Yes. I can indeed ask. But the reality is that China has not caused Galwan clash because India built up. China however noted that India's fatal excursion into Galwan was preceeded by Infrastructure buildup.4. Status quo ante means both sides completely pull back from the area except for PLA's Kongka LA post and India's Hot Springs Post. Gen. Naravane has been specifically saying India is working towards disengagement, deescalation, and de-induction. Disengagement means both sides pull back forward camps and create distance betwween troops, often using temporary buffer zones. This has been done at most locations with the exception of Gogra(which multiple sources have said is a problem area). deescalation means moving back rear deployments etc. to peacetime locations. Honestly, I don't think that will happen anytime soon.
5, The 1993 agreement specifically was against millitarizing the LAC. You can ask the same question about why China objected to Indian presence and infrastructure construction in Galwan and other areas in the Talks.
You routinely bring this so as to draw some parallel.
You don't see China trying to conduct talks with India regarding India's buildup ( for what it's worth), do you?
China is not interested in any talks for the time being and has told India to "be happy with what has been achieved so far". I see that as China disappointing a very desperate India.