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
Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7808
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by Anujan »

Kayani's statement should be seen as Chunkiyan earth-e-shatter.

One of the things that Rakshaks should realize is that people see a mirror image of themselves in others. Indians see Indians when they see Pakis, Pakis see Pakis when they see Indians. Let me give you an example:

Remember the earthquake in PoK? Apparently that took down a lot of Paki posts and supply lines and the first few men and material rushed there were to reinforce their positions. They left taking care of injured and killed civvies to LeT/JuD. Remember that 60,000 civilians were killed and 2.5 million were homeless!!

B Raman wrote:
The first reaction of the Army's General Headquarters (GHQ) in Rawalpindi after it came to know after 3 PM of the extent of the devastation caused and the state of confusion in the ranks of the Army personnel stationed in the POK was to rush reinforcements to the POK to restore and strengthen the defences along the Line of Control (LOC), lest Indian forces take advantage of the collapse of the defences to infiltrate into the POK in order to destroy the terrorist training infrastructure, which had not been brought down by the quake.
Why? because Pakis thought Indians would act like Pakis and will invade and conquer PoK. Which is what exactly Pakis would have done if the earthquake were in JK or in Sir Creek. Indians on the other hand were doing pappi-jhappi with the usual suspects (screaming on TV) "IS IT NOW THE RIGHT TIME TO GIVE AWAY KASHMIR AS A GOODWILL GESTURE FOR PEACE WITH PAKIS?!"

Fast forward to the latest happening. We dont know how important the post was to the Pakis. More soldiers have died in Fata (in thousands). If official version were to be believed ~150 got their 72, but that was enough for every jernail to rush there. This accident was probably a major one, stretching their logistics and re-supply. Remember that bombing Muntho Dhalo pretty much assured IA of victory in Kargil because the pigs did not have food to eat and bullets to fire anymore. If this camp were comparable, IA can walk to Skardu!

What does Kayani do? He issues a statement "Shouldnt we all think of the 5 trillion people who live on less than $0.0000001 per day?!" and usual suspects (screaming on TV) go "IS IT NOW THE RIGHT TIME TO GIVE AWAY KASHMIR AS A GOODWILL GESTURE FOR PEACE WITH PAKIS?!"
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by chaanakya »

Jhujar wrote:
Indaruta wrote:Any agreement made between katlaas and kufr wont last
Its called Hudna
Duration of the Hudnah:

The Shafi`i school of jurisprudence set the limit of the hudna at 10 years, following the original stated duration of the Treaty of Hudaybiyya. If the treaty does not specify the time limit, it is considered invalid.The Maliki school of jurisprudence does not specify a time limit and they leave this matter to the jurisdiction of the head of state.Of course, this discussion of the duration of the hudna is only a glimpse of what’s available in the books of jurisprudence..
Ahh So you mean Indus Water Treaty is invalid as far as Pakitanis are concerned as it does not specify any time limit. and Shimla Smajauta is a gone case.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by Prem »

="chaanakyaAhh So you mean Indus Water Treaty is invalid as far as Pakitanis are concerned as it does not specify any time limit. and Shimla Smajauta is a gone case.
Yes, but Kaffirs dont have the right to abrogate , the priviledge is reserved only for Muslims as they are the best judge.
mody
BRFite
Posts: 1362
Joined: 18 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: Mumbai, India

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by mody »

The strategic considerations for Siachen have completely changed in the last 10-15 years.

A de-militarization solution could have been considered in the early to mid nineties but certainly not now.
In fact India's efforts should be to take full control of Baltistan also from the Pakis. The road and rail link between Pak and China should be severed, or atleast India should be in position to do this as and when it wants and relatively easily.

With the new Great Game being played out, it is imperative for India to stop the encircling by China that is taking place with the help of Pakistan.
If China were to build a rail link along the lines of KKH with Pakistan the strategic implications for India would be grave. It would give China access to Gwadar and also give China access to Afghanistan. Given the reports about great Mining prospects in Afghanistan for Copper, Iron Ore and more importantly Lithium and maybe also Rare Earth minerals, China with Road link from Afghanistan to Pakistan and then Rail Link all the way back to China's heartland, would be very difficult beat.

Also in case of any eventuality, with this kind of Rail and Road links, China would also be a in a position to move large no. of troops, right into Gilgit Baltistan, if required. This would an absolute nightmare for India.

India should strategize, and look for opportunity or create opportunity to take offensive action and take control or Skardu and surrounding areas in Balistan.
Kanishka
BRFite
Posts: 330
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 06:44
Location: K-PAX

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by Kanishka »

mody wrote:The strategic considerations for Siachen have completely changed in the last 10-15 years.

