Siachen News & Discussion

The Military Issues & History Forum is a venue to discuss issues relating to the military aspects of the Indian Armed Forces, whether the past, present or future. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Post Reply
karan
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 50
Joined: 03 Jun 2003 11:31
Location: USA

Post by karan »

ramana wrote:Wasnt Gurmeet Kanwal the guy who led to the Gurez incident by sleeping on the job? And he is talking about international pariah! Since when did he start suing castist language?
Boss
You nailed it in the head. Any wonder why a guy like him with so called such stellar service record will retire and not become Maj. Gen. He gets a free trip to US, becomes enamored by hospitality of DOD, he starts singing their tune. He sounds like one of those "Sipharsi"(nepotism) type. Maybe he was given a card for Costco Shopping to buy all the Black Label he could drink, or maybe his son or daughter got an admission to one of the universities for higher learning.
Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3800
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31

Post by Paul »

The moment I saw this guy was from the Observor Research foundation, I realized 'Daal me kuch kala hai'. This Foundation is sponsored in part by Reliance and they have a vested interest in ensuring that war does not break out in the Subcontinent. Hence Pakistan needs to be mollified.
Rye
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 05 Aug 2001 11:31

Post by Rye »

From the Sandia page, Mr. Kanwal's tenure in Sandia overlaps J18.

Gurmeet Kanwal (India): May 18 – August 19, 2005

Don't know what that means, but I am less and less convinced that Siachen Demilitarizaion and J18 are not connected, as claimed by the GoI.
rocky
BRFite
Posts: 142
Joined: 08 Mar 2006 22:52

Post by rocky »

Rye wrote:Don't know what that means, but I am less and less convinced that Siachen Demilitarizaion and J18 are not connected, as claimed by the GoI.
Which begs the next question: why would the US want the Siachen demilitarized?
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

karan wrote:
ramana wrote:Wasnt Gurmeet Kanwal the guy who led to the Gurez incident by sleeping on the job? And he is talking about international pariah! Since when did he start suing castist language?
Boss
You nailed it in the head. Any wonder why a guy like him with so called such stellar service record will retire and not become Maj. Gen. He gets a free trip to US, becomes enamored by hospitality of DOD, he starts singing their tune. MHe sounds like one of those "Sipharsi"(nepotism) type. Maybe he was given a card for Costco Shopping to buy all the Black Label he could drink, or maybe his son or daughter got an admission to one of the universities for higher learning.
Karan.

All this is in bad taste, for many reasons not to mention offensive to the mans integrity. Unless you have specific proof making such comments on a public fora is simply not done.

GK has been part of the IDSA, has written extensively on Indias security perceptions and been fairly conservative to boot. One article and he's suddenly a corrupt traitor?

Even BR hosts his articles.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/MONITOR/I ... anwal.html

Google his articles and you'll find that they have been used by BR for various discussions and research.

Criticize his POV. Not his integrity.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Post by Prem »

http://in.rediff.com/news/2006/may/23siachen.htm

India takes tough stand on Siachen
According to experts, the Siachen sector is a strategic area which is "virtually called the tri-junction of Pakistan, China and India on the northern borders".

A source in the ministry said that talks have not broken down yet, but, he added, "We are still looking if we can address the issue. Both sides are looking for agreement on the principle of authentication."

India made it clear to Pakistan that India wants comprehensive measures of surveillance and monitoring in place in the area if demilitarisation takes place.
Rye
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 05 Aug 2001 11:31

Post by Rye »

rocky wrote:
Which begs the next question: why would the US want the Siachen demilitarized?
Good question. To answer this question, we may want to answer the more basic questions:

1) What is Siachen strategic value?

http://www.himalmag.com/june2001/review.html

foreign expeditions to the glacier originating from Pakistan, 14 in all, combined with ‘cartographic aggression’, provoked India into occupying Siachen. The climbing expeditions, accompanied by Pakistani liaison officers, provided the rationale for Pakistan to lay claim on the glacier. Maps began to be published in Europe showing the extended line of control joining the Karakoram Pass in the east following the Pakistani claim (the line along the glacier had earlier been left undefined—see Himal on Siachen, December 1998). These maps conceded the entire Siachen Glacier to Pakistan, and showed Pakistan and China sharing a long common border to the east of Siachen. The Indian Army occupied Siachen in 1984 when Pakistan gave permission to a Japanese expedition to attempt Rimo, a peak located in a side valley east of the Siachen and overlooking Aksai Chin, which would have linked Pakistan controlled Kashmir with China, along the historic trade route that leads to Chinese Turkestan over the Karakoram Pass.
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_e ... r_area.jpg

Note that Siachen blocks Pakistan's access to the karakoram pass.

