What's new

India’s interest compromised in Siachen

ajtr

BANNED
Joined
May 25, 2010
Messages
9,357
Reaction score
0
India’s interest compromised in Siachen

By Prakash Chandra Katoch on October 24, 2012

The Indian government is acting against the interests of the country by surreptitiously agreeing to a deal with Pakistan according to which it will withdraw troops from Siachen Glacier, the command of which gives India immense strategic advantages.

India is committing a strategic blunder by quietly agreeing to Pakistan’s demand for withdrawing from Saltoro Ridge in Siachen glacier. The Indian public and Parliament have been kept in the dark. A backroom deal has been concluded through questionable intermediaries with close ties to Pakistan.


Since November 2011, militaries of both India and Pakistan have held several rounds of talks to boost confidence-building measures. These meetings were held in Dubai (20-21 November 2011), Bangkok (23-25 February 2012) and Lahore (23-25 September 2012). Additionally, working group meetings took place in Chiang Mai (21 April 2012) and Palo Alto (30-31 July 2012). In the Track 2 round held in Lahore in September 2012, India and Pakistan signed an agreement to demilitarise Siachen despite the grave reservations of some members of the Indian delegation. The members who expressed reservations include a former ambassador, a former intelligence officer and two former officers from the Army and the Navy.

The decision to demilitarise, or rather withdraw from Siachen has been taken arbitrarily at the highest political level disregarding strong objections by successive army chiefs including the current chief, General Bikram Singh. He has even made a statement to the media opposing demilitarisation of the glacier. The agreement mainly includes setting up a joint commission to delineate the line beyond NJ 9842, the map coordinate south of the incompletely demarcated disputed territory; joint authentication of present ground positions; determination of places for redeployment; disengagement and demilitarisation in a mutually acceptable time frame, and cooperative monitoring of activities to ensure transparency. The agreement states that reoccupation cannot be done speedily. This is absurd as it negates India’s ability to use helicopters for a lightning occupation. This gives Pakistan a huge advantage because the western flanks and glacial valleys of the Saltoro ridge are controlled by Pakistan. They do not have snow during summer and can be reached under cover of darkness and on foot in bad weather. The provision for technical surveillance is a red herring because of the tough terrain and extreme weather. It is important to remember that because of these conditions even the US with all its technical resources was surprised by India’s nuclear tests of 1998.

The Indian Government briefed the Lahore Track 2 team to keep in mind the Army’s stand that further talks would only be taken up after positions of both sides were authenticated on ground. The Indian Army’s concerns have clearly been ignored. The strategic importance of the Saltoro Ridge, especially in relation to Gilgit-Baltistan, Northern Areas, Shaksgam and Wakhan Corridor has been systematically obfuscated by a Government that retains far too much of power over electronic and print media. The Government has carried out a massive public relations exercise using gullible television channels to transmit the message that Siachen has no strategic significance. At one point, one so-called expert claimed that India holds the Karakoram Pass, which is a blatant lie. National dailies have refused to publish articles highlighting the enormous strategic disadvantage of withdrawing from Siachen. Similarly, this issue has not been debated on national television. There are rumours that the media is muffling any discussion on Siachen on the instructions of the Government.

The selection of Indian delegates who visited Lahore was incongruous. None of them had served in Siachen, not even the six army officers who were part of the delegation. The negotiating team did not bother to visit the conflict zone despite months of parleys with Pakistani officials at beautiful locations. Two former military officers in the delegation are infamous for their political connections. It is rumored that the Air Force four star officer is to be rewarded with an ambassadorship or governorship while the one star army officer is to be given another bag of carrots for towing the official line.

It is surmised that the Government is aiming for a Nobel Peace Prize to recover the legitimacy that it has lost after a succession of scandals. The Indian military has been castrated and is not allowed to state its views. Veterans who oppose demilitarisation are denied media forums. It is inconceivable that any other major power would shut its military out of the decision-making and discourse the way India is doing at the moment.

