What is leading Indian army's rethink of its typically inelastic position on Siachin?

[Pak Nationalist]

India will not change its position on Siachen at this point. It has no incentive to do so. Even if Pakistan should accept the LOC as IB in that area, I do not think that Siachen will be demilitarized at the Indian side.

I do not know what makes you say that but the Indian army chief representing the institution that has historically been against any sort of demilitarisation of Siachin has just taken an about-turn from that traditionally held and jealously guarded position.

Wars cost money. Pakistan with its annual begging bowl rituals is no position to wage wars

Pakistan is no Russia.

Why is this guy even engaged? MODs @waz are too quick to delete threads and comments asking questions but the usual suspects who bring down the quality of discussion on this forum and de-track discussions are given a free berth. Why? This thread is discussing a very specific statement of Indian COAS and the context in which it has been made. This fellow has successfully detracted the discussion and Pakistani commentators have obliged his attempt.

 

[The Maverick]

Indian army has no political.power in india
They can't move an inch inns,democracy
let alone give a strategic point held since 1984.
Any status quo change will be f
done by prime Minster level.only and massively debated for years first

heck we can't even.buy warplanes.without decade long political fighting first
and you think saichen can be given.due to.coas comment probably misinterpreted Any way in the first place

 

[Pak Nationalist]

Indian army has no political.power in india
They can't move an inch inns,democracy
let alone give a strategic point held since 1984.
Any status quo change will be f
done by prime Minster level.only and massively debated for years first

heck we can't even.buy warplanes.without decade long political fighting first
and you think saichen can be given.due to.coas comment probably misinterpreted Any way in the first place

Incorrect. Indian army has in the past torpedoed various Indian governmental efforts at demilitarising the Siachin glacier. I have cited at least 7-8 links to corroborate this from Indian sources, neutral sources, and WikiLeaks cables. Indian army may have been historically apolitical (not now; being politicized and subservient to civilian administrations is different; towing the political agenda of a certain ideological cohort also entails being politicized), but even then it used to take a strong exception to governmental efforts at demilitarising Siachin as a result of diplomatic initiatives.

 

[The Maverick]

Incorrect. Indian army has in the past torpedoed various Indian governmental efforts at demilitarising the Siachin glacier. I have cited at least 7-8 links to corroborate this from Indian sources, neutral sources, and WikiLeaks cables. Indian army may have been historically apolitical (not now, being politicized and subservient to civilian administrations is different; towing the political agenda of a certain ideological cohort also entails being politicized), but even then it used to take a strong exception to governmental efforts at demilitarising Siachin as a result of diplomatic initiatives.

don't hold your breadth or get your hopes up.too.high
The indian.army chief was,warning China last week.about ladakh withdrawal and india will never allow China to take indian territory by Force.

So don't read too much into.... quotes

don't hold your breadth or get your hopes up.too.high
The indian.army chief was,warning China last week.about ladakh withdrawal and india will never allow China to take indian territory by Force.

So don't read too much into.... quotes

like I said don't get your hopes up.about indian leaving an inch
never mind saichen

 

[Pak Nationalist]

don't hold your breadth or get your hopes up.too.high
The indian.army chief was,warning China last week.about ladakh withdrawal and india will never allow China to take indian territory by Force.

So don't read too much into.... quotes

like I said don't get your hopes up.about indian leaving an inch
never mind saichen

I am not sure which planet you are living on but China is already occupying Indian territory for the last 2 years. This is apart from nearly 860 sq km that was lost to Chinese encroachment since the early 2000s. The fact that the Indian military has changed a jealously guarded statement is significant. It shows the pressure it is reeling under nowadays. It wants to reduce the points of convergence between Pakistan and China. Towards that end, if the Siachin dispute is resolved on terms still favorable to India, the Indian army is more than willing to take it and try to keep Pakistan out of an eventual Sino-Indian conflict.

 

[The Maverick]

I am not sure which planet you are living on but China is already occupying Indian territory for the last 2 years. This is apart from nearly 860 sq km that was lost to Chinese encroachment since the early 2000s. The fact that the Indian military has changed a jealously guarded statement is significant. It shows the pressure it is reeling under nowadays. It wants to reduce the points of convergence between Pakistan and China. Towards that end, if the Siachin dispute is resolved on terms still favorable to India, the Indian army is more than willing to take it and try to keep Pakistan out of an eventual Sino-Indian conflict.

The Indians don't need to.worry about pak.entry into.a border war between.the big 2 India and China

for one China never goes to war never has never will.....The impact on.their shipping lanes.will be catastrophic in.indian Ocean.

second usa a strategic ally will never allow q gang up..on.india ...
it will.take one phone call.from.washington.to.khan and co.and they will
just sit back down.
Pak.will.never wish to.be isolated completely from.west and usa
You think usa will.sit watch 3 nuclear armed states go to war
Not a.chance

 

[Wood]

I do not know what makes you say that but the Indian army chief representing the institution that has historically been against any sort of demilitarisation of Siachin has just taken an about-turn from that traditionally held and jealously guarded position.

