Indian Army:Pakistan welcome to withdraw from Siachen,but we won't withdraw

[Dark Warrior]

Pakistan welcome to withdraw from Siachen, says India's Northern Army Commander.

NDTV: What is it that Indian Army is concerned about with respect to Siachen?

Lt General KT Parnaik: You see, to understand Siachen, I think one needs to be geographically oriented to the region. And let me simply put it, because I'm telling you without a map, but the Siachen Glacier is bounded by the west by the Saltoro Range, which is a very high range and to the east by the Karakoram Range and the Nubra River. So, per se Siachen Glacier is a sort of iced river, which flows in between them. The Saltoro Range actually provides domination of the entire area. If we do not stay on the Saltoro, I won't go into the history of the demarcation of this thing, and how the area north of 9847 was left to the imagination, when they said that the LCA runs northward thence. Now northwards, if you literally and practically take northwards, it is along the Saltoro Range. The Pakistan's contention is that actually northwards means that it runs through the Karakoram Pass. Karakoram Pass is almost, I would say, 45 degrees from 9842. But the issue was that in '80s and '70s and late '70s and '80s, when we realized that a large number of expeditions were being conducted by Pakistan, we did perceive that, if in the excuse of expeditions they come and occupy that area, it would cause a lot of threat to us. So we occupied it in '84. There is a strategic implication of the Saltoro Range and the implication is you have the Pakistanis sitting in the northern areas, which we keep saying is an illegally occupied, it's a Pakistan occupied Kashmir. Now out of the other areas that they have occupied, they have illegally seeded the Aksai Chin and the Shaksgam Valley, Shaksgam Valley lies to the north of the glacier. And if Saltoro Range was held by them, it practically enables them to bridge this Aksai Chin and northern areas gap, which is with China, and also exercise complete control over the Karakoram Pass. Therefore, strategically, it is an important area. And we feel, by holding these areas, would effectively deny approaches to Kargil and Leh. Now, in security parlance, for the country it is of strategic importance, that is one reason. Second reason is that we have had a number of rounds of talks on this. A large number of solutions have been offered. One of the biggest issues that has not been resolved yet is that we insist that for anything to happen in Siachen, the Pakistanis must first accept the actual line of ground position and delineate the line along the positions that are being held by the troops today, both theirs and ours, as is, where is. They do not seem to be amenable to this sort of a thing. They continue to say that we should go back to '71 and '53, when this whole area was not demarcated, so you should vacate it. Don't forget, Kargil happened because of Siachen and why they did Kargil. If you peruse their own records, which are now public, the Kargil War in Pakistan is now in a public domain. And one of the major objectives of what they did in Kargil was to force us to vacate the Siachen Glacier. Now if that is their intent and that is their credibility, it is up to you to judge whether we should be really vacating the Glacier or not.

NDTV: Does the Government understand these strategic implications?

Lt General KT Parnaik: The government fully understands the strategic implications and they are absolutely with us. And all through these talks, they have always projected this issue in the manner that I've told you.

NDTV: And the offer made by Pakistan on Siachen talks?

Lt General KT Parnaik: See, the offer that was made by the Pakistan Army Chief, probably in wake of the tragedy that took place in Gayari, if they find it difficult they are most welcome to withdraw to safe places. And let me assure you Indian Army has no evil designs to set across for those areas and capture those territories. And this aspect is also well known to our leaders. So that is where it rests.

NewsWarrior: Pakistan welcome to withdraw from Siachen, says India's Northern Army Commander

 

[Nassr]

This is the first time that such a senior Indian Army officer has accepted without any compunction that they were the aggressors and that they illegally occupied Siachen, "if in the excuse of expeditions they come and occupy that area, it would cause a lot of threat to us. So we occupied it in '84." They occupied an area because they perceived a threat. It clearly means that the area was not occupied and the Indian Army conducted an act of aggression. It also means that India is certainly not a status-quo power as they famously proclaim.

And they expect that Pakistan should should sign on the maps, accepting and rewarding Indian aggression. Pakistan should never sign on any such documents as this would tantamount to accepting Indian aggression. His statement as I mentioned above is the first Indian confession of a blatant aggression and must be archived for future references.

