Line of Actual Control
disputed boundary between China and India

The Line of Actual Control (LAC), in the context of the Sino-Indian border dispute, is a notional demarcation line that separates Indian-controlled territory from Chinese-controlled territory on their mutual border. The concept was introduced by Chinese premier Zhou Enlai in a 1959 letter to Jawaharlal Nehru as the "line up to which each side exercises actual control", but rejected by Nehru as being incoherent. Subsequently, the term came to refer to the line formed after the 1962 Sino-Indian War.
The LAC is different from the borders claimed by each country in the Sino-Indian border dispute. The Indian claims include the entire Aksai Chin region, and the Chinese claims include Arunachal Pradesh/Zangnan. These claims are not included in the concept of "actual control".
The LAC is generally divided into three sectors:
the western sector between Ladakh on the Indian side and the Tibet and Xinjiang autonomous regions on the Chinese side. This sector was the location of the 2020 China–India skirmishes ;
the middle sector between Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh on the Indian side and the Tibet Autonomous Region on the Chinese side ;
The eastern sector between Arunachal Pradesh/Zangnan on the Indian side and the Tibet Autonomous Region on the Chinese side. This sector generally follows the McMahon Line.
The term "line of actual control" originally referred only to the boundary in the western sector after the 1962 Sino-Indian War, but during the 1990s came to refer to the entire de facto border.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Line of Actual Control” is disputed boundary between China and India. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Line, Actual and Control, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “disputed boundary between China and India” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 10, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q1826411. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1959, 1962 and 2020.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Line of Actual Control”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Line of Actual Control primary sources, Line of Actual Control archive and Line research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Line of Actual Control”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Line of Actual Control” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.