A de-militarization solution could have been considered in the early to mid nineties but certainly not now.
In fact India's efforts should be to take full control of Baltistan also from the Pakis. The road and rail link between Pak and China should be severed, or atleast India should be in position to do this as and when it wants and relatively easily.

With the new Great Game being played out, it is imperative for India to stop the encircling by China that is taking place with the help of Pakistan.
If China were to build a rail link along the lines of KKH with Pakistan the strategic implications for India would be grave. It would give China access to Gwadar and also give China access to Afghanistan. Given the reports about great Mining prospects in Afghanistan for Copper, Iron Ore and more importantly Lithium and maybe also Rare Earth minerals, China with Road link from Afghanistan to Pakistan and then Rail Link all the way back to China's heartland, would be very difficult beat.

Also in case of any eventuality, with this kind of Rail and Road links, China would also be a in a position to move large no. of troops, right into Gilgit Baltistan, if required. This would an absolute nightmare for India.

India should strategize, and look for opportunity or create opportunity to take offensive action and take control or Skardu and surrounding areas in Balistan.
Spot on. :) Me thinks AP is (will be) a diversion. The real intention could be to grab Siachin using overwhelming military force and connect to Pakistan.
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7101
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by shyamd »

Was just told that GoI is linking Siachen to larger Kashmir settlement and there will be no giving up of Siachen due to Kargil.

I hope the conspiracy theorists will learn a few things. They are in for more surprises soon.
Kanishka
BRFite
Posts: 330
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 06:44
Location: K-PAX

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by Kanishka »

shyamd wrote:Was just told that GoI is linking Siachen to larger Kashmir settlement and there will be no giving up of Siachen due to Kargil.

I hope the conspiracy theorists will learn a few things. They are in for more surprises soon.
<OT>
One does not need to be a "conspiracy theorist" to question the intention and motives of the current GOI just as one is not a traitor if he does not. :)
When you say "They are in for more surprises soon" I hope you are not referring to surprises like SES. :wink:
</OT>
shyamd
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7101
Joined: 08 Aug 2006 18:43

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by shyamd »

Wait and see. If anything they are going in the total opposite direction and you will see the results of it soon.

And tell me more about SeS and if it changed anything
abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3679
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by abhijitm »

shyamd wrote:Was just told that GoI is linking Siachen to larger Kashmir settlement and there will be no giving up of Siachen due to Kargil.

I hope the conspiracy theorists will learn a few things. They are in for more surprises soon.
Shyamd, this was reported few days ago (unable to find the link). If my memory serves well, GoI is putting forward three point agenda as 1) demarcation of Sir Creek 2) Siachen is part of larger kashmir settlement. Will not vacate Siachen till then, and 3) bringing 26/11 perpetrators to justice.
arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by arun »

Retired Brigadier Javed Hussain of the Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan who served with the Special Services Group (SSG) lays out the various abortive Pakistani attempts to wrest Siachhen from India . Admits that India’s move to occupy Bilafod La and Sia La passes in the Saltoro Range was a reaction to Pakistan’s attempt to occupy the Siachen glacier:

The fight for Siachen
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by ShauryaT »

Not about Siachen - Prakash Katoch
The Line of Control between India and Pakistan was originally drawn on a 1:250,000 map with a thick sketch pen that left a variation of hundred plus metres at any given point besides not always following ridgelines – a source of constant acrimony. Then was the naiveté of not drawing any line beyond NJ 9842 that in 1984 led to the discovery of Pakistan creeping up the Saltoro Ridge, followed by its preemptive third dimension occupation by India. The Siachen issue is not about Siachen Glacier but the Saltoro Massif. Strategic significance of the latter can hardly be gauged by armchair warriors.

Before the euphoria for demilitarization of Siachen grips the country with visions of a peace prize and another ‘landmark’ agreement before the next general elections in 2014 eggs us to draw another foolish line on the map, there is need for serious strategic introspection – ‘paid’ media hollering to ignore military advice notwithstanding. Major fallouts of hurried demilitarization of Siachen are as under:

Widening the China-Pakistan handshake (collusive threat) to include Gilgit-Baltistan (reportedly being leased out by Pakistan to China for 50 years), Shaksgam Valley (already ceded by Pakistan to China in 1963), Saltoro-Siachen region (that Pakistan may reoccupy through “Kashmiri Freedom Fighters” or cede to China), own Sub Sector North (SSN) east of Siachen with Chinese sitting on the northern slopes of the Karakoram Pass if not on top of it already, and Aksai Chin already under Chinese occupation.

