Talks with no outcome

[M. Sarmad]

You have old statistics Azlan.
Indian army gets to zero high altitude casualties in Siachen Glacier
Indian army gets to zero high altitude casualties in Siachen Glacier
The frostbite and other issues have been mitigated by a large extent because of DRDO creating Indian HAPO and other devices. IA getting more Arctic snow gear.
IA has achieved zero casualty rate in Siachen barring unfortunate incidences like landslide.

" For the first time, Army finally seems to have the measure of the Glacier. Siachen Glacier: Siachen no longer hurts. That's the message from the Indian Army, which has now ensured that none of its troops perishes on the treacherous battlefield. For the first time since it paratrooped to the Sia La heights in 1984 to pre-empt a Pakistani march into Siachen, the Army finally seems to have the measure of the Glacier. "There has been no death in the last one year," Dr Latika, a doctor at the High-Altitude Medical Research Centre"
So that is your source ?? a report from a military journal claiming that a doctor said so ? A report suggesting that only 700 troops have died since 1984 ?

Honestly have you ever been to the area? Acclimatization at such altitudes is medically not possible and the natural hazards causing casualities are simply beyond human control

Do you know that serving in Siachen is voluntary?

I know that very well ... Suicide bombing is also not mandatory !! hope you understand .. Even If someone is ready to sacrifice his life for his purpose , Unnecessary wastage of life should be avoided

 

[Contrarian]

" For the first time, Army finally seems to have the measure of the Glacier. Siachen Glacier: Siachen no longer hurts. That's the message from the Indian Army, which has now ensured that none of its troops perishes on the treacherous battlefield. For the first time since it paratrooped to the Sia La heights in 1984 to pre-empt a Pakistani march into Siachen, the Army finally seems to have the measure of the Glacier. "There has been no death in the last one year," Dr Latika, a doctor at the High-Altitude Medical Research Centre"
So that is your source ?? a report from a military journal claiming that a doctor said so ? A report suggesting that only 700 troops have died since 1984 ?

Since the Army which actually serves there believes that it is now okay to be present at Siachen and that its no longer half as hurting as it used to be, who are the others to contest their professional advice. As you well know IA does not indulge in politics. This is their sole job.

Honestly have you ever been to the area? Acclimatization at such altitudes is medically not possible and the natural hazards causing casualities are simply beyond human control

Yes ofcourse. The thousands of people employed to make sure soldiers in Siachen are as less vulnerable as can be disagree with you. As does the report. If you choose to disregard reports then I cant help you.

I know that very well ... Suicide bombing is also not mandatory !! hope you understand .. Even If someone is ready to sacrifice his life for his purpose , Unnecessary wastage of life should be avoided

It was the Army which vetoed the GoI's wish to demilitarize Siachen. If they deem it as worthy of holding, and if they deem that its human cost can be managed, I see no reason to ask otherwise of GoI.

Lastly, since its Pakistan that we are dealing with, it makes no sense to vacate Siachen just to realize that PA has taken over after India left. Agreements with Pakistan are not worth the paper they are written on. Next thing you know PA will feign innocence and say 'non state actors' are occupying Siachen.

 

[M. Sarmad]

As you well know IA does not indulge in politics. This is their sole job

It was the Army which vetoed the GoI's wish to demilitarize Siachen

IA does not indulge in politics but it can "veto" against the "wishes" of political governmenet !!! Dont you think that these statements are somewhat self-contradicting ?

Lastly, since its Pakistan that we are dealing with, it makes no sense to vacate Siachen just to realize that PA has taken over after India left. Agreements with Pakistan are not worth the paper they are written on. Next thing you know PA will feign innocence and say 'non state actors' are occupying Siachen.

Now I get it . You are just another hate-filled War monger . Dont worry , we have a plenty of them too . And all of you will surely lead us to a ultimate self-destruction

 

[livingdead]

@Azlan Haider the cost of reoccupying siachen will be unbearably high for us if PA decides to occupy it.
We used to vacate kargil as a mutual convention too, in winter.

 

[genmirajborgza786]

.

Two different points that need raising. The first one pertains to the present AGPL & the NE orientation of that line. That is reasonable since the Saltoro constitutes the watershed which would be a main principle in boundary demarcation. The Indian position is not unjustified. Militarily too, that is a defensible position.

The second and more important point is what @Contrarian alluded to. Why should India agree to give something it already controls? For what purpose? What is Pakistan offering in return? I remember having such a discussion with you once before & the position articulated then is still valid. What is Pakistan bringing to the table in return for any compromise that they may want?

that's for you to tell me what does India wants in return ? since I have given the point of what Pakistan desires, so unless you don't give me an idea of what India would like in return for a compromise, & that only fair as its a give & take world after all. but for that you will have to at least say what you expect in return because if you don't say how will one know ? so what does India wants in return ?

 

[M. Sarmad]

@Azlan Haider the cost of reoccupying siachen will be unbearably high for us if PA decides to occupy it.
We used to vacate kargil as a mutual convention too, in winter.

Dont you think that we should get over with our "paranoia" now ?
Ofcourse only a withdrawal by both sides is being suggested by our govt.
Both of us have enough nukes to "ensure" any non-aggression by the other
We shoud think about the betterment of our future generations now

 

[Bang Galore]

.

that for you to tell me what does India wants in return ? since I have given the point of what Pakistan desires, so unless you don't give me an idea of what India would like in return for a compromise, that only fair as its a give & take world after all. but for that you will have to at least say what do you expect in return because if you don't say how will one know ? ,so what does India wants in return ?