Jehangir Karamat, the former army chief heading the Pakistani delegation, understands the strategic significance of Saltoro unlike his Indian counterparts. Under his leadership, Pakistan has grabbed the strategic opportunity to attain all its key goals. The Atlantic Council of Canada that acted as the peace broker has promptly put out the news on the net. Shuja Nawaz, a Pakistani strategic analyst who heads the South Asia Center at the Atlantic Council of the US, has close relations his Canadian counterparts. More worryingly, he has close ties with the Pakistani military and is said to be a trusted advisor to both Genaral Kayani and General Musharraf. Indians have long distrusted the Atlantic Council, which is perceived to be in bed with the Pakistani military and which has never really concluded its cold war love affair with Pakistan. It is incredible that India should agree to the Atlantic Council as a mediator as it is unlikely to be a disinterested party and, as per the old adage, Caesar’s wife must be above suspicion.

The Line of Control between India and Pakistan was originally drawn on a 1:250,000 map with a thick sketch pen without military advice. This has left an ambiguity as to the location of any given point on this line to the tune of about a hundred metres. Furthermore, the line does not follow ridge lines creating a source of constant and persisting hostility and acrimony. The same thick pen may be used once again in Siachen to devastating effect. A withdrawal from Siachen would facilitate further Pakistani incursions into Kashmir and put Ladadh, the Buddhist part of the state, under threat.

Gen Pervez Musharraf, the former Pakistani president and army chief, mentions in his autobiography In The line of Fire, that he was planning to put a battalion on Saltoro Ridge. Indian officers preempted his move. Since 1984, Pakistan has been trying to control Siachen. Pakistan invaded India in 1999 to control Kargil and cut off Siachen. Pakistan is attempting to eradicate its strategic disadvantage through both military and non military measures. People in Shia dominated Baltistan, the place close to Siachen Glacier, are being forcibly converted to Sunni Islam. The Pakistani state often sponsors Shia massacres. The idea is to create a strong base for Pakistani troops to advance from when they make their next move.

If India withdraws from Siachen, the new defense line will need additional troops. The new number will be many times the number of troops holding Siachen presently and the costs to the exchequer will increase exponentially. The joint agreement innocuously says in Annexure II, “Small-scale intrusions are neither significant nor sustainable”. This is absurd. Small scale intrusions can easily take place undetected in areas devoid of snow during summer months. They can then be staging posts for infiltration. The Indian army lost the flower of its youth in 1999 when Pakistani troops intruded to take the heights in Kargil. With no defense line in Siachen, Ladakh will be open to infiltration. Irregulars and members of the Taliban will be able to cross into territory that belongs to India, while Pakistan will deny culpability for ‘non-state-actors’. General Musharraf once declared that there would be many more Kargils in the future. Withdrawing from Siachen will make the general’s declaration a reality.

The public and the parliament have the right to ask the government why the Siachen issue has not been debated publicly and in the parliament. What exactly has Pakistan done to earn Indian trust? Has the anti-India terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and ****************** Kashmir been dismantled? Has any progress been made in punishing the perpetrators of the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks? Has the Government forgotten that Pakistan has repeatedly double crossed us? During a visit by a delegation from Pakistan to discuss confidence building measures, why was the Pakistan Army breaching the ceasefire? Why is Pakistan arming and stoking insurgencies in India? Why is the Pakistani intelligence trying to revive terrorism in Punjab? Why do American think tanks repeatedly state that Pakistan is the most dangerous place in the world? What does India gain from giving away Siachen?

This article was first published in Fair Observer.

(Photo Courtesy: anupkumarchaturvedi.com)
 
Looks like another BS article from some alternative media. Does anyone know if Fair Observer is even legitimate? I have never heard of this journal. Nor has it been cited anywhere. Who was the writer, and what is his credibility? If the information is so secretive, how did it get out? And what is his source? All of this half baked nonsense.
 
