Siachen tragedy could trigger demilitarisation

[dadeechi]

Siachen is easy to demilitarize provided Pakistan agrees to authenticate the present positions which the PA is unwilling to do since they contend that the whole of Kashmir belongs to Pakistan and that we are in illegal occupation of Siachen. They want us to hand over Siachen unconditionally.

If India withdraws without authentication, then it would be near impossible to recapture the posts on the Saltoro Ridge if Pakistan occupies it at some later stage.

That's the crux of the problem.

Absolutely. Authenticating and formalizing the Actual Ground Position Line (AGPL) that divides current positions of Indian and Pakistani troops in the Siachen Glacier region is the crux of the issue.

Pakistan has time and again rejected this proposal from India to demilitarize Siachen.

This shows that Pakistan is not serious in resolving Kashmir issue as it serves it's internal politics.

 

[Parul]

Voted No. Because it's strategically important to India.

 

[XenoEnsi-14]

Demilitarize and rename it Nordistan.

 

[Nilgiri]

It will only be demilitarised when there is trust between the two countries. There is little to none, so there is little chance.

Asking whether it should be demilitarised is part of broader question: should Kashmir be demilitarised? Eventually it should be....but much needs to happen on both sides for that to be a real option.

The technological situation for Siachen will not work till India has supply routes coming from other directions than it currently has ....or India has to trust Pakistan enough to not play re-occupy game where it has speed advantage.....and given Pakistan cannot deal with JuD and JeM domestically in India's eyes....India will not reciprocate with major trust anywhere else.

 

[RISING SUN]

I do wish to demilitarize Siachin but not as per fictional wishes. So I vote for yes.

 

[Tshering22]

There are three countries involved in this: us, Pakistanis and Chinese. Considering that we have the highest peak in our control, it is unlikely that we will de-militarize unilaterally. A repeat of 1987 is least desired and with global distractions amply found around our region, we would not want someone en-cashing this.

However, this will require a serious trilateral meeting between the leaders of each country and in Pakistan's case, their Army chief to sit together and decide.

Although I am completely against it.

Asking whether it should be demilitarised is part of broader question: should Kashmir be demilitarised? Eventually it should be....but much needs to happen on both sides for that to be a real option.

Almost in all countries of the world, border states are militarized. If you are referring to AFSPA, then it is here to stay as long as the natives don't return to their land and are guaranteed the safety and assurance of law. Removing AFSPA is not going to happen simply because of the infestation in the valley is not likely going to change.

Even on the border areas, we have suffered a lot of deaths due to reducing troop numbers and military powers in the 90s on certain occasions. This is a big no-no.

 

[Nilgiri]

Almost in all countries of the world, border states are militarized. If you are referring to AFSPA, then it is here to stay as long as the natives don't return to their land and are guaranteed the safety and assurance of law. Removing AFSPA is not going to happen simply because of the infestation in the valley is not likely going to change.

Even on the border areas, we have suffered a lot of deaths due to reducing troop numbers and military powers in the 90s on certain occasions. This is a big no-no.

Yes thats why I said many things have to change on both sides. It is very long term. Demilitarising unilaterally any part of Kashmir (including Siachen) is quite a foolish unwise thing to do in present circumstances.

Its why I voted no in the poll....since I think it is asking for action in the present scenario.

Everything should be left status quo with adjustments as necessary till India no longer has to worry about trump cards from the other side. Then we can settle this issue once and for all peacefully or through force. Anything else is a big sellout because we are not negotiating from a position where we have fully found our complete potential (economically, militarily, technologically etc.)

Let it also be very clear just what kind of opportunity was missed in 47/48...an example of opportunity cost multiplier effect if I ever saw one.

 

[unbiasedopinion]

Pakistan already offered ceasefire on Siachen now ball is in Indian court what they decide, just over ego issue we put finest soldiers in a hell.

Not required. Pakistan due to its own history of occupying the empty posts cannot be trusted untill they sign the demarcation. If they are so concern about soldiers, they can leave their posts and save their soldiers.

 

[Nilgiri]

untill they sign the demarcation

Even if they sign...it is ink on paper...and nothing more. India is better off playing the long term game, continuing status quo and settling this whole thing on our best possible terms. We must be in no rush for a bad sellout peace, we are not bleeding.

 

[jetray]

Pakistan is effectively the Somalia of S.Asia is just too much to swallow.

yup, you are bang on target.
David Headley revelations will lead to nothing for India because Pakistan is a Somalia in our neighb

 

[unbiasedopinion]

Even if they sign...it is ink on paper...and nothing more. India is better off playing the long term game, continuing status quo and settling this whole thing on our best possible terms. We must be in no rush for a bad sellout peace, we are not bleeding.

Exactly my thoughts as they have gone back on many signed agreements including Shimla/Lahore etc etc. They cannot be trusted so easily.

 

[Tshering22]

Let it also be very clear just what kind of opportunity was missed in 47/48...an example of opportunity cost multiplier effect if I ever saw one.

Or for that matter in 1971. Indira and her piety cost the country dearly.

 

[Scavenger]

India has never attacked any nation i past 1000 years............... you need to ''admit'' that before debating them.........
Pakistan was aggressor in 1948
China was aggressor in 1962
Pakistan was aggressor in 1965
Pakistan was aggressor in 1971
China forced India to get nukes
Pakistan was aggressor in Siachin
Pakistan was aggressor in Kargil
Pakistan will be aggressor in future...................... Same case with China...................


So Pakistan occupy not an inch of Siachin...................?

I am not wrong, please call The Hindu and ask for the clarification. I posted the source link also.

Are you aware Sir's that Pakistan Army from its farthest position in the North can not even visually see the Siachen glacier.

Yes, that is how far they are from Siachen.

All this talk of 'mutual disarmament' is hog wash. There is no 'mutual' here because Pakistan military is not on the Siachen. Your Army has promoted this word in your media to save itself from the embarrassment of admitting this in front of its population.

Do ask any of your veterans or military experts.
@Irfan Baloch @Oscar @Icarus

 

[Maarkhoor]

Pakistan military is not on the Siachen.

This line make me to draw the conclusion that you are the one twho suffering from delusion otherwise prove it with credible sources.

 

[Levina]

Vinaasha kaale viprita budhhi!!
I heard Indian airforce is vacating its airport in leh? and that Indian army is also vacating some base (aslos in Leh) so that it can be used for civilian purposes. They are promised a new place though.
I am skeptical. @Abingdonboy whats happening???

@Levina @AUSTERLITZ @scorpionx @Roybot @Water Car Engineer

why the hell are my notifications not working????
Missed it.