India against use of force
Strongly hinting at China without naming it, India on Thursday said it opposed “the use or threat of use of force” to settle disputes between countries in the South China Sea, adding that efforts should be made “towards adoption of a code of conduct in the South China Sea on the basis of consensus”. India also emphasised the “importance of unimpeded right of passage” in international waters.
Representing India at the Asean Defence Ministers’ Meeting Plus (ADMM Plus) at Brunei in Southeast Asia on Thursday, minister of state for defence Jitendra Singh said, We oppose the use or the threat of use of force. We hope that all parties to disputes in the South China Sea region will abide by the 2002 Declaration on Conduct in the South China Sea and work together to ensure peaceful resolution of disputes, in accordance with international law, including the UNCLOS. We urge all parties concerned to take forward these discussions towards adoption of a Code of Conduct in the South China Sea on the basis of consensus.”
“The safety and security of the sea lanes of communication is of paramount importance. ... There is need to reaffirm the importance of unimpeded right of passage and other maritime rights in accordance with the accepted principles of international law. These principles should be respected by all. Maintenance of peace and security in the region is of vital interest and sovereignty issues must be resolved peacefully by all countries concerned, in accordance with international law,” he said.
In a veiled reference to terror havens in Pakistan without naming that country, Mr Singh said, “Terrorism represents a major threat to the peace, stability and security of the entire region. ... Since the main threat to peace and stability in Afghanistan emanates from terrorism, it is imperative that terrorist sanctuaries and safe havens, particularly those beyond Afghan borders, are dismantled. ... India supports the efforts of the Afghan government to establish a peaceful dialogue with all armed opposition groups.”
Post new comment