NEW DELHI: Details of a deal reached Monday between India and China to end the standoff in the Doklam border area remain ambiguous, raising more questions than answers, commentators said.
Tensions mounted in June when India sent troops to stop China building a road in the Doklam, a remote territory claimed by both China and Bhutan.
“Nowhere (did China actually confirm it is) going ahead with the road building; they are avoiding answers and maintaining they are doing so just to cater to the domestic audience,” Dhruva Jaishankar, fellow in foreign policy studies at Brookings India, told Arab News.
Jaishankar did however point out that while China is not carrying out any construction activity, it has not ruled out such works in the future.
While the Chinese side is claiming the upper hand in the deal, India is maintaining a stoic silence at an official level. It issued a brief statement earlier this week saying that the “expeditious disengagement of border personnel at ... Doklam has been agreed to and is ongoing.”
However, a section of the Indian media has been very vocal on the issue and called the deal a victory for India and a demonstration of its political leadership’s maturity.
An article in the Business Standard called the Doklam standoff deal “India’s greatest diplomatic victory in decades.”
The Chinese Foreign Ministry’s statement on Tuesday added further ambiguity to the agreement. “China has long engaged in infrastructure development, including road construction in Doklam. We will take into consideration all factors, including weather, to make relevant construction plans according to the situation on the ground,” the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said.
A Chinese Army general was quoted by NDTV as saying that “the Chinese military will remain vigilant and firmly defend ... national territory and sovereignty following the military standoff between China and India … we remind India to draw lessons from the standoff, abide by established treaties and the basic principles of international law.”
The national daily The Hindu took a more nuanced stand, calling the deal “a welcome sign that diplomacy has prevailed over the harsh rhetoric of the past 10 weeks”.
Bhutanese media meanwhile gave little in the way of comment except in reporting the agreement.
Many have suggested that the truce reached on Monday is a temporary reprieve, necessitated by the upcoming BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) summit that starts on Sept. 3 in the Chinese city of Xiamen.
“I think the BRICS summit forced the timing of the agreement because if (Indian Prime Minister Narendra) Modi had not gone to China, it would have been a bit embarrassing for the Chinese government. Had he gone, it would again be embarrassing,” said Jaishankar.
“So effectively, the BRICS summit created a hard timeline for both the countries to come to some kind of resolution beforehand.”
![]()
Uncertainty engulfs India-China deal on Doklam dispute
Uncertainty engulfs India-China deal on Doklam dispute
Trump to host Colombia’s Petro just weeks after insulting him as a ‘sick man’ fueling drug trade
WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump is set to welcome Colombian President Gustavo Petro to the White House on Tuesday for talks only weeks after threatening military action against the South American country and accusing the leader of pumping cocaine into the United States.
US administration officials say the meeting will focus on regional security cooperation and counternarcotics efforts. And Trump on Monday suggested that Petro — who has continued to criticize Trump and the US operation to capture Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro — seems more willing to work with his administration to stem the flow of illegal drugs from Colombia.
“Somehow after the Venezuelan raid, he became very nice,” Trump told reporters. “He changed his attitude very much.”
Yet, bad blood between the leaders overshadows the sit-down, even as Trump sought to downplay any friction on the eve of the visit.
The conservative Trump and leftist Petro are ideologically far apart, but both leaders share a tendency for verbal bombast and unpredictability. That sets the stage for a White House visit with an anything-could-happen vibe.
In recent days, Petro has continued poking at the US president, calling Trump an “accomplice to genocide” in the Gaza Strip, while asserting that the capture of Maduro was a kidnapping.
And ahead of his departure for Washington, Petro called on Colombians to take to the streets of Bogotá during the White House meeting.
There’s been a shift in US-Colombia relations
Historically, Colombia has been a US ally. For the past 30 years, the US has worked closely with Colombia, the world’s largest producer of cocaine, to arrest drug traffickers, fend off rebel groups and boost economic development in rural areas.
But relations between the leaders have been strained by Trump’s massing US forces in the region for unprecedented deadly military strikes targeting suspected drug smuggling boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific. At least 126 people have been killed in 36 known strikes.
In October, the Trump administration announced it was imposing sanctions on Petro, his family and a member of his government over accusations of involvement in the global drug trade.
The Treasury Department leveled the penalties against Petro; his wife, Veronica del Socorro Alcocer Garcia; his son, Nicolas Fernando Petro Burgos; and Colombian Interior Minister Armando Alberto Benedetti.
