CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Sino-Indian border dispute

border dispute between China and India

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 26, 2026
Entity authorityQ5308408 ↗
Source-derived summary

There is an ongoing territorial dispute between China and India over the sovereignty of two relatively large, and several smaller, separated pieces of territory at their border. The territorial disputes between the two countries stem from the legacy of British colonial-era border agreements, particularly the McMahon Line in the eastern sector, which was drawn in 1914 during the Simla Convention between British-ruled India and Tibet but was rejected by China. In the western sector, the dispute involves Aksai Chin, a region historically linked to the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir but effectively controlled by China after the 1962 war. The lack of mutually recognized boundary agreements has led to ongoing tensions and occasional military clashes.

The first of the territories, Aksai Chin, is administered by China and claimed by India; it is mostly uninhabited high-altitude wasteland but with some significant pasture lands at the margins. It lies at the intersection of Kashmir, Tibet and Xinjiang, and is crossed by China's Xinjiang-Tibet Highway. The second of the disputed territories, Arunachal Pradesh, is a region south of the McMahon Line. The area was formerly known as the North-East Frontier Agency, and is now administered by India as a state. The McMahon Line was signed between British India and Tibet to form part of the 1914 Simla Convention, but the latter was never ratified by China. China rejected the McMahon Line agreement, stating that Tibet was not independent when it signed the Simla Convention, and maintains a claim over the area.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Sino-Indian border dispute” as border dispute between China and India. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Sino-Indian, border and dispute.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1914, 1962—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Sino-Indian, border and dispute providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Sino-Indian border dispute”, the useful work is to connect “border dispute between China and India” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 26, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q5308408. The Library of Congress control number is sh85122897. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1914 and 1962.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. 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.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Sino-Indian border dispute”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Sino-Indian border dispute primary sources, Sino-Indian border dispute archive and Sino-Indian research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Sino-Indian border dispute”?
  2. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
  3. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Sino-Indian border dispute” 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.