 |publisher=Usha |page=487}}</ref>

The Dongkya range that normally runs in the north–south direction gently curves to east–west at the southern end of the Chumbi Valley, running through the Batang La and Sinchela passes and sloping down to the plain. A second ridge to the south, called the '''''Zompelri''''' or '''''Jampheri''''' ridge, runs parallel to the first ridge, separated by the Doklam or Doka La valley in the middle. At the top of the valley, the two ridges are joined, forming a plateau. The highest points of the plateau are on its western shoulder, between Batang La and Mount Gipmochi, and the plateau slopes down towards the southeast. Between the two ridges lies the valley '''Torsa Nala''' (called '''Doklam River''' by the Chinese), which joins the Amo Chu river about {{cvt|15|km}} to the southeast.{{Efn|After the confluence, the Amo Chu river itself is called "Torsa River" in Bhutan (Map 6). The naming is apparently derived from that of Torsa Natural Forest.}}

The {{cvt|89|km2}} area between the western shoulder of the plateau and the mouth of Torsa Nala is called ''Doklam'' by China.{{sfnp|China Foreign Ministry|2017|loc=Appendix I}}{{efn|thumb|right|Map of Bhutan with two other disputed areas marked. Several newspaper reports wrongly identify "Doklam Plateau" with a disputed area to the east of Chumbi Valley.<ref>{{citation |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-40478813 |title=What's behind the India-China border stand-off? |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170724153114/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-40478813 |archive-date=24 July 2017 |newspaper=BBC News |date=5 July 2017}}</ref> This is incorrect. The Doklam plateau is indeed to the ''south'' of the Chumbi valley. The disputed area to the east has no single name, but various parts of it are called Sinchulumpa (or Sinchulung), Gieu and Dramana.<ref name=Panag/>{{sfnp|Smith, Bhutan–China Border Disputes and Their Geopolitical Implications|2015|pp=29–30}}}} In the Tibetan language, "Doklam", or more properly "Droklam", means a nomad's path.{{sfnp|Lama, Dragon Meets Dragon|2022|pp=57–58}} The said path can be seen in Maps 5–7, which runs from the village of "Shuiji" in the vicinity of Sangbay (Sangbe), climbing up to the Doklam plateau and descending to the Amo Chu valley through the Sinche La pass. It continues along the river to the hamlet of Asam on what was then regarded as the border of Tibet, and proceeds to the town of Rinchengang, which was a border trade mart. According to scholar Jigme Yeshe Lama, such paths were used for ages by traders, nomads and pilgrims.{{sfnp|Lama, Dragon Meets Dragon|2022|p=59}}

India's Sikkim state lies to the west of the Dongkya range, the western shoulder of the Doklam plateau and the 'southwest spur' issuing from Mount Gipmochi. This spur is cut by the Dichu river (also called Jaldhaka) which originates below the Jelep La pass and enters Bhutan. The 'southeast spur', called Zompelri ridge, separates Bhutan's Haa District (to the north) from the Samtse (to the south).

Bhutan's claimed border runs along the northern ridge of the Doklam plateau until Sinchela and then moves down to the valley to the Amo Chu river. China's claim of the border includes the entire Doklam area within the Chumbi Valley, ending at the Zompelri ridge on the south and the confluence of the Torsa Nala with Amo Chu on the east.

== Strategic significance == [[File:China_Tibet.svg|thumb|right|320px|Map 2: Tibet's Chumbi Valley pointing towards India's Siliguri Corridor between Nepal and Bangladesh]] Scholar Susan Walcott counts China's Chumbi Valley, to the north of Doklam, and India's Siliguri Corridor, to the south of Doklam, among "strategic mountain chokepoints critical in global power competition".{{sfnp|Walcott, Bordering the Eastern Himalaya|2010|p=64}} John Garver has called the Chumbi Valley "the single most strategically important piece of real estate in the entire Himalayan region".{{sfnp|Garver, Protracted Contest|2011|p=167}} The Chumbi Valley intervenes between Sikkim and Bhutan south of the high Himalayas, pointing towards India's Siliguri Corridor like a "dagger".<ref name="ReferenceB">{{harvp|Walcott, Bordering the Eastern Himalaya|2010|p=64, 67–68}}; {{harvp|Smith, Bhutan–China Border Disputes and Their Geopolitical Implications|2015|p=31}}; {{harvp|Van Praagh, Great Game|2003|p=349}}; {{harvp|Kumar, Acharya & Jacob, Sino-Bhutanese Relations|2011|p=248}}</ref>

The Siliguri Corridor is a narrow 24 kilometer-wide corridor between Nepal and Bangladesh in India's West Bengal state, which connects the central parts of India with the northeastern states including the contested state of Arunachal Pradesh. Often referred to as the "chicken's neck", the Siliguri Corridor represents a strategic vulnerability for India. It is of key strategic significance to Bhutan, containing the main supply routes into the country.<ref name="ReferenceB"/>

Historically, both Siliguri and Chumbi Valley were part of a highway of trade between India and Tibet. In the 19th century, the British Indian government sought to open up the route to British trade, leading to their suzerainty over Sikkim with its strategic Nathu La and Jelep La passes into the Chumbi Valley. Following the Anglo-Chinese treaty of 1890 and Younghusband expedition, the British established trading posts at Yatung and Lhasa, along with military detachments to protect them. These trade relations continued till 1959, when the Chinese government terminated them.<ref>{{harvp|Walcott, Bordering the Eastern Himalaya|2010|p=70}}; {{harvp|Chandran & Singh, India, China and Sub-regional Connectivities|2015|pp=45–46}}; {{citation |author=Aadil Brar |url=https://thediplomat.com/2017/08/the-hidden-history-behind-the-doklam-standoff-superhighways-of-tibetan-trade/ |title=The Hidden History Behind the Doklam Standoff: Superhighways of Tibetan Trade |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170822134136/https://thediplomat.com/2017/08/the-hidden-history-behind-the-doklam-standoff-superhighways-of-tibetan-trade/ |archive-date=22 August 2017 |newspaper=The Diplomat |date=12 August 2017}}</ref>

The Doklam area had little role in these arrangements, because the main trade routes were either through the Sikkim passes or through the interior of Bhutan entering the Chumbi Valley in the north near Phari. There is some fragmentary evidence of trade through the Amo Chu valley, but the valley is said to have been narrow with rocky faces with a torrential flow of the river, not conducive for a trade route.<ref>{{citation |last1=Fraser |first1=Neil |last2=Bhattacharya |first2=Anima |last3=Bhattacharya |first3=Bimalendu |title=Geography of a Himalayan Kingdom: Bhutan |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=OzLsd5nvzGwC&pg=PA1 |year=2001 |publisher=Concept Publishing Company |isbn=978-81-7022-887-5 |page=28, 123}}</ref><ref>{{citation |last=Easton |first=John |title=An Unfrequented Highway Through Sikkim and Tibet to Chumolaori |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qSg0ccoAXQcC |year=1997 |orig-year=1928 |publisher=Asian Educational Services |isbn=978-81-206-1268-6 |page=14, 55}}</ref>

Indian intelligence officials state that China had been carrying out a steady military build-up in the Chumbi Valley, building many garrisons and converting the valley into a strong military base.{{sfnp|Bajpai, China's Shadow over Sikkim|1999|p=vii}} In 1967, border clashes occurred at Nathu La and Cho La passes, when the Chinese contested the Indian demarcations of the border on the Dongkya range. In the ensuing artillery fire, states scholar Taylor Fravel, many Chinese fortifications were destroyed as the Indians controlled the high ground.{{sfnp|Fravel, Strong Borders, Secure Nation|2008|p=198}} The Chinese military is believed to be in a weak position in the Chumbi Valley because the Indian and Bhutanese forces control the heights surrounding the valley.<ref name=Panag>{{citation |author=Lt Gen H. S. Panag |title=India-China standoff: What is happening in the Chumbi Valley? |newspaper=Newslaundry |date=8 July 2017 |url=https://www.newslaundry.com/2017/07/08/panag-india-china-sikkim-bhutan |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170818225144/https://www.newslaundry.com/2017/07/08/panag-india-china-sikkim-bhutan |archive-date=18 August 2017}}</ref><ref>{{citation |author=Ajai Shukla |url=https://www.pressreader.com/india/business-standard/20170704/282140701401344 |title=The Sikkim patrol Broadsword |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170822174743/https://www.pressreader.com/india/business-standard/20170704/282140701401344 |archive-date=22 August 2017 |newspaper=Business Standard |date=4 July 2017}}</ref>

The desire for heights is thought to bring China to the Doklam plateau.<ref name=Ram>{{citation |url=https://thewire.in/169465/doklam-india-china-bhutan-amar-nath-ram/ |title='Bhutan Raised Doklam at All Boundary Negotiations with China' (Interview of Amar Nath Ram) |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170823162351/https://thewire.in/169465/doklam-india-china-bhutan-amar-nath-ram/ |archive-date=23 August 2017 |newspaper=The Wire |date=21 August 2017}}</ref> Indian security experts mention three strategic benefits to China from a control of the Doklam plateau. First, it gives it a commanding view of the Chumbi valley itself. Second, it outflanks the Indian defences in Sikkim which are currently oriented northeast towards the Dongkya range. Third, it overlooks the strategic Siliguri Corridor to the south. A claim to the Mount Gipmochi and the Zompelri ridge would bring the Chinese to the very edge of the Himalayas, from where the slopes descend into the southern foothills of Bhutan and India. From here, the Chinese would be able to monitor the Indian troop movements in the plains or launch an attack on the vital Siliguri Corridor in the event of a war. To New Delhi, this represents a "strategic redline".<ref name=geography/><ref name=Panag/><ref>{{citation |last=Bhardwaj |first=Dolly |title=Factors which influence Foreign Policy of Bhutan |journal=Polish Journal of Political Science |volume=2 |issue=2 |year=2016 |page=30}}</ref> Scholar Caroline Brassard states, "its strategic significance for the Indian military is obvious."<ref>{{citation |last=Brassard |first=Caroline |chapter=Bhutan: Cautiously Cultivated Positive Perception |editor1=S. D. Muni |editor2=Tan, Tai Yong |title=A Resurgent China: South Asian Perspectives |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=KQkVAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA76 |year=2013 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-317-90785-5 |page=76 |ref={{sfnref|Brassard, Bhutan: Cautiously Cultivated Positive Perception|2013}} |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170827223033/https://books.google.com/books?id=KQkVAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA76 |archive-date=27 August 2017 |df=dmy-all }}</ref>

== History == The historical status of the Doklam plateau is uncertain.