The sanctions, which had to be waived to allow Petro to travel to Washington this week, came after the US administration in September announced it was adding Colombia to a list of nations failing to cooperate in the drug war for the first time in three decades.
Then came the audacious military operation last month to capture Maduro and his wife to face federal drug conspiracy charges, a move that Petro has forcefully denounced. Following Maduro’s ouster, Trump put Colombia on notice, and ominously warned Petro he could be next.
Colombia is “run by a sick man who likes making cocaine and selling it to the United States,” Trump said of Petro last month. “And he’s not gonna be doing it very long, let me tell you.”
But a few days later, tensions eased somewhat after a call between the leaders. Trump said Petro in their hourlong conversation explained “the drug situation and other disagreements.” And Trump extended an invitation to Petro for the White House visit.
Trump on a couple of occasions has used the typically scripted leaders’ meetings to deliver stern rebukes to counterparts in front of the press.
Trump and Vice President JD Vance lashed out at Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in February for showing insufficient gratitude for US support of Ukraine. Trump also used a White House meeting in May to forcefully confront South African President Cyril Ramaphosa,accusing the country, with reporters present, of failing to address Trump’s baseless claim of the systematic killing of white farmers.
It was not clear that the meeting between Trump and Petro would include a portion in front of cameras.
US administration officials say the meeting will focus on regional security cooperation and counternarcotics efforts. And Trump on Monday suggested that Petro — who has continued to criticize Trump and the US operation to capture Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro — seems more willing to work with his administration to stem the flow of illegal drugs from Colombia.
“Somehow after the Venezuelan raid, he became very nice,” Trump told reporters. “He changed his attitude very much.”
Yet, bad blood between the leaders overshadows the sit-down, even as Trump sought to downplay any friction on the eve of the visit.
The conservative Trump and leftist Petro are ideologically far apart, but both leaders share a tendency for verbal bombast and unpredictability. That sets the stage for a White House visit with an anything-could-happen vibe.
In recent days, Petro has continued poking at the US president, calling Trump an “accomplice to genocide” in the Gaza Strip, while asserting that the capture of Maduro was a kidnapping.
And ahead of his departure for Washington, Petro called on Colombians to take to the streets of Bogotá during the White House meeting.
There’s been a shift in US-Colombia relations
Historically, Colombia has been a US ally. For the past 30 years, the US has worked closely with Colombia, the world’s largest producer of cocaine, to arrest drug traffickers, fend off rebel groups and boost economic development in rural areas.
But relations between the leaders have been strained by Trump’s massing US forces in the region for unprecedented deadly military strikes targeting suspected drug smuggling boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific. At least 126 people have been killed in 36 known strikes.
In October, the Trump administration announced it was imposing sanctions on Petro, his family and a member of his government over accusations of involvement in the global drug trade.
The Treasury Department leveled the penalties against Petro; his wife, Veronica del Socorro Alcocer Garcia; his son, Nicolas Fernando Petro Burgos; and Colombian Interior Minister Armando Alberto Benedetti.
The sanctions, which had to be waived to allow Petro to travel to Washington this week, came after the US administration in September announced it was adding Colombia to a list of nations failing to cooperate in the drug war for the first time in three decades.
Then came the audacious military operation last month to capture Maduro and his wife to face federal drug conspiracy charges, a move that Petro has forcefully denounced. Following Maduro’s ouster, Trump put Colombia on notice, and ominously warned Petro he could be next.
Colombia is “run by a sick man who likes making cocaine and selling it to the United States,” Trump said of Petro last month. “And he’s not gonna be doing it very long, let me tell you.”
But a few days later, tensions eased somewhat after a call between the leaders. Trump said Petro in their hourlong conversation explained “the drug situation and other disagreements.” And Trump extended an invitation to Petro for the White House visit.
Trump on a couple of occasions has used the typically scripted leaders’ meetings to deliver stern rebukes to counterparts in front of the press.
Trump and Vice President JD Vance lashed out at Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in February for showing insufficient gratitude for US support of Ukraine. Trump also used a White House meeting in May to forcefully confront South African President Cyril Ramaphosa,accusing the country, with reporters present, of failing to address Trump’s baseless claim of the systematic killing of white farmers.
It was not clear that the meeting between Trump and Petro would include a portion in front of cameras.
Latest updates
Recommended
© 2026 SAUDI RESEARCH & PUBLISHING COMPANY, All Rights Reserved And subject to Terms of Use Agreement.