• SSN and Eastern Ladakh will become focused objectives of Chinese strategic acupuncture. Defence potential of SSN will be totally degraded with western flank exposed and KK Pass to north, which India stopped patrolling years back for fear of annoying the dragon. We continue to remain thin in Eastern Ladakh against Chinese threat via Aksai Chin – heightened more now with possibility of two front war.

• Our next line of defence will perforce base on Ladakh Range with possibility of Leh coming within enemy artillery range.

• Ladakh and Zanskar Ranges will be targeted for terrorism by ISI nurtured groups while Pakistan will say they are ‘out of control’. ISI has been nurturing Shia terrorist outfits with an eye on Ladakh since late 1990s.

The recent media frenzy has exposed the citizenry to the arms lobbies, which may be the tip of the iceberg but what about global games being played by countries whose economies are largely based on weapon exports. Look at the manner in which India and Korea were partitioned – recipe for centuries of strife. Look at the deceit by the British in forcing Skardu into Pakistan’s lap. Look at the aftermath of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria – heightened conflict and who makes the moolah through arms sales, oil, re-construction and power? Why are the Ottawa University, the Atlantic Council and the National Defense University, Washington not discussing a ‘Peace Park’ astride the Durand Line? Will demilitarization of Siachen increase the chances / avenues of conflict between China-Pakistan and India?

Protagonists of total demilitarization from Siachen with suggestions to keep reserves ready for offensive action in case of double cross need to answer the following:

• If the whole exercise is based on trusting Pakistan, what exactly has Pakistan done to earn that trust? Has the anti-India terrorist infrastructure including 40 terrorist training camps in POK been dismantled? Has ‘any’ progress been made in punishing the perpetrators of 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks?

• How will Ladakh be defended post de-militarization?

• What force levels we will need to hold ground - mainly along the Ladakh range? On face value ‘many more times’ the current strength north of Khardung La will be required – remember while one brigade was deployed in Kargil earlier, post 1999, the same area is held by a division with nine battalions deployed on the LC and additional troops required during summer months to check infiltration.

• Where and in what quantum will reserves for Saltoro Ridge locate, how will they be acclimatized, time frame for launch and what is our capability to launch them at those heights on a ridge already occupied?

• What troops will we need to counter infiltration and possible terrorist influx into Ladakh? Even requirement of placing reserves on the Zanskar Ranges will need examination.

• Expenditure on establishing next defence line post-demilitarization; posts, bunkers, gun positions, helipads, administrative echelons, new communications infrastructure with increased quantum of troops, time frame, tenability, maintenance and recurring expenses.

• Effect of demilitarization on population in the area, especially the Nubra and Shyok Valleys considering army provides livelihood to most.

Nawaz Sharif’s call for Pakistan to take the lead and withdraw troops from Siachen glacier is nothing more than a political statement and Kayani’s call to resolve the dispute saying his country follows “the doctrine of peaceful co-existence with its neighbours especially India”, words of a sly fox. Without remorse for her dead during the Kargil conflict, Kayani is capitalizing recent loss of soldiers in an avalanche to rake up demilitarization because:

• Pakistan is at great disadvantage vis-à-vis India at the Saltoro Ridge with Pakistan holding Gyong and Bilafond glaciers on lower ground to the West.

• The situation in Gilgit-Baltistan is becoming explosive due to neglect of Shia dominated areas, enforced demographic changes, subtle but deliberate conversions to Sunni form of Islam and state sponsored Shia massacres. Any outbreak of insurgency will adversely affect communications to Siachen.

• In conjunction Shaksgam Valley, ceding Gilgit-Baltistan region to China for 50 years (reported by USA’s Middle East Media Research Institute) can extend to Siachen-Saltoro through to Aksai Chin, forcing Indian defences south and increasing the vulnerability of Ladakh region.

• Demilitarization will open avenues of infiltration and terrorism into Ladakh. Since late 1990s, Pakistan’s ISI has been nurturing Shia terrorist organizations including Tehreek-e-Jaferia (TJP) and its many sub groups with an eye on Ladakh and Zanskar Range south of it.

To say that Pakistan will be in no position to re-occupy Siachen is foolish. Even while Indian troops were deployed at Saltoro, the Kargil intrusions were never visualized on plea that terrain was not negotiable. Additionally, in 1984, when both India and Pakistan rushed for Gyong La, an agreement was reached following a flag meeting for both parties to withdraw. Indians did, but the Pakistanis re-enacted their back-stabbing legacy and occupied the pass in clear violation of the agreement made hours ago.

