Twenty-five rounds of talks between Indian and Chinese military commanders helped achieve disengagement along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), but a return to normal bilateral relations hinges on maintaining peace along the border and addressing the widening trade imbalance, former Foreign Secretary and Rajya Sabha MP Harsh Vardhan Shringla has said.Speaking at a conversation with Asia Society president and CEO Kevin Rudd on ‘Asia’s Geopolitical Future’, Shringla said India had maintained a firm position after the 2020 border clashes, making it clear that normal relations could not resume without a resolution of the issues arising from the confrontation.”What struck me was the sort of firmness with which this issue was dealt with on the Indian side. We did not relent to the fact that until and unless there is a proper resolution of the issues that transpired in 2020, we would not be able to go forward with a normal bilateral relationship,” he said.The disengagement process was concluded in October 2024 following detailed negotiations between military commanders on the ground, he said, adding that the decision to keep the process at the military level helped prevent escalation.“We did not escalate the situation at the capitals. We did not involve… direct talks between diplomats and leaders. We actually tossed that to the commanders on the ground,” Shringla said, describing the 25 rounds of discussions as instrumental in working out a mutually satisfactory disengagement.He reiterated that peace and tranquillity in the border areas remained central to India’s approach towards China. Referring to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s position, Shringla said the maintenance of peace along the border was essential for the development of bilateral relations.The two countries had since made some progress towards stabilisation, with the resumption of direct flights, the easing of visa restrictions, the reopening of border trade at certain points and the restoration of pilgrimage arrangements, he said.However, Shringla cautioned against equating these steps with full normalisation, stressing that sustained efforts to prevent another border confrontation and greater reciprocity in market access were essential to moving the relationship forward.He cited the widening trade imbalance as a major concern, noting that bilateral trade stood at around $150 billion, while Indian exports to China accounted for only about $20 billion.“This is the trade deficit that is growing,” he said, while pointing to a 36 per cent spurt in Indian exports during the previous quarter as a positive development.“There are structural issues that need to be addressed,” he said, adding that both sides needed to work towards a more balanced economic relationship.Shringla described the current state of ties as one of “a certain level of stabilisation”, but said much more needed to be done to manage friction and prevent differences from escalating into disputes.“We need to see how we can manage any friction so that situations don’t develop into disputes and both sides can move towards a process of normalisation that, I think, existed before 2020,” he said.The discussion also touched on India’s economic and strategic challenges in its relationship with the United States, particularly over tariffs and Washington’s pressure on New Delhi to reduce its purchases of Russian oil.Shringla said India had faced tariffs exceeding 50 per cent at one point under US President Donald Trump’s administration before an interim arrangement brought them down to 18 per cent. However, he warned that uncertainty over sanctions and other trade measures could undermine the benefits of any bilateral trade agreement.“The question really is that can we conclude a deal and then find suddenly that our tariffs are not what we concluded, but it’s 100 per cent more or 50 per cent more or 20 per cent more,” he said.He cited the US sanctions framework targeting countries buying Russian oil, along with investigations into forced labour and excess industrial capacity, as factors adding to uncertainty for Indian exporters.On energy security, Shringla said India had diversified its sources of supply, increasing purchases from the US and countries such as Nigeria, Australia, Brazil and Guyana. However, he warned that an abrupt halt to Russian oil imports would have serious consequences for domestic inflation and global energy markets.India had accounted for a substantial share of Russian oil purchases in recent years, he said, adding that stopping imports of more than two million barrels a day could create significant supply pressures.“If you were to stop purchase of Russian oil, you would have a serious energy situation in your hands,” Shringla said, warning that energy prices could rise sharply, affecting inflation and global energy security.