2) What entities gain if India loses control of Siachen?

a) Pakistan -- gains land access to chinese territory. This would dramatically increase the value of Gwadar for China, and would be very lucrative for Pakistan. (This is pretty weak since the terrain in this region is not very conducive to pipelines and the like) There may be better reasons for China and Pakistan to have a direct land route between their territories...increases their ability to transfer chinese WMDs to Pakistan, for example.

b) china -- An overland pipeline from Gwadar to eastern China? Maybe there are other reasons I am not aware of...

c) US -- Can proclaim to Pakistan to have gotten India to make concessions to pakistan and thus extract their pound of flesh. I don't see why the US would do China a favour, but maybe this is the handiwork of Sinophiles in the US SD.

3) Why would the US want to assist Pakistan and China, to India's detriment?

The US does not do anyone but itself favours -- so this may just be a short term measure to get more leverage on Pakistan. Secondly, if we take it for granted that pakistan will violate the AGPL if this treaty is signed, then the US entrenches itself more in the Indo-pak conflict than it already is. This entire problem would have its origins in the US, and all the "Experts" in this conflict would all be US lifafas. In short, the US gains more leverage over both India and Pakistan in different ways.

Just my two paise.
Last edited by Rye on 24 May 2006 09:29, edited 1 time in total.
Rye
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 05 Aug 2001 11:31

Post by Rye »

Other visiting scholars to Sandia have a focus on Siachen. Fromthe same page. This stuff has been going on since 1997, before Pokharan II, but the US had to wait till a weak UPA govt. was at the center to push this idea through to the top most levels of the GoI. I find it highly curious that the US has had such an interest in Siachen demilitarization for the past 10 years, and yet this paki colonel who supposedly whined about being "sick and tired of the battle for Siachen" was what that supposedly kicked off the current "peace talks" on siachen demilitarization. The whole thing smells to high heaven. Every single idea mentioned by the pro-demilitarization folks on this forum and elsewhere is the topic of one of the papers by visiting scholars to Sandia.


[quote]
Varun Sahni, Ph.D. (India): May 5, 1997 through August 31, 1997

Professor Sahni is Associate Professor, Center for International Politics, School of International Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi, India. During his tenure as a CMC scholar, Professor Sahni worked cooperatively with Dr. Samina Ahmed (Pakistan) to co-author an analysis proposing initiatives for reducing Indian/Pakistani conflict on the Siachen Glacier. The joint research product was issued as CMC Occasional Paper/1, “Freezing the Fighting: Military Disengagement on the Siachen Glacier,â€
Last edited by Rye on 24 May 2006 07:39, edited 3 times in total.
Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3866
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Post by Kakkaji »

Siachen talks: Pak team mum on troop authentication
While the Indian side communicated its flexibility on the method of authentication, its position being that the disengagement plan should be accompanied by proper post-pullback surveillance and monitoring measures to govern the demilitarised zone. And considering the assymetry of the disengagement—the ridge is more accessible from the Pakistan side—New Delhi is also of the view that there can be no mechanical equivalance to the withdrawal.

One of the possibilities for authentication already conveyed through the back-channel is that the withdrawal plan itself could list the positions from which Indian positions pull back and also where they will base themselves after that, amounting to automatic, though indirect, authentication.
All these roundabout ways of getting the Pakistanis to 'authenticate' the ground position, so that when the Pakistanis occupy those positions, we can file a case against them at the International Court in Hague. :roll:
Singha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 66601
Joined: 13 Aug 2004 19:42
Location: the grasshopper lies heavy

Post by Singha »

ORF is a mixed bag. they have a book named Pakistan on the Abyss that lays out the complex contours of the Karachi conflict. nice effort. "fans" of riaz basra and other maniacs can look it up.
merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2153
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Post by merlin »

Is only Siachen being discussed in these talks? I hope "realignment" of the LoC is not being discussed there.
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

Singha wrote:ORF is a mixed bag. they have a book named Pakistan on the Abyss that lays out the complex contours of the Karachi conflict. nice effort. "fans" of riaz basra and other maniacs can look it up.
Every old salt in India seems to be linked to ORF.