According to Sikkimese tradition, when the Kingdom of Sikkim was founded in 1642, it included all the areas surrounding the Doklam plateau: the Chumbi Valley to the north, the Haa Valley to the east as well as the Darjeeling and Kalimpong areas to the southwest. During the 18th century, Sikkim faced repeated raids from Bhutan and these areas often changed hands. After a Bhutanese attack in 1780, a settlement was reached, which resulted in the transfer of the Haa valley and the Kalimpong area to Bhutan. The Doklam plateau sandwiched between these regions is likely to have been part of these territories. The Chumbi Valley was still said to have been under the control of Sikkim at this point.{{sfnp|Harris, Area Handbook for Nepal, Bhutan and Sikkim|1977|pp=387–388}}{{sfnp|Chandran & Singh, India, China and Sub-regional Connectivities|2015|pp=45–46}}

Historians qualify this narrative, Saul Mullard states that the early kingdom of Sikkim was very much limited to the western part of modern Sikkim. The eastern part was under the control of independent chiefs, who did face border conflicts with the Bhutanese, losing the Kalimpong area.{{sfnp|Mullard, Opening the Hidden Land|2011|pp=147-150}} The possession of the Chumbi Valley by the Sikkimese is uncertain, but the Tibetans are known to have fended off Bhutanese incursions there.{{sfnp|Shakabpa, Tibet: A Political History|1984|p=122}}

After the unification of Nepal under the Gorkhas in 1756, Nepal and Bhutan had coordinated their attacks on Sikkim. Bhutan was eliminated from the contest by an Anglo-Bhutanese treaty in 1774.<ref>{{citation |last=Banerji |first=Arun Kumar |chapter=Borders |editor=Jayanta Kumar Ray |title=Aspects of India's International Relations, 1700 to 2000: South Asia and the World |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Nyk6oA2nOlgC&pg=PA173 |year=2007 |publisher=Pearson Education India |isbn=978-81-317-0834-7 |page=196}}</ref> Tibet enforced a settlement between Sikkim and Nepal, which is said to have irked Nepal. Following this, by 1788, Nepal occupied all of the Sikkim areas to the west of the Teesta river as well as four provinces of Tibet.{{sfnp|Shakabpa, Tibet: A Political History|1984|p=157}} Tibet eventually sought the help of China, resulting in the Sino-Nepalese War of 1792. This proved to be a decisive entry of China into the Himalayan politics. The victorious Chinese General ordered a land survey, in the process of which the Chumbi valley was declared as part of Tibet.{{sfnp|Bajpai, China's Shadow over Sikkim|1999|pp=17-19}} The Sikkimese resented the losses forced upon them in the aftermath of the war.{{sfnp|Mullard, Opening the Hidden Land|2011|pp=178–179}}

=== British Raj period === [[File:Southern Chumbi Valley (Richard Temple, 1881).jpg|thumb|right|upright=1.35|Map 3: An 1881 map depicting the trijunction area by Sir Richard Temple.<ref name=Temple/>{{efn|Sir Richard Temple was the Lt. Governor of the Bengal province, with jurisdiction over Darjeeling and Kalimpong, as well as the political relations with Sikkim and Bhutan.}} Mount Gipmochi is shown on the Dongkya Range between Jelep La and Sinchela.]]

[[File:Tibet-Bhutan border (JC White, 1910).jpg|thumb|right|upright=1.35|Map 4: 1909 map of Tibet–Bhutan border by John Claude White.{{efn|John Claude White was the British Political Officer in Sikkim with responsibility for managing relations with Tibet and Bhutan. He travelled from Sikkim to Bhutan in 1905 via Chumbi Valley. His route is marked on the map.}} The border of Bhutan passes through Gipmochi and Batangla peaks (unmarked, but next to "Jelep La"), and, after crossing Amo Chu, continues on the western watershed of Langmaro Chu]]

thumb|right|upright=1.35|Map 5: 1923 Survey of India map of Sikkim border. Mount Gipmochi is correctly shown with respect to the Dongkya Range. In the following decades, Sikkim established relations with the British East India Company and regained its lost territory with their help after an Anglo-Nepalese War. The British made Sikkim a ''de facto'' protectorate through the Treaty of Titalia (1817).{{sfnp|Singh, Himalayan Triangle|1988|loc=p. 175: "The political significance of this treaty meant that Sikkim, by agreeing to place her foreign relations under British control, became a British protectorate."}}{{sfnp|Phuntsho, The History of Bhutan|2013|loc=Ch. The Duar War and the Black Regent. "After the Gorkha War, neighbouring Sikkim has become a protectorate of the British and Darjeeling, which the British East India Company had received from the King of Sikkim, had become a British colony."}} The relations between Sikkim and the British remained rocky, and the Sikkimese retained loyalties to Tibet. Another treaty, Treaty of Tumlong in 1861, "confirmed" the protectorate status, and excluded Tibetan influence from Sikkim.{{sfnp|Mehra, Sikkim and Bhutan—An Historical Conspectus|2005|loc=p. 134: "The new compact signified an important landmark in Sikkim's chequered story for now, for the first time, the country's political integrity as British India's 'protectorate' stood confirmed."}} The Tibetan effort to retain their own suzerainty resulted in a clash at the Lingtu mountain in 1888. China, which exercised nominal suzerainty over Tibet, stepped in and signed a treaty on behalf of Tibet.<ref name="ReferenceA">{{harvp|Mullard, Opening the Hidden Land|2011|pp=183–184}}; {{harvp|Prescott, Map of Mainland Asia by Treaty|1975|pp=261–262}}; {{harvp|Shakabpa, Tibet: A Political History|1984|p=217}}; {{harvp|Phuntsho, The History of Bhutan|2013|p=405}}</ref>

==== Sikkim–Tibet boundary definition ==== The treaty agreed between Britain and China, called the Convention of Calcutta or the Anglo-Chinese treaty of 1890, recognised British suzerainty over Sikkim and delineated the boundary between Sikkim and Tibet. The border was defined as the watershed between Teesta River of Sikkim and Mochu of Tibet (on the Dongkya range), starting at "Mount Gipmochi".<ref name="ReferenceA"/> For today's point of view, what was meant by "Mount Gipmochi" is unclear as no land surveys of the area had been undertaken prior to the treaty. Travel maps and sketch maps available from that time period show no awareness of the Doklam plateau on the part of the British, placing Mount Gipmochi directly on the Dongkya range.<ref name=Temple>{{citation |first=Richard |last=Temple |author-link=Sir Richard Temple, 1st Baronet |title=The Lake Region of Sikkim, on the Frontier of Tibet |journal=Proceedings of the Royal Geographical Society and Monthly Record of Geography |date=June 1881 |volume=3 |number=6 |pages=321–340 |doi=10.2307/1800507 |jstor=1800507|url=https://zenodo.org/record/2274571 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name=Markham>{{Cite book |first=Clements Robert |last=Markham |title=Narratives of the Mission of George Bogle to Tibet and of the Journey of Thomas Manning to Lhasa |orig-year=1876 |publisher=Trübner and Co. (1876) |publication-place=London |isbn=9780524102213 |url=https://archive.org/stream/pts_narrativesofmiss_3721-1221#page/1/mode/2up}}</ref> (See Map 3.)

