--- "Milefsky, Ray J" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> discrepancy amounts to some 1400 sq km
this may have been reduced to as little as 269 sq km
by april 2004
per page 2 of the following media report from august
2005
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/China_inching_closer_to_India_through_Bhutan/articleshow/msid-1187893,curpg-1.cms
which appears to have followed the 17th round of the
talks
however
the stated area of 269 sq km is suspicious because it
just happens to equal the sum total of 3 but evidently
not all 4 of the disputed areas mentioned by the king
prior to the 16th round in 2002
as detailed in the july 2004 report
http://www.bhutannewsonline.com/bhutan_china.html
where the extent of the 4th area is not included or
stated
if this 4th area was in fact resolved in the 16th or
17th round
then it might have amounted to 731 sq km
to make up the 1000 sq km figure given by the times of
india for the discrepancy total prior to april 2004
or there could be some mistake in these data or in my
inferences from them
also an 18th round was held last august but no new
data were reported
> Colleagues,
>
> Peace and tranquility are grand and noble things but
> the verbiage of the
> 1998 Agreement does not define the boundary and the
> document should not
> be construed as a true boundary agreement, per se.
> Nary a mention is
> made therein describing an allocation, delimitation,
> or demarcation.
> Instead, it only permits the Parties to agree to
> disagree and seek
> amicable ways to resolve issues that come up with
> the contested border
> area.
>
> Thus, my original locution of an uncontested
> dispute.
>
> Ray Milefsky, Specialist
> International Boundaries and Sovereignty Issues
> Office of the Geographer and Global Issues
> U.S. Department of State
> Washington, DC 20520-6510
> Phone: 202 647 1205
> Fax: 202 647 0504
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: International boundaries discussion list
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Kwiatkowska, Barbara
> Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 2:22 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [INT-BOUNDARIES] Bhutan-China
>
> Please see China/Bhutan websites listed under Mr Ray
> Milefsky's e-mail
> (Martin Pratt's & Victor's e-mails are re-enclosed
> afterwards). All IBRU
> e-mails are at:
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/int-boundaries.html
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: International boundaries discussion list
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Milefsky, Ray J
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
> Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 14:42
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [INT-BOUNDARIES] Bhutan-China
>
> We are pleased you have addressed this fuzzy border,
> Victor.
>
> Like Lebanon and Syria, there is no known written
> boundary agreement
> delimiting or describing the boundary. Nineteenth
> and early Twentieth
> Century British Survey of India maps show the line
> following largely the
> watershed based on the topography as interpreted by
> the colonial
> cartographers, whose understanding of the
> hypsography on the Chinese
> side
> was, shall we say, quite sketchy. Before then,
> local peoples apparently
> recognized the traditional separation along certain
> high elevation peaks
> in
> this remote, sparsely inhabited region. The
> configuration of the boundary as drawn by the
> British, however, has
> remained fixed on current Bhutanese maps, even
> though the true watershed
> lies somewhat further south -- which is where the
> Chinese presently show
> the
> boundary on their maps. This discrepancy amounts to
> some 1400 square
> kilometers.
>
> Several mapping entities show two lines as the
> boundary. Some simply
> label one line or the other as indefinite.
>
> China and Bhutan have been in boundary discussions
> but to our knowledge
> no
> resolution has materialized. One might say this
> boundary constitutes an
> uncontested dispute, as neither side asserts more
> than cartographic
> claims.
> However, the true alignment remains clearly in
> question.
>
> Kindest regards,
> Ray
>
> Ray Milefsky, Specialist
> International Boundaries and Sovereignty Issues
> Office of the Geographer and Global Issues
> U.S. Department of State
> Washington, DC 20520-6510
> Phone: 202 647 1205
> Fax: 202 647 0504
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>
> INDIA/BHUTAN BOUNDARY DEMARCATION COMPLETED:
>
> India/Bhutan Boundary Demarcation Completed of 13
> December 2006
> at:
> www.newkerala.com/news4.php?action=fullnews&id=66023
> &
> http://in.news.yahoo.com/061213/43/6a9ef.html &
>
http://www.kuenselonline.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=7833
> (via: http://www.phayul.com/ &
>
http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news?p=Demarcation
> &
> http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news?p=Bhutan)
> Bhutan/India Demarcation Almost Completed of 5 July
> 2006 - don't
> know how to get rid of adverts - at:
> http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/10656.asp
> Bhutan/India Boundary Demarcation of 24 June 2006
> at:
>
http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?article=Bhutan-China+boundary+mu
> st+b
> e+finalised&id=13002 - these Bhutan/India news were
> written by Tashi
> Dorji
> mailto:[log in to unmask] and were
> circulated by Dr Brendan
> Whyte of
> Geography Department, Hebrew University of
> Jerusalem, Mt Scopus,
> Jerusalem
> 91905, mailto:[log in to unmask] via IBRU on 27
> June 2006, lower at:
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/int-boundaries.html
> 1998 Agreement to Maintain Peace and Tranquillity
> on the
> Bhutan-China Border can be found at
> http://www.bhutannewsonline.com/bhutan_china.html. A
> news report posted
> by
> Brendan Whyte to this forum last July
> (http://tinyurl.com/2mo6py) - see
> Martin Pratt's email infra
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: International boundaries discussion list
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Martin Pratt
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
> Sent: Monday, January 22, 2007 13:23
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [INT-BOUNDARIES] Bhutan-China
>
> Dear Victor,
>
> As far as I am aware, Bhutan and China are still
> negotiating the precise
> alignment of their boundary. A fairly detailed
> account of their
> discussions up to 2002 and the text of the 1998
> Agreement to Maintain
> Peace and Tranquillity on the Bhutan-China Border
> can be found at
> http://www.bhutannewsonline.com/bhutan_china.html. A
> news report posted
> by
> Brendan Whyte to this forum last July
> (http://tinyurl.com/2mo6py)
> indicated
> that a final delimitation has yet to be agreed.
>
> It was reported last month that with the exception
> of the two tripoints
> with China, the Bhutan-India border has now been
> fully demarcated (see
> http://www.dur.ac.uk/ibru/news).
>
> Regards,
>
> m a r t i n
>
> ==================================
> Martin Pratt
> Director of Research
> International Boundaries Research Unit
> Department of Geography
> University of Durham
> South Road
> Durham DH1 3LE
> United Kingdom
>
> +44 (0)191 334 1964 (direct line)
>
=== message truncated ===
____________________________________________________________________________________
Finding fabulous fares is fun.
Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and hotel bargains.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097
|