===============================================


Siachen: To hold or to fold?
There have been many discussions on the need to de-militarise the Siachen Glacier. Why have India and Pakistan suddenly begun to believe that they were mistaken in holding on to the region all this while? What are the possible ramifications of de-militarising this strategic location?
BY Brigadier (Retd.) Xerxes Adrianwalla
CHIEF OF CIS AND GROUP SECURITY OF THE MAHINDRA GROUP



In Siachen, the whistling winter wind can turn a temperature of −50 °C to a vicious wind chill of −80 °C where dropping gloves can mean losing fingers. Here, weather takes a far greater toll than the enemy; a man loses 10 years of his life by just being there. This is the reality of the harsh and unforgiving battlefield at the top of the world, that India and Pakistan are fighting over. Indian soldiers permanently man posts above 20,000 feet in these conditions, and have done so for almost 30 years.

Is it worth the trouble? Recently, there has been much talk and Track II agreements on the need to demilitarise the Siachen Glacier. These moves appear to originate mainly from Pakistani Army Chief Gen A.P.Kayani, who lost 139 Pakistani troops in an avalanche at Gayari earlier this year. Many in India, including prolific strategic writers, subscribe to the demilitarization view and a Track II diplomacy initiative has ostensibly been signed.

What has changed in Indo-Pakistan attitudes towards the region – from the 1949 Karachi Agreement and the 1972 Simla Agreement – that the two countries now suddenly realize they were mistaken in holding on to Siachen all along?

The genesis of the conflict lies in the Pakistan-sponsored ‘tribal invasion’ of Kashmir after the Partition when what is today Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (***) came into existence. The Line of Control delineated by the UN in 1949 became the Karachi Agreement, which did not clearly mention who controlled the glacier, merely stating that from NJ9842 (a map coordinate) the boundary would proceed “thence north to the glaciers.” UN officials presumed there would be no dispute between India and Pakistan over such a cold and barren region. The 1972 Simla Agreement too glossed over the issue.

Prior to 1984, neither India nor Pakistan had any permanent presence in the area. However cartographic aggression by Pakistan, mountaineering expeditions and counter-expeditions by both countries resulted in a conflict which began in 1984 with India’s successful Operation Meghdoot, during which it wrested control of the Siachen Glacier (unoccupied and not demarcated area). India has established control over all of the 70 km-long Siachen Glacier, its tributary glaciers, as well as the three main passes of the Saltoro Ridge immediately west of the glacier. This gives India the tactical advantage of holding the high ground.

After 1984, Pakistanis launched several attempts to displace the Indian forces from these heights, but with little success. The most well known was in 1987, when the attack was masterminded by Pervez Musharraf (later President of Pakistan) heading an elite Special Services Group commando unit. The Pakistan attack was repulsed and the positions remained the same. Naib Subedar Bana Singh, who in a daring daylight raid, assaulted and captured a Pakistan post atop a 22,000 foot (6,700 m) peak, now named Bana Post, after climbing a 457 m (1500 feet) ice cliff face, was awarded the Param Vir Chakra. He lived, but according to government statistics, 846 other Indian soldiers have been killed on the glacier due to weather and enemy action since 1984.

There are strategic and tactical reasons why this desolate and bitterly cold, windswept strip of ice is so important to both countries. There is the ideal of a unified Kashmir, of course, and protection of India’s borders, but also the potential domination of Buddhist Ladakh by the Chinese and further infiltration of terrorists from Pakistan if India was to vacate Siachen. Down to brass tacks, however, it is about sovereignty: India cannot let go of such hard-fought and gained territory.

Demilitarization may seem a noble – or sinister – idea. Recently it was propagated by a group of strategic thinkers with multiple views on how this can be managed. But India must understand the ramifications of such a move:

First, the Line of Control (LoC) does not have the recognition of an international border. It is disputed, volatile and permanently manned by troops. The Siachen Glacier is simply a glossed over extension of the LoC and the line from NJ9842 to Siachen is referred to as the actual ground position line (AGPL), which is exactly that: you own what you occupy. Here, possession is definitely nine-tenths of the law.

Second, in the past Pakistan has shown great duplicity in its approach to disputed territory; when expedient it could easily violate a signed agreement and grab and hold these commanding heights. Expelling intruders is more costly than holding these heights; the Kargil adventure illustrates this dramatically.