Continued Tibetan resistance to the acceptance of the Anglo-Chinese treaty eventually led to a British expedition to Tibet in 1904, under the political officer Francis Younghusband. The ensuing Convention of Lhasa obtained the Tibetan agreement to the earlier terms. The boundary established between Sikkim and Tibet in the treaty still survives today, according to scholar John Prescott.{{sfnp|Prescott, Map of Mainland Asia by Treaty|1975|pp=261–262}}

==== Exploration of Doklam ==== In the course of the Younghusband expedition, Charles Bell was asked to lead a team investigating a supply route to Tibet through Bhutan, via the Amo Chu valley.{{sfnp|Bell, Portrait of the Dalai Lama|1946|p=26}}{{sfnp|Collister, Bhutan and the British|1987|p=170}} The team travelled through Sipchu and Sangbay, and then, along an existing "goat track" on a mountain ridge, went up to the Doklam plateau. After reaching Mount Gipmochi, they descended to the Chumbi Valley through Sinchela.{{sfnp|Bell, Portrait of the Dalai Lama|1946|loc=pp. 27–28: "So we continued through the snow, following a track used by goats and sheep in the summer, but in the snow used by nobody.... We travelled mainly along the crest of the ridge."}}{{efn|Bell did not indicate the route he took to Doklam. But, as can be seen on Map 5, there were two routes: one via the Zompelri ridge between the Dichu and Amo Chu basins (approaching Gipmochi from the east), and the other via the Lasa La ridge in the Dichu basin (approaching Gipmochi from the southwest).}} This appears to have been the first instance of British exploration of the Doklam plateau.{{sfnp|Bell, Portrait of the Dalai Lama|1946|p=28}}

Through this exploration, Bell discovered that the prevailing border between Bhutan and Tibet to the west of Amo Chu was a highland tree (''Ya-shing'') – lowland tree (''Mön-shing'') border over the same geographic region. The highland trees belonged to Tibet, perhaps above 11,500 ft in elevation, while the lowland trees belonged to Bhutan.{{sfnp|Hutt, Unbecoming Citizens|2003|loc=Sec. 3.4}}{{sfnp|Bell, Tibet Past and Present|1924|pp=5–6}}{{efn|Bell saw practical virtue in this arrangement, whereby the Tibetans would be able to graze their yaks and highland sheep, while the Bhutanese could make good use of bamboo from the lowlands.}}

With the geography of the Doklam plateau becoming known, the later maps show a divergence. The official Survey of India map shows the correct location of Mount Gipmochi on the border of India, but without showing the borders of Bhutan, as per treaty. (Map 5) Unofficial maps often show Batang La peak—the peak corresponding to Gipmochi on the Dongkya Range—as the trijunction of the three countries. (Map 4 and 6.)

==== Relations between Bhutan and India ==== Bhutan became a protected state, though not a 'protectorate', of British India in 1910,<ref>{{citation |last=Kharat |first=Rajesh |chapter=Indo-Bhutan relations: Strategic perspectives |editor=K. Warikoo |title=Himalayan Frontiers of India: Historical, Geo-Political and Strategic Perspectives |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=w_Z8AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA139 |date=2009 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-134-03294-5 |page=139 |quote=Finally, a new treaty was concluded on 8 January 1910 between Bhutan and British India at Punakha, whereby the Government of Bhutan agreed to conduct its foreign relations under the guidance and advice of British India.}}</ref><ref>{{citation |first=James |last=Onley |title=The Raj Reconsidered: British India's Informal Empire and Spheres of Influence in Asia and Africa |journal=Asian Affairs |volume=11 |number=1 |date=March 2009 |url=https://socialsciences.exeter.ac.uk/iais/downloads/Onley_Raj_Reconsidered.pdf |quote=Nepal during 1816–1923, Afghanistan during 1880–1919, and Bhutan during 1910–47 were British-protected states in all but name, but the British Government never publicly clarified or proclaimed their status as such, preferring to describe them as independent states in special treaty relations with Britain.}}</ref> an arrangement that was continued by independent India in 1949.<ref> {{citation |first=Werner |last=Levi |title=Bhutan and Sikkim: Two Buffer States |journal=The World Today |volume=15 |number=2 |date=December 1959 |pages=492–500 |jstor=40393115 |quote=Then, imperialism or no imperialism, Sikkim was declared a protectorate of India in June 1949, a 'regrettable necessity', and a treaty with Bhutan in August of that year obliged that state to accept Indian 'guidance' in foreign affairs, including defence.}}</ref> Bhutan retained its independence in all internal matters and its borders were not demarcated until 1961.<ref name=Joshi>{{citation |author=Manoj Joshi |author-link=Manoj Joshi (journalist) |url=https://thewire.in/159407/doklam-india-china-bhutan/ |title=Doklam, Gipmochi, Gyemochen: It's Hard Making Cartographic Sense of a Geopolitical Quagmire |newspaper=The Wire |date=20 July 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170804013614/https://thewire.in/159407/doklam-india-china-bhutan/ |archive-date=4 August 2017}}</ref> It is said that the Chinese cite maps from before 1912 to stake their claim over Doklam.<ref>{{citation |author=Govinda Rizal |url=http://www.bhutannewsservice.org/while-the-big-and-the-small-dragons-tryst-in-dok-la-the-elephant-trumpets-loud/ |title=While the big and the small dragons tryst in Dok-la, the elephant trumpets loud |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170808035420/http://www.bhutannewsservice.org/while-the-big-and-the-small-dragons-tryst-in-dok-la-the-elephant-trumpets-loud/ |archive-date=8 August 2017 |newspaper=Bhutan News Service |date=27 July 2017}}</ref>

== Sino-Bhutanese border dispute at Doklam == [[File:1955 US Army map of the Doklam trijunction.jpg|thumb|right|upright=1.35|Map 6: China–Bhutan border in a survey map of US Army Map Service, 1955. From the trijunction at Batang La, the border goes north-northeast to the village of Asam, following a ridge line.]]

thumb|right|upright=1.35|Map 7: China–Bhutan border in a CIA map, 1965  {{anchor | Dispute | Doklam}} {{OSM Location map | coord = {{coord|27.3016|88.9375}}  | float = right | zoom = 12 | width = 300  | height = 375 | caption = Map 8: Chinese road construction through Sinchela to Doka La, believed to have been carried out between 2004–2005. Other roads added after 2017. | nolabels = 1 | minimap = | mini-file = | mini-width = | mini-height = | minipog-x = | minipog-y = | scalemark = 120 | shape = image  | map-data-light = Q10871647 | map-data-text = Doklam area | map-data-color = Orange  | mark-coord1 = {{coord|27.2739637|88.9000613}} | mark1 = BlackRedMountain.svg | mark-size1 = 20 | label1 = Gipmochi | label-size1 = 10 | label-color1 = hard red | label-pos1 = bottom | mark-title1 = Mount Gipmochi | mark-image1 = | mark-description1 = Mount Gipmochi  | mark-coord2 = {{coord|27.327083|88.920928}} | mark2 = Mountain pass 12x12 n.svg | mark-size2 = 15 | label2 = Batang La | label-size2 = 10 | label-color2 = dark grey | label-pos2 = bottom | mark-title2 = Batang La | mark-image2 = | mark-description2 = Bhutanese claim of trijunction point  | mark-coord3 = {{coord|27.3382507|88.9364553}} | mark3 = BlackRedMountain.svg | mark-size3 = 20 | label3 = Merug La | label-size3 = 10 | label-color3 = hard red | label-pos3 = top |label-offset-x3 = 0 |label-offset-y3 = 0 | mark-title3 = Merug La | mark-image3 = | mark-description3 = The highest point in Doklam  | mark-coord4 = {{coord|27.294902|N|88.913102|E}} | mark4 = Mountain pass 12x12 e.svg | mark-size4 = 15 | label4 = Doka La | label-size4 = 10 | label-color4 = dark grey | label-pos4 = left | mark-title4 = Doka La | mark-image4 = | mark-description4 = Position of standoff  | mark-coord5 = {{coord|27.310497|88.961772}} | mark5 = Mountain pass 12x12 ne.svg | mark-size5 = 15 | label5 = Sinchela | label-size5 = 10 | label-color5 = dark grey | label-pos5 = right | mark-title5 = Sinchela | mark-image5 = | mark-description5 = Part of the prevailing border  | mark-coord6 = {{coord|27.349324|88.988679}} | mark6 = AS-rzeka-icon.svg | mark-size6 = 15 | label6 = Amo Chu | label-size6 = 10 | label-color6 = hard blue | label-pos6 = right | mark-title6 = Amo Chu river | mark-image6= | mark-description6= Part of the prevailing border  | mark-coord7 = {{coord|27.27058|89.01415}} | mark7 = AS-rzeka-icon.svg | mark-size7 = 10 | label7 = Amo Chu | label-size7 = 10 | label-color7 = hard blue | label-pos7 = right |label-offset-x7 = 0 |label-offset-y7 = 0 | mark-title7 = Amo Chu river | mark-image7= | mark-description7= Called Torsa river in India  | mark-coord8 = {{coord|27.385772|88.858668}} | mark8 = Geobox Mountain Range.svg | mark-size8 = 14 | label8 = Dongkya range | label-size8 = 10 | label-color8 = dark red | label-pos8 = right | mark-title8 = Dongkya range | mark-image8= | mark-description8= border between Sikkim and Tibet  | mark-coord9 = {{coord|27.270636|88.930006}} | mark9 = Geobox Mountain Range.svg | mark-size9 = 14 | label9 = Zompelri ridge | label-size9 = 10 | label-color9 = dark red | label-pos9 = bottom | mark-title9 = Zompelri ridge | mark-image9= | mark-description9= claimed by China }}

Depictions of historical Chinese maps by the People's Republic of China show Sikkim and Bhutan as part of Tibet or China for a period of 1800 years, starting from the second century B.C., noted as dubious claims by scholars.{{efn|{{harvtxt|Garver, Protracted Contest|2011|pp=167–168}}: "As is the case of putative 'tributary relations' between China's imperial court and foreign rulers, independent scholars see modern Chinese historiography as deeply biased by nearly exclusive reliance on Chinese sources and a nationalist urge to demonstrate China's ancient influence over as wide-ranging an area as possible. Leo Rose's response to these Chinese views was that 'Sikkim and Bhutan were never under any form of control by the Chinese government, or, for that matter, of Tibet except for a short period in the nineteenth century.'"}} From 1958, Chinese maps started showing large parts of Bhutanese territory as part of China.<ref name=Bharadwaj/>