It was indeed very difficult to understand what the Army Commander was blabbering - if this is the standard of their army commanders, the rest can be well understood.

 

[Bond]

This is the first time that such a senior Indian Army officer has accepted without any compunction that they were the aggressors and that they illegally occupied Siachen, "if in the excuse of expeditions they come and occupy that area, it would cause a lot of threat to us. So we occupied it in '84." They occupied an area because they perceived a threat. It clearly means that the area was not occupied and the Indian Army conducted an act of aggression. It also means that India is certainly not a status-quo power as they famously proclaim.

And they expect that Pakistan should should sign on the maps, accepting and rewarding Indian aggression. Pakistan should never sign on any such documents as this would tantamount to accepting Indian aggression. His statement as I mentioned above is the first Indian confession of a blatant aggression and must be archived for future references.

It was indeed very difficult to understand what the Army Commander was blabbering - if this is the standard of their army commanders, the rest can be well understood.

Go cry a river !!! Both countries were trying to occupie siachin first.. Pakistan failed & India succeeded... IA does not trust pakistan so does not want to vaccate the higher ground. IA has no issues in holding ground- it is PA who wants to now go back to previous status... not going to happen...

 

[karan.1970]

This is the first time that such a senior Indian Army officer has accepted without any compunction that they were the aggressors and that they illegally occupied Siachen, "if in the excuse of expeditions they come and occupy that area, it would cause a lot of threat to us. So we occupied it in '84." They occupied an area because they perceived a threat. It clearly means that the area was not occupied and the Indian Army conducted an act of aggression. It also means that India is certainly not a status-quo power as they famously proclaim.

Cherry picking much.. Read a few lines before the ones you quoted where he mentions that as per LOC agreement going northwards (exact wordings from the agreement) from 9847 puts saltoro in Indian region. So his contention is that they expected Pakistan to come and occupied an unguarded Indian region and hence we preempted the move and sent our troops their first..

It was indeed very difficult to understand what the Army Commander was blabbering - if this is the standard of their army commanders, the rest can be well understood.

talk about standards of Army commanders when half the time, the ones in Pakistan commit a daylight robbery regularly at the national level.. (Military coups)

Lt General KT Parnaik: See, the offer that was made by the Pakistan Army Chief, probably in wake of the tragedy that took place in Gayari, if they find it difficult they are most welcome to withdraw to safe places. And let me assure you Indian Army has no evil designs to set across for those areas and capture those territories. And this aspect is also well known to our leaders. So that is where it rests.

The general just trolled Kayani big time

 

[Solomon2]

The general just trolled Kayani big time

Really? Suppose India accepts Pakistani assurances and withdraws from a position. If Pakistani troops then advance to take the position Pakistani leaders will be lauded by Pakistanis for a successful deception, is that not so? However, if Indian forces tried the same trick after Pakistani forces withdrew from a position, they would be strongly condemned by Indians for violating the country's honor, yes?

At least, that's how I see it. That's how low my expectations of Pakistan have fallen...

 

[Anish1]

Kashmir is an integral historical part of Bharat.
Pakistanis have no business being in kashmir.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

This is the first time that such a senior Indian Army officer has accepted without any compunction that they were the aggressors and that they illegally occupied Siachen, "if in the excuse of expeditions they come and occupy that area, it would cause a lot of threat to us. So we occupied it in '84." They occupied an area because they perceived a threat. It clearly means that the area was not occupied and the Indian Army conducted an act of aggression. It also means that India is certainly not a status-quo power as they famously proclaim.

And they expect that Pakistan should should sign on the maps, accepting and rewarding Indian aggression. Pakistan should never sign on any such documents as this would tantamount to accepting Indian aggression. His statement as I mentioned above is the first Indian confession of a blatant aggression and must be archived for future references.

It was indeed very difficult to understand what the Army Commander was blabbering - if this is the standard of their army commanders, the rest can be well understood.

Does that "passionate" diatribe change or more importantly can it change anything on the ground?

Now about that Agression Canard; there was simply no clear demarcation on the ground during the 1949 conference, just "thence northwards to the glaciers".
So that is the contentious issue now. Though there can be nothing contentious about North (the direction). North cannot be South just as North cannot be NorthEast (unfortunately, that is the direction that Pakistan's claim is pointing towards). So the Compass Rose (sadly) cannot be be bent or distorted out of shape to accommodate that point of view.

