After Delhi’s tough talk, Beijing says all is well
China says talks helped reach consensus on key issues
BEIJING: China on Thursday played down the differences that marked the strategic dialogue with India and insisted the talks were held in an “overall friendly” atmosphere.
Foreign secretary S Jaishankar on Wednesday concluded his two-day Beijing visit with strategic talks with executive vice-foreign minister Zhang Yesui. He met foreign minister, Wang Yi and state councilor, Yang Jiechi.
Speaking to the Indian media, Jaishankar said it was made clear to the Chinese officials that overwhelming evidence – and support – had been gathered against Pakistan-based terrorist Masood Azhar, for proscribing him in the UN.
Foreign ministry spokesperson Geng Shuang said: “The dialogue reached the goals and is of positive significance for bilateral relations.”
“Both sides agreed to maintain the momentum of bilateral relations in the spirit of agreement of two leaders, work out a good programme for 2017 at various levels, advance practical cooperation, strengthen coordination and cooperation on regional and international issues,” he said.
“In friendly atmosphere, the two sides had an in-depth and comprehensive exchange of views on bilateral relations, international situation and other issues of mutual interest,” he said. “The two sides reached extensive consensus and shared the view that with similar national conditions, stage of development, China and India have extensive converging interests and huge potential for cooperation,” Geng added.
Geng’s comments after India dismissed China’s contention that it has not furnished enough evidence against Azhar, with Jaishankar telling senior Chinese officials that the burden of proof is not on New Delhi.
China’s efforts to block moves to sanction Azhar at the UN, despite its “principled” stand on counter-terrorism, was a political decision, he said on Wednesday. Jaishankar also reiterated India’s concerns on the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor that passes through PoK, making it clear that it was a “sovereignty” issue.