In 1960, China issued a statement claiming that Bhutan, Sikkim and Ladakh were part of a unified family in Tibet and had always been subject to the "great motherland of China".<ref name=Benedictus/>{{sfnp|Smith, Bhutan–China Border Disputes and Their Geopolitical Implications|2015|pp=27}}{{efn|The statement attributed to Chang Kuow-Hua, the head of the Chinese Mission in Tibet, made in a public meeting in Lhasa on 17 July 1959: "Bhutanese, Sikkimise and Ladakhis formed a united family in Tibet; they have been subjects of Tibet and the great motherland of China and must once again be united and taught the Communist doctrine." This passage was apparently deleted from the version reported in ''China Today'', but it was reported in ''The Daily Telegraph'' by George N. Patterson, its Kalimpong correspondent.<ref>{{citation |last=Desai |first=B. K. |title=India, Tibet and China |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yrU9AAAAMAAJ |year=1959 |publisher=Democratic Research Service |location=Bombay |page=30 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170827223036/https://books.google.com/books?id=yrU9AAAAMAAJ |archive-date=27 August 2017 |df=dmy-all }}</ref><ref>{{citation |chapter=Delhi Diary, 14 August 1959 |title=The Eastern Economist; a Weekly Review of Indian and International Economic Affairs, Volume 33, Issues 1–13 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=d90nAAAAMAAJ |year=1959 |page=228 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170827223036/https://books.google.com/books?id=d90nAAAAMAAJ |archive-date=27 August 2017 |df=dmy-all }}</ref> Patterson reports that when Prime Minister Nehru raised the matter with China, "he was bluntly informed that China's claims to these border territories were based on the same claim as for their invasion of Tibet."<ref>{{citation |first=George N. |last=Patterson |author-link=George N. Patterson |url=http://www.georgepatterson.co.uk/Graphics/China'sRapeOfTibet.pdf |title=China's Rape of Tibet |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170827223033/http://www.georgepatterson.co.uk/Graphics/China%27sRapeOfTibet.pdf |archive-date=27 August 2017 |publisher=George N. Patterson web site |access-date=23 August 2017}}</ref>}} Alarmed, Bhutan closed off its border with China and shut all trade and diplomatic contacts.<ref name=Benedictus/> It also established formal defence arrangements with India.<ref name=Bharadwaj/>

=== 1960s === Starting August 1965, China and India traded accusations regarding intrusions into Doklam. China alleged that Indian troops were crossing into Doklam (which they called "Dognan") from Doka La, carrying out reconnaissance and intimidating Chinese herders. At first, the Indians paid no attention to the complaint. After several rounds of exchanges, on 30 September 1966, they forwarded a protest from the Bhutanese government which stated that Tibetan grazers were entering the pastures near the Doklam plateau accompanied by Chinese patrols. The letter asserted that the Doklam area was to the "south of the traditional boundary between Bhutan and the Tibet region" in the southern Chumbi area. On 3 October, the Government of Bhutan issued a press statement in which it said, "this area is traditionally part of Bhutan and no assertion has been made by the Government of the People's Republic of China disputing the traditional frontier which runs along recognizable natural features."<ref name=Bharadwaj>{{citation |url=http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/GXIc4NLACn5jxHv6RkkX7I/Doklam-may-bring-Bhutan-closer-to-India.html |author=Sandeep Bharadwaj |title=Doklam may bring Bhutan closer to India |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170816110000/http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/GXIc4NLACn5jxHv6RkkX7I/Doklam-may-bring-Bhutan-closer-to-India.html |archive-date=16 August 2017 |newspaper=livemint |date=9 August 2017}}</ref><ref name=Benedictus>{{citation |last=Benedictus |first=Brian |title=Bhutan and the Great Power Tussle |newspaper=The Diplomat |date=2 August 2014 |url=https://thediplomat.com/2014/08/bhutan-and-the-great-power-tussle/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151222212344/https://thediplomat.com/2014/08/bhutan-and-the-great-power-tussle/ |archive-date=22 December 2015 |df=dmy-all }}</ref><ref name=Arpi>{{citation |author=Claude Arpi |title=Middle Kingdom's Dream to Become a 'Big Insect' |url=http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/edit/middle-kingdoms-dream-to-become-a-big-insect.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170827050131/http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnists/edit/middle-kingdoms-dream-to-become-a-big-insect.html |archive-date=27 August 2017 |newspaper=The Pioneer |date=17 August 2017}}</ref>{{efn|A sample of exchanges: * Government of China, 27 August 1965:{{sfnp|India. Ministry of External Affairs|1966|p=56}} "On July 3, at about 1900 hours, a group of five Indian soldiers crossed the China-Sikkim border and intruded into Dongnan grassland in Tibet, China. They carried out reconnaissance and harassment for as long as four days within Chinese territory before leaving China near Tungchu La at about 1300 hours on July 7." * Government of India, 2 September 1965:{{sfnp|India. Ministry of External Affairs|1966|p=58}} "No Indian soldier has crossed into Chinese territory. As a matter of fact, the Indian troops have strict instructions not to go beyond the boundary of Sikkim with Tibet." * Government of China, 31 January 1966:{{sfnp|India. Ministry of External Affairs|1967|p=13}} "...four Indian soldiers crossed Toka La and intruded into Tunglang pasture in Dongnan grassland, and with their weapons intimidated Chinese herdsmen who were grazing cattle there." * Government of India, 30 September 1966:{{sfnp|India. Ministry of External Affairs|1967|p=13}} "...the Government of Bhutan have requested the Government of India to draw the attention of the Chinese Government to a series of intrusions in the Doklan pasture area which lies south of the traditional boundary between Bhutan and the Tibet region of China in the southern Chumbi area." }}{{efn|Press Statement of 3 October 1966, issued on behalf of the Bhutan Government by its Trade Adviser in Calcutta:{{sfnp|India. Ministry of External Affairs|1967|p=101}} "His Majesty's Government of Bhutan had for some time, been concerned with reports received from its patrols of a number of intrusions by Tibetan graziers and Chinese troops in the Doklam pastures which are adjacent to the southern part of the Chumbi Valley. This area is traditionally part of Bhutan and no assertion has been made by the Government of the People's Republic of China disputing the traditional frontier which runs along recognizable natural features. In the area of the intrusion, the boundary runs along the water-parting along Batang La to Sinchel La. Local attempts were made to inform the graziers and the Chinese troops that they had strayed into Bhutanese territory but these have not been heeded."}}

In response to the Indian protest, the Chinese government replied that Bhutan was a sovereign country and that China did not recognize any role for the Indian government in the matter. It asserted that the Doklam area had "always been under Chinese jurisdiction", that the Chinese herdsmen had "grazed cattle there for generations" and that the Bhutanese herdsmen had to pay pasturage to the Chinese side to graze cattle there.<ref>{{citation |last1=Cohen |first1=Jerome Alan |last2=Chiu |first2=Hungdah |title=People's China and International Law, Volume 1: A Documentary Study |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-6ArDgAAQBAJ |year=2017 |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=978-1-4008-8760-6 |ref={{sfnref|Cohen & Chiu, People's China and International Law, Volume 1|2017}} |page=422}}</ref>{{efn|Hsinhua News Agency, 27 October 1966:{{sfnp|India. Ministry of External Affairs|1967|p=99}} "China has consistently respected Bhutan's sovereignty and territorial integrity....It is true that the China-Bhutan boundary has never been formally delimited and if the Bhutanese side's understanding is not quite the same as that of the Chinese side as regards the alignment of the boundary between the two countries at certain specific points, a fair and reasonable solution can very well be found through consultations on an equal footing... Nevertheless it must be explicitly pointed out that the boundary question between China and Bhutan is a matter that concerns China and Bhutan alone and has nothing to do with the Indian Government which has no right whatsoever to intervene in it." }}

China later formally extended claims to {{cvt|800|km2|-2}} of territory in northern Bhutan and areas north of Punakha, but apparently not in Doklam. Bhutan requested the Indian government to raise the matter with China. However, China rejected India's initiatives stating that the issue concerned China and Bhutan alone.<ref>{{citation |last=Jha |first=Tilak |title=China and its Peripheries: Limited Objectives in Bhutan |publisher=Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, Issue Brief #233 |location=New Delhi |year=2013 |url=http://www.ipcs.org/issue-brief/china/china-and-its-peripheries-limited-objectives-in-bhutan-233.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170127013105/http://www.ipcs.org/issue-brief/china/china-and-its-peripheries-limited-objectives-in-bhutan-233.html |archive-date=27 January 2017 |ref={{sfnref|Tilak Jha, China and its Peripheries|2017}}}}</ref><ref name=Chaudhuri>Rudra Chaudhuri, [https://indianexpress.com/article/india/looking-for-godot-doklam-standoff-india-china-bhutan-neighbours/ Looking for Godot], The Indian Express, 3 September 2017.</ref> Indian commentators state that the Chinese troops withdrew after a month and that the fracas over Doklam brought Bhutan even closer to India, resulting in the appointment of 3,400 Indian defence personnel in Bhutan for training the Bhutanese Army.<ref name=Bharadwaj/>