Regardless of whether the Track II discussions have resulted in proposals urging for demilitarization of Siachen, there is no substantial national or parliamentary debate on the subject. Signing away such an important tract of territory held at great cost, without a practical dialogue, will be inappropriate and insulting to those Indian soldiers who have held these heights at great cost all these years.

There have been many suggestions on how such demilitarization can be made foolproof to ensure Pakistan does not encroach on posts vacated by India – including the right to take military action. But in this part of the world, might is right and holding these heights is vital.

Sometime in the distant future, when the LoC is converted to an actual border, perhaps India can consider a move to demilitarize Siachen. Till then, India simply has to keep holding it.

Xerxes Adrianwalla is a retired Brigadier of the Indian Army and a regular contributor to Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations.

This feature was written exclusively for Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations. You can read more exclusive features here.


=================================================


Solution to siachin is near seems track-2 negotiations worked.Well done PM manmohan singh.we can now look forward for his early visit to pakistan in late november or in early December to seal the siachin deal............................:yahoo:

Looks like another BS article from some alternative media. Does anyone know if Fair Observer is even legitimate? I have never heard of this journal. Nor has it been cited anywhere. Who was the writer, and what is his credibility? If the information is so secretive, how did it get out? And what is his source? All of this half baked nonsense.
I wont doubt Lt. gen. Prakash Chandra Katoch's words.He is an expert voice on siachin matters........
 
congrats to fair observer in creating another ajtr standards of bs.

not gonno happen:disagree:
this is the 4th article i ve posted in last 4 days and 2nd thread on siachin all dealing with track-2 negotiations on siachin....some deal is nearly up for grab.Otherwise there wouldnt have been this sudden hungama by the expert voice on siachin in media.
 
I dont even read threads started by AJTR, such a waste of internet space.....

I wonder if anyone on this planet takes you seriously!!
BS is spouted by the pdf indians not by the general who himself served in siachin and is well known for his voice on siachin in reputed media like the hindu and outlook.
 
I dont even read threads started by AJTR, such a waste of internet space.....

I wonder if anyone on this planet takes you seriously!!

Lives in India but hates India :lol:
Starts thread to see the heated arguments btw Indians and Pakistanis .
 
this is the 4th article i ve posted in last 4 days and 2nd thread on siachin all dealing with track-2 negotiations on siachin....some deal is nearly up for grab.Otherwise there wouldnt have been this sudden hungama by the expert voice on siachin in media.
in simple words i can say its a political suicide and u might see a mid term elections in india before such deal.

neither upa is that stupid nor such articles based on internal "sources" has any relevance.
 
As usual some Indians are coming up with monologues!

Personal attacks and personal attacks... And still people say AJTR baits them.
 
in simple words i can say its a political suicide and u might see a mid term elections in india before such deal.

neither upa is that stupid nor such articles based on internal "sources" has any relevance.
Vajpayee did lahore bus yatra did you see mid term election on that?MMS is always known for clinching big deals. first term it was economy.2nd term it was civil nuke deal 3rd term its siachin deal.................:yahoo:
 
Vajpayee did lahore bus yatra did you see mid term election on that?MMS is always known for clinching big deals. first term it was economy.2nd term it was civil nuke deal 3rd term its siachin deal.................:yahoo:

a bus yatra comparison with demilitarization of siachin and u want ppl to take u and this article seriously ?

anyways if this article makes u happy ..continue :lol:
 
India-Pakistan CBMs Project:Siachen Proposal

There was further discussion on the proposal for the demilitarisation of the region and for
stringent and cooperative monitoring and verification of this. After considerable
discussion a suggestion achieved consensus which seeks to have these activities occur as
part of an overall package. Recognising that both countries have a divergence of views,
it was felt that such an approach is more likely to create forward movement.