In India 2 things happen- strat community talks, publishes papers.

GOI sleeps.
Surya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5034
Joined: 05 Mar 2001 12:31

Post by Surya »

karan etc.

Since obviously you are clueless about the antecedents of Gurmeet Kanwal, the best thing for you to do is to SHUT UP.

Yes Kanwal retired from the Army early.

But is has nothing to do with his military record. For obvious reasons i am not going to menton the details here but essentially his career was at a dead end.

It was one of those sad cases - and actually pure bad luck.

So please do not make statements unless you can back it up.

We do not have to agree with him - but to cast him as a traitor is ludicrous.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19226
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Post by NRao »

Neither Pakistan nor the think tanks in America have the sense to note that they ALL could be FAR better served if they concentrate and improve the Pakistani economy, education and political system. Siachen militarised or not will not get THEM anywhere.
Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3866
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Post by Kakkaji »

India, Pak. fail to reach breakthrough on Siachen 8)
The Pakistani side "is not agreeing to the proposal for authentication of positions (held by the Indian and Pakistani forces) for quite some time and this is the area of difference which can continue...In this round of discussions, we could not not make a breakthrough," Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee said.

He was replying to questions on the outcome of two-day Indo-Pak Defence Secretary-level talks on demilitarisation of Siachen Glacier,

Mukherjee said "we are still engaged in discussion and perhaps there can be forward movement in another round of talks. But in this round of discussions we could not make breathrough."
Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Post by Vipul »

Vikas
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6828
Joined: 03 Dec 2005 02:40
Location: Where DST doesn't bother me
Contact:

Post by Vikas »

Paul wrote:The moment I saw this guy was from the Observor Research foundation, I realized 'Daal me kuch kala hai'. This Foundation is sponsored in part by Reliance and they have a vested interest in ensuring that war does not break out in the Subcontinent. Hence Pakistan needs to be mollified.
So what's wrong in having a vested interest that war does not breakout in Indian subcontinent. :eek:
Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3800
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31

Post by Paul »

Point is it is in Reliance's interest not see a war breaking out between the Indian Subcontinent as it would put their assets in Jamnagar at risk of attack from Pakistani aggression. Sometimes it is in a country's interest to go to war as Prussia did in 1871 when it goaded France into war and resoundingly defeated them at Sedan. This cleared the way for German unfication.

Here you are asking the question.....Maybe India should not fight with Pakistan as it would put Reliance's assets at risk here?
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by svinayak »

Paul wrote:Point is it is in Reliance's interest not see a war breaking out between the Indian Subcontinent as it would put their assets in Jamnagar at risk of attack from Pakistani aggression.
Reliance is banking upon direct pipeline feed to its Jamnagar refinary from Iran, Qatar, Iraq , Kuwait in the future. Hence it needs to build relationship with the OIL lobbies of the world. It has relationship with CFR, ORF and other international groups which are in the business of studying and in the business of peace process. It has got the contract with KSA only with that infuence. It will participate in the pipeline projects of TAP and others but it has been soothed by the anti-iran lobby in USA to wait it out.

But it also may make its supporters compromise on India's national interest and security. That is the catch.
Kakkaji
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3866
Joined: 23 Oct 2002 11:31

Post by Kakkaji »

India, Pak fail to break ice on Siachen
The Pakistani team, led by Defence Secretary Lt Gen (retd) Tariq Wasim Ghazi, recommended that both sides first talk disengagement and redeployment before getting into the authentication process. The team did not, in the event, have the mandate to discuss authentication.

Hours after the talk ended, Lt Gen Ghazi said, "The mandate given to us is one of withdrawal and redeployment, so we have focused on that. This is the main thrust. The talks did not fail, there was some forward movement. But does authentication mean the line will not be violated? Which international border has not been violated? The issues are not linked."

While this round, by most accounts, had the most candid, positive and open discussions ever held at the technical level on the issue, a sense persisted today that Pakistan’s in-principle nod through the back channel to authenticate Indian troop positions on the Saltoro ridge did not reflect in the technical-level talks.