=== Border negotiations === Border negotiations between Bhutan and China began in 1972 with India's participation. However, China sought the exclusion of India.<ref name=Benedictus/> Bhutan commenced its own border negotiations with China in 1984. Prior to putting forward its claim line, it carried out its own surveys and produced maps that were approved by the National Assembly in 1989. Strategic expert Manoj Joshi states that the Bhutanese voluntarily shed territory in the process.{{sfnp|Joshi, Doklam: To start at the very beginning|2017|p=5}} Other scholars noted a reduction of {{cvt|8606|km2}} area in the official Bhutanese maps. The Kula Kangri mountain, touted as the tallest peak in Bhutan, has apparently been ceded to China.{{sfnp|Kumar, Acharya & Jacob, Sino-Bhutanese Relations|2011|p=248}}

Bhutan said that, through the course of border talks, it had reduced {{cvt|1128|km2}} of disputed border areas to {{cvt|269|km2}} by 1999.<ref name=Europa>{{citation |author=Taylor & Francis Group |title=Europa World Year |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wGA4o-UhAfgC&pg=PA794 |year=2004 |publisher=Taylor & Francis |isbn=978-1-85743-254-1 |pages=794}}</ref>{{efn|These figures appear to refer to areas along Bhutan's western border only.}} In 1996, the Chinese negotiators offered a "package deal" to Bhutan, offering to give up claims on {{cvt|495|km2}} in the "central region" in exchange for {{cvt|269|km2}} in the "northwest", i.e., adjacent to the Chumbi valley, including Doklam, Sinchulumpa, Dramana and Shakhatoe. These areas would offer strategic depth to Chinese defences and access to the strategic Siliguri Corridor of India. Bhutan turned down the offer, reportedly under India's persuasion.<ref>{{harvp|Mathou, Bhutan-China Relations|2004|p=402}}; {{harvp|Smith, Bhutan–China Border Disputes and Their Geopolitical Implications|2015|pp=29–30}}; {{harvp|Kumar, Acharya & Jacob, Sino-Bhutanese Relations|2011|p=247}}; {{harvp|Mandip Singh, Critical Assessment of China's Vulnerabilities|2013|p=52}}; {{harvp|Penjore, Security of Bhutan|2004|p=118}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/china-says-discussed-doklam-with-bhutan-1294498-2018-07-24 |quote=In 1996, China offered a deal giving up 495 sq. km in the middle sector and a part of the 269 sq. km disputed in the western sector, in exchange for prized access to around 100 sq. km in Doklam near the trijunction, which would bring China closer to India's vulnerable 'chicken's neck' or Siliguri Corridor. |date=24 July 2018 |title=China says discussed Doklam with Bhutan in rare visit |first=Ananth |last=Krishnan |newspaper=India Today}}</ref>

Having turned down China's package deal, in 2000, Bhutanese government put forward its original claim line of 1989. The talks could make no progress afterwards. The government reported that, in 2004, China started building roads in the border areas, leading to repeated protests by the Bhutanese government based on the 1998 Peace and Tranquility Agreement.<ref name="Natl_Assembly 2009">{{citation |url=http://www.nab.gov.bt/assets/uploads/docs/resolution/2014/4th_session_eng.pdf |title=Proceedings and Resolutions of the 4th Session of the National Assembly |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151006225630/http://www.nab.gov.bt/assets/uploads/docs/resolution/2014/4th_session_eng.pdf |archive-date=6 October 2015 |publisher=National Assembly of Bhutan |year=2009 |page=20}}</ref> According to a Bhutanese reporter, the most contested area has been the Doklam plateau.<ref name=Rizal>{{citation |author=Govinda Rizal |url=http://www.bhutannewsservice.org/bhutan-china-border-mismatch/ |title=Bhutan-China Border Mismatch |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170810053429/http://www.bhutannewsservice.org/bhutan-china-border-mismatch/ |archive-date=10 August 2017 |newspaper=Bhutan News Service |date=1 January 2013}}</ref>

Chinese 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 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/>{{sfnp|Joshi, Doklam: To start at the very beginning|2017|p=2}}<ref name=Fedirka>{{citation |author=Allison Fedirka |url=https://www.businessinsider.com/china-and-india-and-doklam-2017-8?r=US&IR=T |title=China and India may be on a path to war |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170810052011/http://uk.businessinsider.com/china-and-india-and-doklam-2017-8?r=US&IR=T |archive-date=10 August 2017 |newspaper=Business Insider UK |url-status=live |date=5 August 2017}}</ref> In 2007, there were reports of the Chinese having destroyed unmanned Indian forward posts on the Doklam plateau.{{sfnp|Mandip Singh, Critical Assessment of China's Vulnerabilities|2013|p=53}}{{sfnp|Joshi, Doklam: To start at the very beginning|2017|p=2}}

=== Anglo-Chinese Treaty === China claims the Doklam area as Chinese territory based on the Anglo-Chinese Treaty of 1890, negotiated between the British Empire in India and the Chinese resident in Tibet.<ref>{{harvp|China Foreign Ministry|2017|p=1}}: "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."</ref><ref name="Anglo-Chinese">{{Cite book|url=http://treaties.fco.gov.uk/docs/pdf/1894/TS0011.pdf|title=Anglo-Chinese Treaty of 1890|publisher=British Foreign Office|year=1894|location=London|pages=1|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170709135501/http://treaties.fco.gov.uk/docs/pdf/1894/TS0011.pdf|archive-date=9 July 2017|df=dmy-all|access-date=19 July 2017}}</ref> Its purpose was to delineate the boundary between Sikkim and Tibet, and Bhutan was mentioned only in the offing. Article I of the treaty states: {{Blockquote|text=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" .|sign=|source=Anglo-Chinese treaty of 1890<ref name="Anglo-Chinese" />}} The first sentence implies that Sikkim is to the south of the boundary and Tibet is to its north, which is the case at least at the eastern end of the boundary. The second sentence would imply that Bhutan is to the east, but does not state anything about the extent of Bhutan to the north. These statements would make good sense in the context of the geography assumed in the maps of that time, such as Map 3. But the actual geography (Map 5) impedes any further conclusions. Here, Tibet also extends to the east of Sikkim at Mount Gipmochi, which is not implied in the wording of the treaty. Moreover, waters flowing from Gipmochi, the presumed trijunction point, do not flow into Teesta. Neither do they flow "northwards" into the rivers of Tibet.

In addition to these inconsistencies, Bhutan was not a signatory to the treaty. It has no reason to be bound by its terms.{{sfnp|Joshi, Doklam: To start at the very beginning|2017|p=4}}

''The Diplomat'' has commented that the continuous mountain crest or watershed mentioned in the first sentence of the 1890 treaty appears to begin very near Batang La, on the northern ridge of the Doklam plateau, and that this suggests a contradiction between the first and second sentences of Article I.<ref name="geography">{{citation |author=Ankit Panda |url=https://thediplomat.com/2017/07/the-political-geography-of-the-india-china-crisis-at-doklam/ |title=The Political Geography of the India-China Crisis at Doklam |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170714232229/https://thediplomat.com/2017/07/the-political-geography-of-the-india-china-crisis-at-doklam/ |archive-date=14 July 2017 |newspaper=The Diplomat |date=13 July 2017}}</ref>

Scholar Srinath Raghavan has stated that the watershed principle in the first sentence implies that the Batang La–Merug La–Sinchela ridge should be the China–Bhutan border because both Merug La, at {{convert|15,266|ft}}, and Sinchela, at {{convert|14,531|ft}}, are higher than Gipmochi at {{convert|14,523|ft}}.<ref name="Raghavan">{{citation |author=Srinath Raghavan |url=http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/kfpkmisQLSnGho2e2oo2rO/China-is-wrong-on-SikkimTibet-boundary.html |title=China is wrong on Sikkim-Tibet boundary |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170809211451/http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/kfpkmisQLSnGho2e2oo2rO/China-is-wrong-on-SikkimTibet-boundary.html |archive-date=9 August 2017 |newspaper=livemint |date=7 August 2017|author-link=Srinath Raghavan }}</ref>

===Bhutan and China border agreements 1988 and 1998=== Bhutan and China have held 24 rounds of boundary talks since it began in 1984. The Government of Bhutan claims that the Chinese road construction on the Doklam Plateau amounts to unilateral change to a disputed boundary in violation of the 1988 and 1998 agreements between the two nations. The agreements also prohibit the use of force and encourage both parties to strictly adhere to use peaceful means. {{blockquote|"Boundary talks are ongoing between Bhutan and China and we have written agreements of 1988 and 1998 stating that the two sides agree to maintain peace and tranquility in their border areas pending a final settlement on the boundary question, and to maintain status quo on the boundary as before March 1959. The agreements also state that the two sides will refrain from taking unilateral action, or use of force, to change the status quo of the boundary."|author=Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Royal Government of Bhutan.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Press Release |author=Ministry of Foreign Affairs |work=The Royal Government of Bhutan |date=29 July 2017 |access-date=29 June 2017 |url=http://www.mfa.gov.bt/press-releases/press-release-272.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170630023420/http://www.mfa.gov.bt/press-releases/press-release-272.html |archive-date=30 June 2017 |df=dmy-all }}</ref>}}