That's a bit odd, I would expect someone asking for something to have a price in mind. In any case, a demilitarisation of Siachen would probably be conditional on the acceptance of the LC as IB, whether soft or not. Further, it would be dependent on an overall settlement of Kashmir on the general basis of the Musharraf-MMS talks and an absolute clampdown on groups within Pakistan that might try to put a spoke in an agreement. The agreement would have to take on board all the relevant power centres within Pakistan and give a reasonable guarantee of dealing harshly with anyone who steps out of line.

 

[Contrarian]

IA does not indulge in politics but it can "veto" against the "wishes" of political governmenet !!! Dont you think that these statements are somewhat self-contradicting ?

Ofcourse not.
Please dont look at the social situation/political hierarchy with Pakistani cultural lenses.

The standard protocol is that(of any Responsible Government in the world) is if GoI wants something, it first consults all the stake holders before it takes a final call.
In this case, the biggest stake holder is the Indian Army, which would be called on to capture Siachen again were it to fall in Pakistani hands.

The Army and indeed all Services disagreed that India should settle on Siachen issue because of multiple factors.

And unlike Pakistan where Pakistan Army's massive funding comes only because of its relevance to Kashmir and the constant threat of India, Indian Army remains apolitical at all times and abides by any and all orders of the GoI.

The GoI and IA do not have an adversarial relationship. IA is subservient to GoI in each and every form.
In this case, the Army was called upon to render professional advice. The GoI listened to that advice.
Had the GoI still ordered the Army to march out of Siachen, that is exactly what would have happened without a moments delay.

Now I get it . You are just another hate-filled War monger . Dont worry , we have a plenty of them too . And all of you will surely lead us to a ultimate self-destruction

Ad hominem's are usually pointless on web boards.
However what I mentioned is exactly the reasons the Army pointed out.
That any agreement with Pakistan or commitment of Pakistani Govt is not worth the paper it is written on. Any of Pakistani institutions can violate that and the Pakistani Govt will simply feign innocence at best and helplessness at worst.

The Kargil episode was the single largest factor why even GoI agreed to the Army's assessment. That if India withdraws, regardless of any assurance by the Govt of Pakistan, the Pakistani Army would simply waltz in the glacier and when confronted would claim that the 'non state actors/mujahideen/fidayeen/etc/etc' are involved and PA or Pakistan has nothing to do with it. This is an established precedent used multiple times by Pakistani establishment.

In such situation the net loss would be India's and it would be a massive loss. Pakistan and its Army are simply not credible enough to be trusted.

The fact that you wish for India to disregard all of this either makes us think that you consider us all as fools or worse.

 

[livingdead]

Dont you think that we should get over with our "paranoia" now ?
Ofcourse only a withdrawal by both sides is being suggested by our govt.
Both of us have enough nukes to "ensure" any non-aggression by the other
We shoud think about the betterment of our future generations now

Its not paranoia, its lack of mutual trust. If I say pakistan will attack India in punjab, that will be paranoia. These lands are unhabited, and by the time you detect intrusion, its too late.

Without trust, both of us will be sending endless expedition to siachen. And what if china decides it was part of their chan empire.
Nukes are for deterrent, but nukes did not prevent kargil.

We will need some iron clad guarantee from a 3rd party from a bigger power may be.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Nukes are for deterrent, but nukes did not prevent kargil.

But the nukes did prevent Kargil conflict from escalating into a full scale war
Mutual Trust is the real problem ..
Sooner or later , we have to develop this trust
And more importantly we need to develop some mutual respect

 

[livingdead]

But the nukes did prevent Kargil conflict from escalating into a full scale war
Mutual Trust is the real problem ..
Sooner or later , we have to develop this trust
And more importantly we need to develop some mutual respect

Exactly, nukes prevented kargil from escalating, another siachen, we wont be able to expand the threatre( like we did in 65 to release pressure on kashmir) and focus on siachen only.

So siachen will be a localized conflict, with huge loss of manpower for us, with zero guarantee of ever getting it( siachen is near impossible take back compared to kargil).

Mutual trust is the problem, I think both sides recognize it. IA prefers small casualty over a period of time due to elements (which can be minimized by better resources) than fighting a war every 10 years and ending up with massive casualty.

 

[M. Sarmad]

@hinduguy
And then you say its not paranoia
Seriously you guys think that we like to fight ??
Yes we do seek a solution to Kashmir dispute , but we want it to be peaceful

 

[livingdead]

@hinduguy
And then you say its not paranoia
Seriously you guys think that we like to fight ??
Yes we do seek a solution to Kashmir dispute , but we want it to be peaceful

I did not say you like to fight.I dont want to demonize PA too. They want best for their country.
It makes a lot of logical sense to take siachen and secure the route with china. Only thing that can prevent a general from executing the idea is a strong civilian control.

Pakistan does not have that, your democracy is fragile, the roots of civilian supremacy is not deep enough.
So another siachen and NS will say 'oops we did it again' and probably run away to KSA.

 

[M. Sarmad]

@hinduguy
What solution do you suggest ?

 

[livingdead]

@hinduguy
What solution do you suggest ?

From India side, wait and watch for next 20 years. Normalize relation with pakistan so that we are comfortable with each other. More people to people contact.
More army to army contact, joint exercises, joint border management.
That will bring trust and then we will be able to sign a paper.

I think in 20 years, civilian leadership in pakistan will be strong enough to be called only power center. Nobody will be congratulating a general for not interfering(like people do for kayani) because that will be the norm.