"For us, authentication is an unnecessary issue, even though it’s the main issue for India. We don’t feel convinced of the need for it. I have not been able to understand the purpose for why authentication is being insisted upon, nor its relevance," the Pakistani defence secretary said.

Like the last round, it was apparent that the Pakistani delegation did not have enough political latitude to make any concrete commitments on authentication—owing in part to Islamabad’s original view that India acted aggressively by deploying its troops on the Saltoro ridge in 1984—though the Indians suggested that both sides could work towards veering around these considerations.

Ghazi added, "If there is trust, other guarantees and assurances, there is no need for such processes. :roll: We will now narrow our differences and strengthen what we agree on."
Pakistan to India: Forget our past history and just trust us.

Any takers on the Indian side?
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by svinayak »

RajeevT wrote:
Pakistan to India: Forget our past history and just trust us.

Any takers on the Indian side?
What was LOC in the first place.
Rye
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 05 Aug 2001 11:31

Post by Rye »

Ghazi added, "If there is trust, other guarantees and assurances, there is no need for such processes. We will now narrow our differences and strengthen what we agree on."
This sentiment was repeated word-for-word by Siddarth Varadarajan when he wrote, we need "verify, but trust" :roll:
kgoan
BRFite
Posts: 264
Joined: 30 Jul 2001 11:31

Post by kgoan »

No point in making a big deal about it, but:

I do find ORF's relationship to the Brookings Institute (q.v. a certain S. Cohen), which is the only place to rate a link on ORF's "Partnership" page and the only "Partner" to rate it's own page on ORF's site, terribly interesting.
JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Post by JCage »

Well if you wanted to engage the Yanks, and you had semi-official talks and stuff going on, then you would have to be involved with the weasels at Brookings. Given the lock they have on US's SAsia tag.
abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4277
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Post by abhischekcc »

rocky wrote:Which begs the next question: why would the US want the Siachen demilitarized?
There is another angle. Demil of Siachen will release troops on the Pakistani side for fighting in NFWP, something Uncle wants badly.

If that is so, then perhaps the war in A'stan-Pak border is not going as well for the US-led forces, or perhaps they are planning major operations in the summer.

Perhaps this is also connected with the pro-India voices being made by radical Islamists (Taliban, MMA). They might think that if India leans heavily on Pakjab, they will get some breathing space.

Just speculation.
SRoy
BRFite
Posts: 1938
Joined: 15 Jul 2005 06:45
Location: Kolkata
Contact:

Post by SRoy »

The Great Siachen Sellout

Dr. Subhas Kapila
The signs of sellout

Going by media reports and statements of National Security Advisor M K Narayanan, India is virtually about to sellout Siachen to Pakistan.

Right from the first round of the Siachen talks, India has maintained that no Indian troop re-deployment or de-militarisation in Siachen could take place unless the following conditions were met:

*
Pakistan agrees to de-lineate the 'Actual Ground Position Line' (AGPL) in the Siachen sector.
*
The AGPL de-lineation would then be authenticated on maps, to be signed by senior military officers of India and Pakistan.
*
AGPL authenticated maps to be then exchanged by both countries.
*
Pakistan would cease cartographic aggression and project the AGPL in all its maps, like the LAC is done up to NJ-9842. AGPL becomes the extension of the LAC from NJ-9842, northwards, to the border with Pakistan ceded Chinese territory.
*
Thereafter, formation of 'ground rules' for both sides for the area to be de-militarised. Then only as a last and final step, would both sides discuss redeployment and de-militarisation of this sector.

................

But recent Indian media reports on Siachen attributed to the national security adviser say the Indian position now is:

*
Pakistan can now sign the Siachen Agreement without authenticating the AGPL on maps by the military commanders.
*
The AGPL positions would be attached as an annexure to the agreement (presumably again without formal authentication).
* India is not laying down any conditions.

These seem to be the consequence of the secret parleys between Narayanan and his Pakistan counterpart in Dubai recently.