Notwithstanding the agreement, the PLA crossed into Bhutan in 1988 and took control of the Doklam plateau.<ref name="Benedictus" /><ref name=":0">{{citation |author=Govinda Rizal |title=Bhutan-China Border Mismatch |newspaper=Bhutan News Service |date=1 January 2013 |url=http://www.bhutannewsservice.org/bhutan-china-border-mismatch/}}: "The situation came to hostility in 1988 when China began exercising her authority over the Chumbi valley [Doklam], a plateau where strategic interests of India, China and Bhutan meet, if not overlap."</ref> There were reports of the PLA troops threatening the Bhutanese guards, declaring it to be Chinese soil, and seizing and occupying Bhutanese posts for extended periods.<ref name=Benedictus/> Again, after 2000, numerous intrusions, grazing and road and infrastructure construction by the Chinese were reported in the Bhutanese National Assembly.<ref name="Natl_Assembly 2009"/>

==2017 Doklam standoff== {{main|2017 China–India border standoff}} {{OSM Location map | coord = {{coord|27.2948|N|88.9132|E}}  | float = right | zoom = 14 | width = 230  | height = 350 | caption = Map 9: Doka La – the site of Doklam standoff | minimap = | mini-file = | mini-width = | mini-height = | minipog-x = | minipog-y = | scalemark = 120 | shape = image  | mark-coord1 = {{coord|27.272328|88.901061}} | mark1 = BlackRedMountain.svg | mark-size1 = 20 | label1 = Gipmochi | label-size1 = 10 | label-color1 = hard red | label-pos1 = bottom   | mark-title1 = Mount Gipmochi | mark-image1 = | mark-description1 = Mount Gipmochi | mark-coord2 = {{coord|27.293680|N|88.912938|E}}  | mark2 = Red pog.svg | mark-size2 = 8 | label2 = Indian border post | label-size2 = 10 | label-color2 = black | label-pos2 = left | label-offset-x2 = -1 | label-offset-y2 = 0 | mark-title2 = Indian border post | mark-image2 = | mark-description2 = Indian border post | mark-coord4 = {{coord|27.294641|N|88.913777|E}}  | mark4 = Red pog.svg | mark-size4 = 8 | label4 = Chinese road terminus | label-size4 = 10 | label-color4 = black | label-pos4 = right | label-offset-x4 = -1 | label-offset-y4 = 0 | mark-title4 = Chinese road terminus | mark-image4 = | mark-description4 = Chinese road terminus | mark-coord5 = {{coord|27.293097|N|88.915279|E}}  | mark5 = AS-rzeka-icon.svg | mark-size5 = 20 | label5 = Doka La stream | label-size5 = 10 | label-color5 = hard blue | label-pos5 = right | label-offset-x5 = -1 | label-offset-y5 = 0 | mark-title5 = Doka La stream | mark-image5= | mark-description5= | mark-coord7 = {{coord|27.270636|88.930006}}  | mark7 = Geobox Mountain Range.svg | mark-size7 = 14 | label7 = Zompelri ridge | label-size7 = 10 | label-color7 = hard red | label-pos7 = bottom | mark-title7 = Zompelri ridge | mark-image7= | mark-description7= claimed by China }} In June 2017, Doka La became the site of a stand-off between the armed forces of India and China following an attempt by China to extend a road coming via Sinchela further southward on the Doklam plateau. India does not have a claim on Doklam but it supports Bhutan's claim on the territory.<ref name="bunker">{{Cite news |author=Staff |date=28 June 2017 |title=Indian bunker in Sikkim removed by China: Sources |newspaper=The Times of India |url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/indian-bunker-in-sikkim-removed-by-china-sources/articleshow/59354787.cms |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170707003410/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/indian-bunker-in-sikkim-removed-by-china-sources/articleshow/59354787.cms |archive-date=7 July 2017 |url-status=live |df=dmy }}</ref> According to the Bhutanese government, China attempted to extend the road that previously terminated at Doka La towards the Bhutan Army camp at Zompelri {{cvt|2|km}} to the south; that ridge, viewed as the border by China but as within Bhutan by both Bhutan and India, extends eastward overlooking India's strategic Siliguri Corridor.<ref name=Siliguri> {{citation |author=Shaurya Karanbir Gurung |url=http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/border-face-off-why-china-tries-to-break-chickens-neck-to-isolate-northeast/articleshow/59420472.cms/ |title=Behind China's Sikkim aggression, a plan to isolate Northeast from rest of India |archive-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 |archive-date=24 August 2017 |newspaper=Economic Times |date=3 July 2017}}</ref>

On 18 June, Indian troops crossed into the territory in dispute between China and Bhutan in an attempt to prevent the road construction.<ref name=driving>{{citation |author=Ankit Panda |url=https://thediplomat.com/2017/07/whats-driving-the-india-china-standoff-at-doklam/ |title=What's Driving the India-China Standoff at Doklam? |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 |newspaper=The Diplomat |date=18 July 2017}}</ref> India's entry into the dispute is explained by the extant relations between India and Bhutan. In a 1949 treaty, Bhutan agreed to let India guide its foreign policy and defence affairs, reminiscent of its protected state status during the British colonial rule. In 2007, that treaty was superseded by a new friendship treaty which allows freedom of foreign policy to Bhutan, but mandates cooperation in issues of national security interest.<ref name="driving"/>{{sfnp|Phuntsho, Rhetoric and Reality of Doklam Incident|2017|p=80}}

India has criticised China for "crossing the border" and attempting to construct a road (allegedly done "illegally"), while China has criticised India for entering its "territory".<ref name="vishnusom1">{{Cite news|last=Som |first=Vishnu |editor-last=Shukla |editor-first=Shuchi |title=At Heart Of India-China Standoff, A Road Being Built: 10 Points |date=29 June 2017 |newspaper=NDTV |url=http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/amid-india-china-standoff-army-chief-in-sikkim-today-10-facts-1718311 |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 |url-status=live |df=dmy}}</ref>

On 29 June 2017, Bhutan protested the Chinese construction of a road in the disputed territory.<ref>{{Cite web | title = Bhutan protests against China's road construction | work = The Straits Times | date = 30 June 2017 | access-date = 2017-07-07 | url = http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/bhutan-protests-against-chinas-road-construction | url-status = live | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20170729010351/http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/bhutan-protests-against-chinas-road-construction | archive-date = 29 July 2017 | df = dmy-all }}</ref> The Bhutanese border was put on high alert and border security was tightened as a result of the growing tensions.<ref>{{Cite web | title = Bhutan issues scathing statement against China, claims Beijing violated border agreements of 1988, 1998 | work = Firstpost | date = 30 June 2017 | access-date = 2017-06-30 | url = http://www.firstpost.com/india/bhutan-issues-scathing-statement-against-china-claims-beijing-violated-border-agreements-of-1988-1998-3760587.html | url-status = live | 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 | df = dmy-all }}</ref> On the same day, China released a map depicting Doklam as part of China, claiming, via the map, that all territory up to Gipmochi belonged to China by the 1890 Anglo-Chinese treaty.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/china-releases-new-map-territorial-claims-stand-off-site-1021804-2017-07-01|title=EXCLUSIVE: China releases new map showing territorial claims at stand-off site|access-date=6 July 2017|url-status=live|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|df=dmy-all}}</ref>

On 3 July 2017, China told India that former Prime Minister of India Jawaharlal Nehru accepted the 1890 Britain-China treaty.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.news18.com/news/world/nehru-accepted-1890-treaty-india-using-bhutan-to-cover-up-entry-china-1450635.html|title=Nehru Accepted 1890 Treaty; India Using Bhutan to Cover up Entry: China|date=3 July 2017 |access-date=6 July 2017|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170730112133/http://www.news18.com/news/world/nehru-accepted-1890-treaty-india-using-bhutan-to-cover-up-entry-china-1450635.html|archive-date=30 July 2017|df=dmy-all}}</ref> Contrary to Chinese claim, Nehru's 26 September 1959 letter to Zhou Enlai, stated that the 1890 treaty defined only the northern part of the Sikkim–Tibet border and not the trijunction area. He called for discussion on the "rectification of errors in Chinese maps" regarding the boundary with Bhutan.<ref>A. S. Nazir Ahamed, [https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/did-nehru-really-accept-the-sino-british-treaty-as-final-word-on-the-sikkim-border-issue/article19210128.ece Did Nehru really accept the Sino-British Treaty as final word on the border issue?], The Hindu, 4 July 2017. </ref><ref> {{citation |editor=India. Ministry of External Affairs |chapter=Letter from the Prime Minister of India to the Prime Minister of China, 26 September 1959 |title=Notes, Memoranda and Letters Exchanged and Agreements Signed Between the Governments of India and China: September - November 1959, White Paper No. II |url=http://www.claudearpi.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/WhitePaper2NEW.pdf |year=1959 |publisher=Ministry of External Affairs |at=p. 60, paragraph 17}} </ref>

China claimed on 5 July 2017 that there was a "basic consensus" between China and Bhutan that Doklam belonged 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|access-date=6 July 2017|newspaper=The Economic Times|url-status=live|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|df=dmy-all}}</ref> The Bhutanese government in August 2017 denied that it had relinquished its claim to Doklam.<ref name="TOI Bhutan rejects">{{Cite news |title=Bhutan rejects Beijing's claim that Doklam belongs to China |work=The Times of India |url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/bhutan-rejects-beijings-claim-that-doklam-belongs-to-china/articleshow/60001311.cms |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>

