BJP expresses concern over presence of Chinese troops in POK
  • This Section
  • Latest
  • Web Wrap
Last Updated: Wednesday, April 06, 2011, 20:35
New Delhi: Expressing serious concern over reports about presence of Chinese troops in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, BJP on Wednesday said New Delhi should take up the matter with the neighbouring country and make the POK issue a must in all talks with Pakistan.

"The presence of a large number of People's Liberation Army of China personnel disguised as 'construction workers' in POK on our LoC is a matter of serious concern to us," BJP spokesperson Tarun Vijay said.

He maintained that it is a threat to India's security and the government must get a clarification from the Chinese about the real intention of their involvement on an Indian territory which "is under illegal occupation of Pakistan".

Vijay demanded that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh take up this issue with his Chinese counterpart when he goes to China next week to attend BRICS summit.

"We would urge him (Singh) to take up these matters also with the Chinese PM and get a clarification," Vijay said.

BJP insisted that the occupation of POK is illegal and till Pakistan does not hand over the area to India, there can not be any lasting peace there.

"We also demand that the government of India must put the POK issue on the table in every talk with Pakistan. The government should implement the unanimous resolution of Parliament (that POK is part of India)," Vijay said.

BJP further maintained that clarification should be sought from China whether its presence in PoK is part of some long term plan to connect the Karakoram highway with Gwadar.

Gwadar port was reportedly built with Chinese help and inaugurated by the Chinese PM in 2005. If a free passage is allowed, it would connect mainland China with the Arabian Sea.

Vijay said the presence of Chinese army in POK which also has terrorist training camps raises questions about whether there is a connection between the two.


First Published: Wednesday, April 06, 2011, 20:35

comments powered by Disqus