The Army does not make any policy decisions in India. There is no political motivation in India to bring the troops down from their commanding position. As long as the Indian economy continues to improve, there will be sufficient budget to sustain this position. The loss of life that is paid for this deployment is a non issue for the Indian population.

You should not expect your enemy to make decisions that will suit your interest. Your enemy will always do the opposite.

 

[SaadH]

In my opinion, we have lost Kashmir to India for good after 2020, when they unilaterally changed the status of Jammu and Kashmir and our government stood and watched. Like always all our government and military did was launch a few statements and the rest was history. I don’t think our military is serious or willing to acquire the part of Kashmir which Qaid e. Azam himself state is the Jugular vein of Pakistan and without which our survival would not be possible in future.

What we should’ve done was armed the people of Indian occupied Kashmir to the teeth and launch a massive insurgency. After all that’s what the Indians have been doing in Balochistan and KPK. So pay them in their own coin. But like I said our military and politicians don’t have the balls anymore to reclaim what is ours. Just a few statements and words and that’s that. I wish we had a strong minded leader who would take these steps someday.

Pakistan permanently lost Kashmir in '62. Any other postulations are academic.

BTW, Kashmiri populace in IOK like their forefathers and political leadership doesn't have the wherewithal nor the desire to be free of Indian occupation.

 

[SQ8]

Didn't Pakistan start the 1965 war ?

65 and Kargil. Both easily avoidable and only exacerbated the Kashmir issue. Just because the Nizam of Hyderabad and the Jungargh clan dangled their bank accounts during partition and used it to influence an idiotic policy move years later.

Pakistan permanently lost Kashmir in '62. Any other postulations are academic.

BTW, Kashmiri populace in IOK like their forefathers and political leadership doesn't have the wherewithal nor the desire to be free of Indian occupation.

The Kashmir issue has never been about Kashmiris - it’s plain and simple water and geographic security. The Kashmiris are frankly only interested in living their own lives in security(financial, cultural etc) regardless of whether they have to sing Vande Mataram or Pak Sar Zameen.

 

[Pak Nationalist]

The Army does not make any policy decisions in India. There is no political motivation in India to bring the troops down from their commanding position. As long as the Indian economy continues to improve, there will be sufficient budget to sustain this position. The loss of life that is paid for this deployment is a non issue for the Indian population.

You should not expect your enemy to make decisions that will suit your interest. Your enemy will always do the opposite.

That is not entirely true. Indian military in past has torpedoed political attempts at the demilitarization of the Siachin glacier. If you go through this thread, I have produced at least 7-8 links corroborating that fact from Indian and neutral sources. Another fact of the day is that Indian political and military leadership is worried about the convergence between the interests of Pakistan and China. If one dispute in the North could be amicably resolved, that would reduce the points of convergences that might encourage Pakistan to create problems for the Indians while they are busy engaging the Chinese all along their Northern frontier.

 

[Wood]

That is not entirely true. Indian military in past has torpedoed political attempts at the demilitarization of the Siachin glacier. If you go through this thread, I have produced at least 7-8 links corroborating that fact from Indian and neutral sources. Another fact of the day is that Indian political and military leadership is worried about the convergence between the interests of Pakistan and China. If one dispute in the North could be amicably resolved, that would reduce the points of convergences that might encourage Pakistan to create problems for the Indians while they are busy engaging the Chinese all along their Northern frontier.

1) Indian military can only advise. PM can always replace the Army command. Most Indians don't know anything about Army and therefore no one will bat an eyelid.

2) What I said about setting expectations about your enemy goes both ways. India will never trust Pakistan to remain neutral voluntary in conflicts with China. Today, China and Pakistan are in a united front against India - more so than they've ever been in the past. Even a common man who does not know anything about military in India understands this well.

 

[Pak Nationalist]

The Indians don't need to.worry about pak.entry into.a border war between.the big 2 India and China

for one China never goes to war never has never will.....The impact on.their shipping lanes.will be catastrophic in.indian Ocean.

second usa a strategic ally will never allow q gang up..on.india ...
it will.take one phone call.from.washington.to.khan and co.and they will
just sit back down.
Pak.will.never wish to.be isolated completely from.west and usa
You think usa will.sit watch 3 nuclear armed states go to war
Not a.chance

Obviously, you have not read history. 65 and Kargil were both our own handiworks. US pressure/influence over Pakistan is overestimated. It did not work particularly well even when this influence was intact. That influence has all but gone now. A joint Pak-Sino maneuver along the Indian North-Eastern frontier is not a hypothetical war game scenario anymore. If Afghanistan has not opened your eyes, you are in for a mighty surprise. Uncle Sam didn't protect its assets in that country in the end. Superpowers never fight directly. US did not get involved in 1971 despite assurances to us (and our moronic belief as you are holding now of the US not allowing two states to gang up on India). it did not do so because that would have brought USSR into the conflict as well. As I said, superpowers do not fight directly. These would not in the 21st century either. Neither Hongkong was saved, nor Taiwan would be when the time comes (it's near). It is not going to be any different in the case of India.