Compared to Saltoro Ridge, we have many times more troops deployed on Ladakh and Pir Panjal ranges in Kashmir, some of them holding equally, if not more, tenacious posts including some in glaciated terrain. Equally dangerous avalanches occur periodically in such areas resulting in loss of lives. Yet, there have been units who have done a full tenure in Siachen without losing a single man to weather and terrain. Yoga and religiously following pre-induction training saves precious lives.

Lack of strategic forethought and political unilateralism has been typical to India ever since Independence. More significantly, ambiguity and deceit have been the hallmarks of China and Pakistan. Ask yourself have they ever bothered about world opinion? Will their expanding nexus and US pullout from Afghanistan, not make Pakistan more uppity? India would do well not to look at Siachen in isolation. In case of Siachen, first the AGPL and posts held by both sides must be duly delineated on ground and map. We need dispassionate analysis of all issues mentioned above before taking any step towards demilitarization.

Lt Gen PC Katoch is a Special Forces veteran who has commanded the Siachen Brigade
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

arun wrote:Retired Brigadier Javed Hussain of the Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan who served with the Special Services Group (SSG) lays out the various abortive Pakistani attempts to wrest Siachhen from India . Admits that India’s move to occupy Bilafod La and Sia La passes in the Saltoro Range was a reaction to Pakistan’s attempt to occupy the Siachen glacier:

The fight for Siachen
On April 13, 1984 a small force of the Indian Army occupied the Bilafond La pass. Four days later, another small force occupied the Sia La pass. Both passes, the former at over 18,000 ft and the latter at over 20,000 ft are located in the Saltoro Range and serve as the gateway to the Siachen Glacier. The Indians had moved fast after receiving intelligence that the Pakistan Army was planning to occupy them. The first Pakistani reaction to the occupation of the passes came on April 24/25, 1984 when a small force attempted to get to the Bilafond La in an uphill assault but was thwarted by the difficult glaciated terrain and adverse weather conditions.

In the days that followed, the Indian Army built up a large force to defend the 80 kilometre-long Saltoro Range ridgeline. Since then, the Saltoro Range has been the focal point of operations — the Pakistanis seeking to gain a foothold on the ridge line, the Indians denying it.

In early April 1987, another attempt was made by the Pakistan Army to gain a foothold on the Saltoro ridgeline. A small force consisting of about a dozen SSG commandos, using ropes and ladders, went up a vertical cliff and occupied a position at over 21,000 ft that dominated the Indian positions at Bilafond La. They named it Quaid post. The Indian Army made several attempts to evict the commandos but each time they were repulsed with heavy casualties. On June 25, 1987, they succeeded in taking the post as the commandos had run out of ammunition and could not be resupplied as the base supporting them came under fire. With the only foothold on the ridgeline lost, the Pakistan Army launched a major attack in September 1987 to get to Bilafond La. The attack was repulsed. In March 1989, another attempt was made, this time in the Chumik glacier, three kilometres east of Giari (recently hit by an avalanche). At over 19,000 ft, the place chosen is the most difficult to scale in the Saltoro Range for either side. In a daring operation the peak was occupied by two men, an officer and a non-commissioned officer, slung from a helicopter on a rope, turn by turn. The two thwarted all Indian efforts to get to the top for 36 hours after which they were reinforced by a handful of soldiers dropped in similar fashion. But in May 1989 when the Indians succeeded in neutralising the supply base supporting the soldiers on the peak, the post was vacated. :((

In November 1992, yet another attempt was made to get to the ridgeline by means of a major attack. Launched in haste, the attack ended in failure. As a consequence, the general officer commanding was sacked. 8) Most of the casualties suffered by Pakistani troops in combat were in the two major attacks (September 1987, November 1992).

The Indians have rarely embarked on a major offensive venture. They have left this to the Pakistanis who have obliged them at least twice . The loss of Quaid post and withdrawal from the Chumik glacier post due to lack of logistic support to a handful of men, are cases in point. Despite twelve rounds of negotiations, the two have not been able to reach an amicable settlement because of domestic political compulsions and mutual mistrust (exacerbated by the Kargil conflict). :(( :(( The dispute revolves round the extension of the Line of Control (LOC) beyond a point on the Saltoro Range known by its map reference as NJ 9820420. The demarcated LOC ends at this point —“thence north to the glaciers” is what the Karachi agreement of 1949 states about the extension. According to the Indians, this meant that the LoC should extend northwards along the Saltoro Range up to Sia Kangri.