This strategic climbdown from India's well articulated and established position smacks of a possible sell-out. It seems that the PMO has bypassed or ignored the recommendations of other policy making organs of the Indian government.
abhischekcc
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4277
Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
Contact:

Post by abhischekcc »

Is it only me or does anybody else feel that the Sonia Gandhi led, Manmohan "Mukhota" Singh administered, Red loving UPA is a government that is best described by the name of a certain Norwegian Prime Minister of the 1930s.
:evil:

With leaders like this, is it any wonder that we are so backward?
SRoy
BRFite
Posts: 1938
Joined: 15 Jul 2005 06:45
Location: Kolkata
Contact:

Post by SRoy »

abhischekcc wrote:Is it only me or does anybody else feel that the Sonia Gandhi led, Manmohan "Mukhota" Singh administered, Red loving UPA is a government that is best described by the name of a certain Norwegian Prime Minister of the 1930s.
:evil:

With leaders like this, is it any wonder that we are so backward?
Keep watching. Siachen is gone, next in line is GUBO over nuclear deal, they'll accept a tailored CTBT, FMCT, cap on Missile tests and what not ;)
Vipul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3727
Joined: 15 Jan 2005 03:30

Post by Vipul »

Can Pakistan be trusted?

Concluding part of Dr Subhash Kapila's artcle on Siachen.
Amitabh
BRFite
Posts: 270
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by Amitabh »

abhischekcc wrote:Is it only me or does anybody else feel that the Sonia Gandhi led, Manmohan "Mukhota" Singh administered, Red loving UPA is a government that is best described by the name of a certain Norwegian Prime Minister of the 1930s.
:evil:
I guess you missed the outcome of the talks. :roll:
Talks over Siachen end in failure
pauldevis
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 31
Joined: 14 Sep 2003 11:31
Location: India
Contact:

Post by pauldevis »

I guess you missed the outcome of the talks. :roll:
Talks over Siachen end in failure
Oh come on, dont ruin the "everything the government does is pure nonsense because the UPA is in power" theme :)
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Post by Gerard »

Govt lied on N-deal, says BJP chief
He said the Army was stunned at the proposals to withdraw from strategically important Siachen Glacier, considered as the world's highest battle ground.

For the first time in history, the Chief of Army Staff had come out twice openly, once against the Muslim-head count and now against withdrawal of forces from Siachen.

"The BJP under all circumstances will not tolerate withdrawal of forces from Siachen in the garb of improving relations with Pakistan," he declared.
Vick
BRFite
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 Oct 1999 11:31

Post by Vick »

From DN
[quote]Indo-Pak Siachen Talks Fail
By VIVEK RAGHUVANSHI, NEW DELHI


The 10th round of talks between India and Pakistan on demilitarizating the Siachen glacier failed in the final stages.

Indian Defence Ministry sources said the negotiations failed thanks to pressure from the Indian Army to keep troops on what is dubbed the highest battlefield in the world until adequate guarantees are agreed to by Pakistan.

On May 24, the second day of talks here, Indian Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee announced the failure of the talks to reporters even as the two countries defense secretaries — India’s Shekhar Dut and Pakistan’s Tariq Waseem Ghazi, a retired lieutenant general — were still negotiating.

“Perhaps there can be upward movement in another round of talks,â€
Kim

Post by Kim »

Amitabh
BRFite
Posts: 270
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Post by Amitabh »

Some great pix (mostly of the Pakistani side) from a Swiss/Italian documentary on Siachen.
Siachen: A war for ice
Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3800
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31

Post by Paul »

I have no desire to meet this man

First seven pages are from Pakistan perspective. This article is a reprint from NYTimes and I think was posted here before. I was so fascinated reading about Narendra Kumar that I thought I would share it with all of you.

I salute this great man and wish him all the best.
Babui
BRFite
Posts: 163
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Shrewsbury, MA

Post by Babui »

Fascinating!! We had discussed this article a while ago and commented on Capt Das' fondness for rock......And I salute Gen. ML Chibber without whom we, likely, would have lost all of Siachen. Now he is a Sai Baba devotee http://www.siachen.ch/front_content.php ... 3&client=1 :shock:
Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3800
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31

Post by Paul »

BTW....I think there is a psy-ops angle to this article. It very subtely favors the Pakistanis while portraying India as the aggressor which fired the first shot. All the environmental damage is projected as coming from India like the photo on page 1.

But then what else can be expected of NYT
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Post by Lalmohan »

Paul - I don't see any bias towards Pakistan. if anything they come across as boorish and fanatical (big surprise there!) and we look more human. the authors have tried hard not to take sides. they have also been given more honest info on the indian side which they have reported. to me this is a great testament to indian values which the pakistanis could not even dream of
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Post by svinayak »

I agree with Paul
Post Reply