In a 15-page statement released on 1 August 2017,{{sfn|China Foreign Ministry|2017}} the Foreign Ministry in 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.<ref>{{citation |title=Don't interfere in Bhutan's dispute, China warns India in statement on Doklam |url=http://www.livemint.com/Politics/ofIIdIQ8Dp93jC5EfUdUKJ/China-demands-unconditional-withdrawal-by-India-in-a-15page.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170802123626/http://www.livemint.com/Politics/ofIIdIQ8Dp93jC5EfUdUKJ/China-demands-unconditional-withdrawal-by-India-in-a-15page.html |archive-date=2 August 2017 |newspaper=livemint |date=2 August 2017}}</ref>

=== Chinese position === The Chinese government maintains that, from historical evidence, Donglang (Doklam) has always been traditional pasture area for the border inhabitants of Yadong, a county in its autonomous region of Tibet, and that China had exercised good administration over the area.<ref name="Lu Kang">{{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|website=www.fmprc.gov.cn|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170704211401/http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1474637.shtml|archive-date=4 July 2017|df=dmy-all}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.firstpost.com/world/sikkim-standoff-china-rejects-bhutans-claim-says-doklam-has-historically-been-their-territory-3762433.html|title=Sikkim standoff: China rejects Bhutan's claim, says Doklam has historically been their territory|date=2017-06-30|work=Firstpost|language=en-US|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170816063608/http://www.firstpost.com/world/sikkim-standoff-china-rejects-bhutans-claim-says-doklam-has-historically-been-their-territory-3762433.html|archive-date=16 August 2017|df=dmy-all}}</ref> It also says that before the 1960s, if the 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.<ref name="Lu Kang"/>{{better source needed|date=August 2017}}{{full citation needed|date=August 2017}}

===Bhutanese reactions=== After issuing a press statement on 29 June 2017, the Bhutanese government and media maintained a studious silence.<ref name="NYT squeezed"/><ref>{{Cite web |last=Ferrarini |first=Hélène |date=2025-12-01 |title=India’s tight grip on Bhutan |url=https://mondediplo.com/2025/12/09bhutan-box |access-date=2025-12-26 |website=Le Monde diplomatique |language=en}}</ref> ''The Bhutanese'' clarified that the land 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], ''The Bhutanese'', 1 July 2017.</ref> It 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], ''The Bhutanese'', 5 August 2017.</ref>

However, ''ENODO Global'', 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?], The Diplomat, 14 August 2017.</ref><ref name=ENODO>[http://enodoglobal.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/ENODO_Specialized-Analysis-Bhutan_20170818_FINAL.pdf Conflict Resolution: A Population-Centric Approach to Manage Regional Instability – Real-Time Social Media Analysis of the Standoff in Bhutan], ENODO GLobal, 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 }}</ref> ENODO did not corroborate these observations. Rather it said that hundreds of Twitter hashtags were created to rally support for India and that there was a significant blowback over the ''Xinhua'' television programme titled "7 sins" that castigated India.<ref name=ENODO/> 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 said that what they meant was not well-understood.<ref name=Chaudhuri/>

===Disengagement=== On 28 August 2017, it was announced that India and China had mutually agreed to a speedy disengagement on the Doklam plateau bringing an end to the military face-off that lasted for close to three months.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web | url=http://www.livemint.com/Politics/So0mkBwAICLXxxMoRnVuWM/Dokalam-standoff-India-China-agree-to-disengage.html | title=Doklam standoff ends; India, China agree to disengage| date=2017-08-28}}</ref> The Chinese foreign ministry sidestepped the question of whether China would continue the road construction.<ref>[http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/china-side-steps-issue-of-road-construction-in-doklam/article19581244.ece?homepage=true China sidesteps issue of road construction in Doklam], ''The Hindu'', 29 August 2017.</ref><ref>{{citation |title=Will China resme building roads in Doklam |newspaper=Rediff News |date=29 August 2017 |url=https://www.rediff.com/news/column/will-china-resume-building-roads-in-doklam/20170829.htm}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web | url=https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/china-claims-india-has-withdrawn-troops-in-doklam-silent-on-plans-to-build-road/articleshow/60261118.cms | title=Doklam: China claims India has withdrawn troops in Doklam, silent on plans to build road |newspaper=The Economic Times |date=12 July 2018}}</ref>

===Aftermath=== Chinese forces reportedly returned to Doklam Plateau in September 2018 and had nearly completed their road construction by January 2019, along with other infrastructure.<ref name=":2">{{cite web|title=China Inches Closer to Finishing Construction of 'All-weather Road' in Doklam |url=https://www.news18.com/news/india/china-inches-closer-to-finishing-construction-of-all-weather-road-in-doklam-2004867.html |publisher=News18.com |date=17 January 2019 |access-date=20 June 2020}}</ref> On 19 November 2020, a Chinese CGTN News producer tweeted that China has constructed a village called Pangda approximately {{cvt|9|km}} from the Doklam standoff location and about {{cvt|2|km}} within the territory of Bhutan.<ref name=":3">{{Cite web|last=Som|first=Vishnu|author-link=Vishnu Som|date=20 November 2020|title=China Sets Up Village Within Bhutan, 9 Km From Doklam Face-Off Site|url=https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/china-sets-up-village-within-bhutan-9-km-from-doklam-face-off-site-2327563|access-date=2020-11-20|website=NDTV}}</ref>

==Tourism==

The Chinese government has opened the Doklam area to tourism, allowing citizens to travel by sightseeing bus to visit attractions such as Pangda Village and the Linhai Galaxy Waterfall. Villagers in Pangda Village have opened guesthouses and restaurants to receive tourists. <ref>{{Cite web |title=普陀用“新产业”照亮边陲重镇“致富路” |url=http://www.sh.xinhua.org/20230828/41a9586febd34c9ebfe02c1a7c71b4bb/c.html |access-date=2025-11-01 |website=www.sh.xinhua.org}}</ref>

Doklam is part of the Bharat Ranbhoomi Darshan initiative of the Indian Military which details 77 battleground war memorials in the border area. These include the Longewala War Memorial, Sadhewala War Memorial, and memorials at Siachen base camp, Kargil, Galwan, Pangong Tso, Rezang La, Bum La, Cho La, and Kibithu.<ref name="bdp1">{{cite news|url=https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/battleground-tourism-india-indian-army-ministry-of-tourism-galwan-siachel-kargil-longewala-battle-2665110-2025-01-15|title=Add Galwan, Siachen to holiday plan. India is opening battle tourism bunker|website=India Today|date=15 January 2025|access-date=13 February 2025|first=Priyanjali|last=Narayan}}</ref><ref name="bdp2">{{cite news|url=https://www.indiatimes.com/news/here-is-the-story-of-tanot-mata-the-diety-who-protected-indian-soldiers-from-pakistani-bombs-at-longewala-in-1971-war-259867.html|title=The Story Of Tanot Mata, The Deity Who Protected Our Soldiers From Pakistani Bombs In 1971 War|website=India Times|date=16 December 2020|access-date=13 February 2025|first=Maninder|last=Dabas}}</ref>

==See also== {{Portal|China|India|Politics}} {{div col|colwidth=25em}} * Bhutan–China Sakteng border dispute * Bhutan–China border * Bhutan–China relations * Bhutan–India relations * China–India relations * Sino-Indian border dispute * Five Fingers of Tibet * China's salami slicing {{div col end}} {{clear}}