What Lt.Gen. Parnaik said at the end is related to "cost of ownership and presence" issues. He has indicated that IA has factored that in to their ideas about Siachen. While Gen. Kiyani after the monstrous tragedy at Giyari was driven to state what he did for precisely the same "cost of ownership and presence" reasons. There seems to be some mis-match on the views of both armies about this point.

Finally the importance of Siachen, inspite of being a barren inhospitable terrain simply lies in being where it is and what it is.

 

[ashokdeiva]

Really? Suppose India accepts Pakistani assurances and withdraws from a position. If Pakistani troops then advance to take the position Pakistani leaders will be lauded by Pakistanis for a successful deception, is that not so? However, if Indian forces tried the same trick after Pakistani forces withdrew from a position, they would be strongly condemned by Indians for violating the country's honor, yes?

At least, that's how I see it. That's how low my expectations of Pakistan have fallen...

you have been a good friend of the Pakistanis for a long time,
but for your above post, let me put it straigt. I as an INDIAN would definetly file a case against INDIA if INDIAN ARMY tries to take the hights that PA with draws. and there are a billion people in INDIA just like me, who take Honor first and Life as next. that is why we have been branded as one of the best, hones and loyal work force around the world

 

[karan.1970]

Really? Suppose India accepts Pakistani assurances and withdraws from a position. If Pakistani troops then advance to take the position Pakistani leaders will be lauded by Pakistanis for a successful deception, is that not so? However, if Indian forces tried the same trick after Pakistani forces withdrew from a position, they would be strongly condemned by Indians for violating the country's honor, yes?

At least, that's how I see it. That's how low my expectations of Pakistan have fallen...

Fully agree.. I think you misunderstood me ...

you have been a good friend of the Pakistanis for a long time,
but for your above post, let me put it straigt. I as an INDIAN would definetly file a case against INDIA if INDIAN ARMY tries to take the hights that PA with draws. and there are a billion people in INDIA just like me, who take Honor first and Life as next. that is why we have been branded as one of the best, hones and loyal work force around the world

Dont agree.. If India pulls a Kargil (successful one and not like the Kargil Pakistan did ), most of the population will appalaud the Indian Military and not protest. Prior to 1999, yes you would have been right.. But no longer.. 1999 made Pakistani establishment an enemy of the Indian citizens which earlier used to be only the enemey of the state. 26/11 was the last nail in the coffin after that..

 

[third eye]

you have been a good friend of the Pakistanis for a long time,
but for your above post, let me put it straigt. I as an INDIAN would definetly file a case against INDIA if INDIAN ARMY tries to take the hights that PA with draws. and there are a billion people in INDIA just like me, who take Honor first and Life as next. that is why we have been branded as one of the best, hones and loyal work force around the world

The point intended to be made is taken.

As regards the case to be filed .. well well.

 

[Machoman]

Kashmir is an integral historical part of Bharat.
Pakistanis have no business being in kashmir.

huh I would recommend don't bring Kashmir into this thread....

 

[gilaan]

Really? Suppose India accepts Pakistani assurances and withdraws from a position. If Pakistani troops then advance to take the position Pakistani leaders will be lauded by Pakistanis for a successful deception, is that not so? However, if Indian forces tried the same trick after Pakistani forces withdrew from a position, they would be strongly condemned by Indians for violating the country's honor, yes?

At least, that's how I see it. That's how low my expectations of Pakistan have fallen...

point dude

 

[third eye]

The point made by the General is correct - loud & clear.

 

[K-Xeroid]

That so Warm statements from Lt General KT Parnaik are enough to quiet few personalities in media those were representing this whole idea after Giyari incident. We expected same twisted answer from saint Generals of our nieghbouring country.

 

[Shardul.....the lion]

Reverse the situation, Imagine

IF Pakistan is strongest country economically and militarily as compared to India, what would a stronger Pakistan done?

I am sure they would have kept on attacking not only siachen or kargil but would have tried to capture entire Kashmir.

Hence, Until and unless Pakistani army accepts the actual positions in Siachen, and demarcates them, no need to vacate the glacier.