Accordingly, as a part of the comprehensive resolution of the Siachen dispute, and
notwithstanding the claims of each country, both sides should agree to withdraw from
the conflict area while retaining the option of punitive action should the other side renege
on the commitments. The following clear package of integrated and inter-linked
stipulations were laid down for the demilitarisation of the area and delineation of the line:

• Set up a joint commission to delineate the line beyond NJ 9842, consistent with
existing Agreements;
• The present ground positions would be jointly recorded and the records
exchanged;
• The determination of the places to which redeployment will be affected would be
jointly agreed;
• Disengagement and demilitarization would occur in accordance with a mutually
acceptable time frame to be agreed (see Annex 1);
• Prior to withdrawal, each side will undertake to remove munitions and other
military equipment and waste from areas of its control; and
• Ongoing cooperative monitoring of these activities and the resulting demilitarized
zone would be agreed to ensure/assure transparency (see Annex 2).
In keeping with the Simla Agreement and the Lahore Declaration both sides should
undertake that resolution of this issue is a bilateral matter and that there will be no change
in the status of the area and also that no personnel of any third country will be permitted
within it unless cleared by the two countries jointly.Annex 1
Suggested Time Frame for Demilitarisation
Schedule for Demilitarisation
Operational principles:
• Establish a Joint Working Group to recommend detailed re-deployment and
oversee implementation of the process.
• Variability in process is likely due to frequently changing weather conditions.
Weather forces disengagement to be conducted during the summer season (May –
September)
Determination of the place (s) to which redeployment will be effected and the time frame
to be recommended by the Joint Working Group.
Mechanism for joint management of the demilitarized zone to be recommended by the
Joint Working Group.
Possible Phases of Demilitarisation (with appropriate waste and munitions removal at
each phase)
Phase 1: Withdraw medium artillery located near Base Camps (e.g., Dzingrulma, Gyari)
Phase 2: Withdraw troops and field artillery from Northern, Central, and Southern
battalion sub-sectors
• Forward posts, including crew-served weapons posts
• Declare staging camps where troops from forward positions will transit through in
the process of re-deployment
• Dismantle camps after withdrawal
Phase 3: Withdraw from forward logistics camps on or near the Glacier
Phase 4: Dismantle remaining logistics camps
Phase 5: Withdraw from base camps
Phase 6: Dismantle or convert base camps to scientific/civil use
Ongoing: Cooperative monitoring and verification of demilitarization (see Annex 3)Annex 2
Monitoring and Verification of the Demilitarisation
Overall Concept
• Monitoring initially, by national technical means
• Phase 1: Monitoring and verification of disengagement during the establishment
of the DMZ
o Verify that posts, logistics centers, and base camps vacated
• Phase 2: Post-disengagement monitoring of the DMZ
o Verify that military personnel and equipment do not re-enter the DMZ
• On an ongoing basis, the primary monitoring and verification mechanisms will be
both bilateral and cooperative
Goal is to verify withdrawal and dismantlement of military facilities
• Visual: The withdrawal from Indian and Pakistani posts within line of sight of
each other is to be coordinated so each side can observe the activities of the other.
Ammunition and heavy weapons which cannot be moved immediately will be
temporarily stored in-place and subject to joint verification and monitoring.
• Joint Aerial Reconnaissance: A pair of Indian and Pakistani helicopters will
rendezvous at an agreed location and then fly together along the Forward Battle
Positions in the agreed sector to visually verify and photographically record
withdrawal and dismantlement of post or logistics camp.
• On-site inspection: Both sides have the right to request that its representative land
by helicopter at a location to confirm withdrawal and dismantlement.
• Unilateral activities: Both sides should agree not to interfere with the other’s
national technical means
Goal of detecting illicit re-occupation of positions within the DMZ
• Monitoring and verification considerations:
o Nothing happens quickly on Siachen; logistics and weather drive all
o The possibility of a quick, stealthy reoccupation, without an air bridge, is
remote
 Aerial operations are obvious
 Small-scale intrusions are neither significant nor sustainable
• Monitoring and verification should focus on logistics
o All Indian logistics flows through Dzingrulma
o Pakistan has multiple logistics routes through civilian villages
 

Back
Top Bottom