On a side note, China mightn't even need to go to war to achieve most of its territorial ambitions if the Indian response is going to remain at the same frequency as we have witnessed till now. It would quietly keep chipping away at territory in grey zone operations while Indian leadership tells its people "na koi ghussa hai na koi andar aaya hai."

1. https://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-news-india/siachen-pakistan-siachen-avalanche-army/

2. https://indianexpress.com/article/i...nd-for-troop-withdrawal-from-siachen-glacier/

3. https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/...sation-indian-army-pakistan-758307-2012-05-05

4. https://tribune.com.pk/story/180770/wikileaks-indian-army-poses-as-obstacle-to-siachen-solution

In 2006 JJ Singh himself sabotaged the last effort to demilitarize Siachin. He definitely had a change of heart in 2006. This position has been of the Indian military as an institution, not individual chiefs.

@Wood, you might want to look here. There is a clear precedent from the past where the Indian military has stuck to its guns and had its way on Siachin. The fact that it is the Indian military that is now publicly saying it is open to the demilitarization of Siachin shows that one side of the equation that has historically been opposed to the demilitarization of Siachin in any form is now okay with it. Now, I do not know whether it is a signal to the Indian political government or Pakistan, but the animus seems to be the points of convergence Pakistan and China have today (and you accept that). Indian military might be looking at reducing those points of convergence by creating space for removal of (still on terms favorable to India) at least one friction point.

 

[Wood]

@Wood, you might want to look here. There is a clear precedent from the past where the Indian military has stuck to its guns and had its way on Siachin. The fact that it is the Indian military that is now publicly saying it is open to the demilitarization of Siachin shows that one side of the equation that has historically been opposed to the demilitarization of Siachin in any form is now okay with it. Now, I do not know whether it is a signal to the Indian political government or Pakistan, but the animus seems to be the points of convergence Pakistan and China have today (and you accept that). Indian military might be looking at reducing those points of convergence by creating space for removal of (still on terms favorable to India) at least one friction point.

Here is a wiki leaks quote from the article you've cited

Army Chief JJ Singh appears on the front page of the “Indian Express” seemingly fortnightly to tell readers the Army cannot support a withdrawal from Siachen. Given India’s high degree of civilian control over the armed forces, it is improbable that Gen. Singh could repeatedly make such statements without MoD civilians giving at least tacit approval. Whether or not this is the case, a Siachen deal is improbable while his — and the Army’s — opposition continues to circulate publicly.

The point that I'm trying to emphasize is that Indian army cannot overrule the civilian control. They can only lobby for support from sympathetic voices within the government. MMS had utopian ideas for India Pakistan relationship. For all his wisdom, he failed to understand the futility in his efforts. Modi is not cut from the same cloth.

As for reducing friction points with Pakistan, have you ever watched Gilligan's Island and thought that Gilligan will escape this time?!

I've said all I've wanted to say in the matter. What to believe and what not to believe is entirely up to you.

 

[wali87]

Pakistan permanently lost Kashmir in '62. Any other postulations are academic.

BTW, Kashmiri populace in IOK like their forefathers and political leadership doesn't have the wherewithal nor the desire to be free of Indian occupation.

I agree. However it’s not lack of will or desire, it’s rather the fact that Indians have almost 1:10 ratio of military to civil population in IOK. That and the Indian government controls and monitor and target each individual who even shows signs of hate of discontent against India. They have no support from the outside particularly Pakistan. I believe Pakistan should play an incladestine role but like I said the lack of will appears to be on our side of the border.

 

[SaadH]

I agree. However it’s not lack of will or desire, it’s rather the fact that Indians have almost 1:10 ratio of military to civil population in IOK. That and the Indian government controls and monitor and target each individual who even shows signs of hate of discontent against India. They have no support from the outside particularly Pakistan. I believe Pakistan should play an incladestine role but like I said the lack of will appears to be on our side of the border.

Pakistan did leading up to the '65 war and we all know how that turned out, Kashmiris themselves sabotaged that effort...

Then Pakistan did the same throughout the 80's and 90's and even then not all Kashmiris went along infact their traitorous leadership continued to thrive living amongst this supposed rebellious populace...

If Afghans had been in Kashmiris place, there is no way the Abdullahs and Mufits would have survived long past their treachery.