The China-India relationship is showing signs of a broader diplomatic engagement, with Indian defence experts at the 13th Beijing Xiangshan Forum pointing to artificial intelligence governance, maritime security and multilateral cooperation as areas in which the two countries can work together even as their long-running boundary dispute remains unresolved.
The forum, which concluded on Thursday, brought together about 2,000 participants from more than 100 countries, regions and international organisations under the theme “Build Consensus on Stability, Advance Security Governance Together”. Its discussions provided a platform for military and security specialists to examine common challenges at a time when China-India relations have been undergoing a series of high-level contacts.
Retired Lieutenant General Ravindra Singh Panwar, a distinguished fellow at the United Service Institution of India, told the Global Times that all three Indian defence attachés attended the forum for the first time in recent years. He described their participation as part of a series of steps aimed at improving bilateral relations, particularly by maintaining peace along the border while continuing negotiations towards a settlement.
Panwar also pointed to the possibility of expanding engagement beyond the boundary question. He said China and India shared support for multilateralism and platforms such as BRICS, while people-to-people exchanges and other areas of mutual interest could also advance alongside efforts to stabilise the border.
His comments came shortly after the 25th round of talks between Chinese and Indian special representatives on the boundary question, held in Beijing on 25 August. According to China’s Foreign Ministry, the meeting produced eight points of consensus covering border management, negotiations on a framework for resolving the boundary issue, military communication mechanisms and cross-border cooperation.
The two sides reaffirmed their commitment to maintaining peace and tranquillity along the border and agreed to continue negotiations based on the 2005 political parameters and guiding principles for resolving the boundary question. They also agreed to establish an expert group on boundary delimitation and a working group on border management. Two additional meeting points for senior military-level contacts and two additional border military hotlines in the eastern and middle sectors were also agreed.
The latest arrangements do not amount to a settlement of the boundary dispute. Rather, they establish additional mechanisms for managing differences and continuing negotiations. The two countries also agreed to hold the 26th round of special representatives’ talks in India in 2027.
For Panwar, the significance of the broader relationship lies partly in the gradual development of regular exchanges. A former officer in the Indian Army’s Corps of Signals, he said he has been involved in Track 2 diplomacy for four years, maintaining online discussions with Chinese counterparts every four to six weeks and meeting them in person at least twice a year.
At the Xiangshan Forum, his discussions extended into one of the most consequential emerging security questions: artificial intelligence. Panwar participated in exchanges with Chinese, US and other international delegations on AI governance, including the implications of advanced technologies for nuclear security, chemical weapons and potentially existential risks.
Maritime security provides another practical field in which the two countries have already accumulated experience. Retired Vice Admiral Shekhar Sinha, a member of the Governing Council of the Indian Council of World Affairs, participated in the forum’s session on “Sea Lane Security and Maritime Security Governance”. He noted that Chinese and Indian naval forces had previously cooperated in counter-piracy and escort operations.
For Sinha, however, the border dispute remains a long-term challenge rather than an issue that can be resolved quickly. He argued that progress would begin with building mutual confidence and identifying areas where the two sides have a shared understanding of the boundary. Where their perceptions differ, he said, continued dialogue would be necessary.
That distinction is important. The latest diplomatic developments indicate an effort to separate the management of the border dispute from the wider question of whether China and India can sustain cooperation in other fields. The August talks explicitly linked border stability with the broader development of bilateral relations, while also expanding mechanisms for direct military and diplomatic communication.
The agreement also included steps outside traditional security concerns. China and India welcomed the reopening of three designated border trading points and agreed to strengthen cooperation involving border trade and pilgrimage. They further agreed to convene another expert-level meeting on transboundary rivers in September, including discussions on hydrological data sharing and relevant memorandums of understanding.
The emerging pattern is therefore one of cautious compartmentalisation: the boundary dispute remains unresolved, but it is being addressed through dedicated diplomatic and military mechanisms while other areas of interaction are allowed to develop.
For the Indian experts attending the Xiangshan Forum, that approach offers a framework in which disagreement need not prevent cooperation. AI governance, maritime security, multilateral institutions and people-to-people exchanges provide potential channels for engagement, while the boundary question continues through a separate negotiating process.
Whether this wider engagement can eventually contribute to a durable settlement remains dependent on negotiations between the two governments. For now, the clearest development is not a resolution of the dispute, but the expansion of mechanisms through which China and India can manage it while attempting to keep the rest of their relationship moving forward.