==Notes== {{notelist|40em}}

==References== {{reflist}}

==Bibliography== {{refbegin|2}} ; Secondary sources * {{citation |last=Bajpai |first=G. S. |title=China's Shadow Over Sikkim: The Politics of Intimidation |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=EB2l6dr_JlwC |year=1999 |publisher=Lancer Publishers |isbn=978-1-897829-52-3 |ref={{sfnref|Bajpai, China's Shadow over Sikkim|1999}}}} * {{citation |last1=Chandran |first1=D. Suba |last2=Singh |first2=Bhavna |title=India, China and Sub-regional Connectivities in South Asia |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2riICwAAQBAJ |date=2015 |publisher=SAGE Publications |isbn=978-93-5150-326-2 |ref={{sfnref|Chandran & Singh, India, China and Sub-regional Connectivities|2015}}}} * {{citation |last=Collister |first=Peter |title=Bhutan and the British |location=London |publisher=Serindia Publications with Belitha Press |year=1987 |url=https://archive.org/details/bhutanbritish0000coll |url-access=registration |ref={{sfnref|Collister, Bhutan and the British|1987}}}} * {{citation |last=Fravel |first=M. Taylor |title=Strong Borders, Secure Nation: Cooperation and Conflict in China's Territorial Disputes |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=02Hjr6RUckwC&pg=PA1 |date=2008 |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=978-1-4008-2887-6 |ref={{sfnref|Fravel, Strong Borders, Secure Nation|2008}}}} * {{citation |last=Garver |first=John W. |title=Protracted Contest: Sino-Indian Rivalry in the Twentieth Century |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TOVaMckcO0MC |year=2011 |publisher=University of Washington Press |isbn=978-0-295-80120-9 |ref={{sfnref|Garver, Protracted Contest|2011}}}} * {{citation |last=Harris |first=George L. |title=Area Handbook for Nepal, Bhutan and Sikkim |edition=second |url=https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/001299451 |year=1977 |publisher=U.S. Government Printing Office |orig-year=first published by American University, 1964 |ref={{sfnref|Harris, Area Handbook for Nepal, Bhutan and Sikkim|1977}}}} * {{citation |first=Michael |last=Hutt |title=Unbecoming Citizens: Culture, Nationhood, and the Flight of Refugees from Bhutan |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2003 |isbn=9780195662054 |ref={{sfnref|Hutt, Unbecoming Citizens|2003}}}} * {{citation |last=Joshi |first=Manoj |author-link=Manoj Joshi (journalist) |url=http://www.orfonline.org/research/doklam-start-very-beginning/ |title=Doklam: To start at the very beginning |publisher=Observer Research Foundation |date=2017 |ref={{sfnref|Joshi, Doklam: To start at the very beginning|2017}}}} * {{cite journal |last1=Kumar |first1=Pranav |last2=Acharya |first2=Alka |last3=Jacob |first3=Jabin T. |title=Sino-Bhutanese Relations |journal=China Report |volume=46 |issue=3 |year=2011 |pages=243–252 |issn=0009-4455 |doi=10.1177/000944551104600306 |s2cid=153382221 |ref={{sfnref|Kumar, Acharya & Jacob, Sino-Bhutanese Relations|2011}}}} * {{citation |first=Jigme Yeshe |last=Lama |chapter=Dragon Meets Dragon: Bhutan-China Relationship |title=Asia Matters, Vol. 2 |editor1=Anita Sengupta |editor2=Priya Singh |publisher=Asia in Global Affairs |year=2022 |pages=54–63 |url=https://www.asiainglobalaffairs.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Asia-Matters-2-final.pdf |ref={{sfnref|Lama, Dragon Meets Dragon|2022}}}} * {{citation |last=Mathou |first=Thierry |chapter=Bhutan–China Relations: Towards a New step in Himalayan Politics |title=The Spider and The Piglet: Proceedings of the First International Seminar on Bhutanese Studies |location=Thimpu |publisher=The Centre for Bhutan Studies |year=2004 |chapter-url=http://www.bhutanstudies.org.bt/publicationFiles/ConferenceProceedings/SpiderAndPiglet/19-Spdr&Pglt.pdf |ref={{sfnref|Mathou, Bhutan-China Relations|2004}}}} * {{citation |last=Mehra |first=P. L. |chapter=Sikkim and Bhutan—An Historical Conspectus |editor1=Suresh Kant Sharma |editor2=Usha Sharma |title=Discovery of North-East India: Geography, History, Culture, Religion, Politics, Sociology, Science, Education and Economy. Sikkim. Volume 10. |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kBk3xBjSRbsC&pg=PA125 |year=2005 |publisher=Mittal Publications |isbn=978-81-8324-044-4 |pages=125–154 |ref={{sfnref|Mehra, Sikkim and Bhutan—An Historical Conspectus|2005}}}} * {{citation |last=Mullard |first=Saul |title=Opening the Hidden Land: State Formation and the Construction of Sikkimese History |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=G_1J4tgrYDUC |year=2011 |publisher=BRILL |isbn=978-90-04-20895-7 |ref={{sfnref|Mullard, Opening the Hidden Land|2011}}}} * {{citation |last=Penjore |first=Dorji |title=Security of Bhutan: walking between the giants |journal=Journal of Bhutan Studies |year=2004 |url=https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1810/227045/JBS_10_09.pdf?sequence=2 |ref={{sfnref|Penjore, Security of Bhutan|2004}}}} * {{citation |last=Phuntsho |first=Karma |title=The History of Bhutan |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=aUDAAAAAQBAJ |year=2013 |publisher=Random House India |isbn=978-81-8400-411-3 |ref={{sfnref|Phuntsho, The History of Bhutan|2013}}}} * {{citation |first=Jigme |last=Phuntsho |title=Rhetoric and Reality of Doklam Incident |journal=Journal of Bhutan Studies |volume=37 |date=Winter 2017 |url=http://www.bhutanstudies.org.bt/publicationFiles/JBS/JBS%2037%20/03%20Rhetoric%20and%20Reality%20of%20Doklam%20Incident.pdf |ref={{sfnref|Phuntsho, Rhetoric and Reality of Doklam Incident|2017}}}} * {{citation |last=Prescott |first=John Robert Victor |title=Map of Mainland Asia by Treaty |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=nUQBAAAAMAAJ |year=1975 |publisher=Melbourne University Press |isbn=978-0-522-84083-4 |ref={{sfnref |Prescott, Map of Mainland Asia by Treaty |1975}}}} * {{citation |last1=Rose |first1=Leo E. |title=Nepal – Strategy for Survival |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=v07Vo3vAaKwC |year=1971 |publisher=University of California Press |isbn=978-0-520-01643-9 |ref={{sfnref|Rose, Nepal – Strategy for Survival|1971}}}} * {{citation |last=Shakabpa |first=Tsepon Wangchuk Deden |title=Tibet: A Political History |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=iKziAAAAMAAJ |year=1984 |orig-year=first published Yale University Press 1967| publisher=Potala Publications |location=New York |isbn=978-0-9611474-0-2|ref={{sfnref|Shakabpa, Tibet: A Political History|1984}}}} * {{citation |last=Singh |first=Amar Kaur Jasbir |title=Himalayan Triangle: A historical survey of British India's relations with Tibet, Sikkim, and Bhutan, 1765-1950 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4dq1AAAAIAAJ |year=1988 |publisher=British Library |isbn=9780712306300 |ref={{sfnref|Singh, Himalayan Triangle|1988}}}} * {{citation |last=Singh |first=Mandip |title=Critical Assessment of China's Vulnerabilities in Tibet |url=http://www.idsa.in/system/files/OP_ChinaTibet.pdf |year=2013 |publisher=Institute for Defence Studies & Analyses |isbn=978-93-82169-10-9 |ref={{sfnref|Mandip Singh, Critical Assessment of China's Vulnerabilities|2013}}}} * {{citation |last=Smith |first=Paul J. |chapter=Bhutan–China Border Disputes and Their Geopolitical Implications |editor1=Bruce Elleman |editor2=Stephen Kotkin |editor3=Clive Schofield |title=Beijing's Power and China's Borders: Twenty Neighbors in Asia |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=CnDlcP6L8iEC&pg=PA23 |year=2015 |publisher=M.E. Sharpe |isbn=978-0-7656-2766-7 |pages=23–36 |ref={{sfnref|Smith, Bhutan–China Border Disputes and Their Geopolitical Implications|2015}}}} * {{citation |last=Van Praagh |first=David |title=Greater Game: India's Race with Destiny and China |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=KVDIvLQDGckC |year=2003 |publisher=McGill-Queen's Press - MQUP |isbn=978-0-7735-7130-3 |pages=349– |ref={{sfnref|Van Praagh, Great Game|2003}}}} * {{citation |last=Walcott |first=Susan M. |title=Bordering the Eastern Himalaya: Boundaries, Passes, Power Contestations |journal=Geopolitics |volume=15 |pages=62–81 |year=2010 |doi=10.1080/14650040903420396 |s2cid=144252954 |ref={{sfnref|Walcott, Bordering the Eastern Himalaya|2010}} |url=http://libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/S_Walcott_Bordering_2010.pdf }}

; Primary sources * {{citation |author=China Foreign Ministry |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) |date=2 August 2017 |publisher=Government of China |url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/P020170802542676636134.pdf |access-date=15 August 2017}} * {{citation |editor=India. Ministry of External Affairs |title=Notes, Memoranda and Letters Exchanged Between the Governments of India and China, January 1965–February 1966, White Paper No. XII |url=http://www.claudearpi.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/WhitePaper12NEW.pdf |year=1966}} * {{citation |editor=India. Ministry of External Affairs |title=Notes, Memoranda and Letters Exchanged Between the Governments of India and China, February 1966–February 1967, White Paper No. XIII |url=http://www.claudearpi.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/WhitePaper13NEW.pdf |year=1967}} * {{citation |editor=India. Ministry of External Affairs |title=Notes, Memoranda and Letters Exchanged Between the Governments of India and China, February 1967–April 1968, White Paper No. XIV |url=http://www.claudearpi.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/WhitePaper14NEW.pdf |year=1968}} * {{citation |last=Bell |first=Charles |author-link=Charles Alfred Bell |title=Tibet Past and Present |edition=First |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=1924 |url=https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.167531 |ref={{sfnref|Bell, Tibet Past and Present|1924}}}} * {{citation |last=Bell |first=Charles |author-link=Charles Alfred Bell |title=Portrait of the Dalai Lama |publisher=Collins |location=London |year=1946 |url=https://archive.org/details/dli.pahar.2859/page/26 |ref={{sfnref|Bell, Portrait of the Dalai Lama|1946}}}} {{refend}}

== External links == * [http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3964647 Doklam area marked on OpenStreetMap] * [http://treaties.fco.gov.uk/docs/pdf/1894/TS0011.pdf Convention Between Great Britain and China relating to Sikkim & Tibet] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170709135501/http://treaties.fco.gov.uk/docs/pdf/1894/TS0011.pdf |date=9 July 2017 }} * Neville Maxwell, [http://m.scmp.com/week-asia/geopolitics/article/2102555/indias-china-war-round-two THIS IS INDIA'S CHINA WAR, ROUND TWO], 14 July 2017 * Manoj Joshi, [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVhCW-WCmno India and China after the Doklam Standoff] (video), Hudson Institute, 16 November 2017

Category:Bhutan–India border Category:Bhutan–China border Category:Sino-Indian border dispute