On the other hand, Pakistan’s stand is that beyond NJ 9820420, the LOC should extend eastward up to the Karakoram pass. Extending the LOC northwards would give the entire Siachen Glacier-Saltoro area to India, while extending it eastward would give it to Pakistan.
8)

The only way out of this morass is to demilitarise the zone with the UN acting as the guarantor. :(( :(( :(( Can the leadership of the two countries show for once statesmanship to resolve not only the Siachen dispute but all other outstanding disputes and can the two armies assist them in doing so?

Until then, for the soldiers on the Saltoro Range ‘theirs not to reason why, theirs but to do and die’.

Published in The Express Tribune, April 23rd, 2012.
His solution is to call in outside powers as TSP has been unable to capture Siachen. Also he ignores that it was TSp that tried to first capture Siachen and got pre-empted and now wants to be statesmanlike!!!
Roperia
BRFite
Posts: 778
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by Roperia »

Other than stating the strategic implications of unilateral withdrawal from Siachen, Lt Gen Katoch has ripped through this facade of "peaceful existence" doing the rounds in Khan's think-tanks and Pak-jabi elites after mother nature buried 130 wanna-be mujahids under snow. South Asia (<-- read "Pakistan") Center at Atlantic Council puts out a hash tag of # w a g i n g p e a ce with every news on Siachen.

I loved Lt Gen Katoch telling Khan's think-tanks why not make a peace park on Durand Line instead of Siachen. :rotfl:
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by chaanakya »

ramana wrote:

The fight for Siachen


The only way out of this morass is to demilitarise the zone with the UN acting as the guarantor. :(( :(( :(( Can the leadership of the two countries show for once statesmanship to resolve not only the Siachen dispute but all other outstanding disputes and can the two armies assist them in doing so?

Until then, for the soldiers on the Saltoro Range ‘theirs not to reason why, theirs but to do and die’.

Published in The Express Tribune, April 23rd, 2012.
His solution is to call in outside powers as TSP has been unable to capture Siachen. Also he ignores that it was TSp that tried to first capture Siachen and got pre-empted and now wants to be statesmanlike!!!
Pakistan in bleeding because of J&K issues and sub issues within this larger theme. Siachen being the one. I have only solution to J&K which Pakistan can gracefully accept and end its torment.

Withdraw from POK and handover all the areas to India and let people of these areas enjoy fruits of Democracy.
Then it can live and prosper.

But if it wants to gain respect of the World community , let them become Indian State within the Constitution of India. Whole of Pakistan and together we would be a Major power in the World.
Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3671
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by Kashi »

In March 1989, another attempt was made, this time in the Chumik glacier, three kilometres east of Giari (recently hit by an avalanche). At over 19,000 ft, the place chosen is the most difficult to scale in the Saltoro Range for either side. In a daring operation the peak was occupied by two men, an officer and a non-commissioned officer, slung from a helicopter on a rope, turn by turn. The two thwarted all Indian efforts to get to the top for 36 hours after which they were reinforced by a handful of soldiers dropped in similar fashion. But in May 1989 when the Indians succeeded in neutralising the supply base supporting the soldiers on the peak, the post was vacated.
So we actually got Pakis to turn tail from the Chumik glacier as well? A small fact which they conveniently choose to omit from their youtube videos about Operation Chumik and make out as if they still hold the place.

What's the exact status of Chumik at present?
Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3565
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by Aditya G »

^^^ http://www.wesjones.com/coldest.htm

THE ARTILLERY FIRE HAD BEEN so fierce during the summer of 2002 that the Pakistani top brass delayed our trek to the front. But on our third day at Ghyari, they gave the go-ahead: We would be escorted by a squad of eight soldiers who had been ordered to relieve Captain Yasin Rafiq, the commander of a post called Sher.

Sher is perched at 19,600 feet on a ridge at the head of the Chumik Glacier, a short, steep tributary that comes crashing down into the Bilafond Glacier from the northeast and is one of the few Pakistani positions on the Saltoro that commands the high ground.
vanand
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 61
Joined: 12 Apr 2011 13:19

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by vanand »

Kashi wrote:
What's the exact status of Chumik at present?
Kashi All the point k12, chumik kangri, Gyong kangri around Gayri post are with us, including pk 6512, ghent kangri, Saltoro Kangri. Gayri post 1 is the biggest one which have helipads. All Pak bases are at the bottom of the ridge.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/79363637@N05/7106339123/
Last edited by vanand on 23 Apr 2012 20:57, edited 1 time in total.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by svinayak »

Aditya G wrote:^^^ http://www.wesjones.com/coldest.htm
The door to the Karakoram was mostly shut, however, during the two wars that India and Pakistan fought over Kashmir in 1965 and 1971. Then, in 1974, Pakistan's Ministry of Tourism decided to open the region again, issuing permits allowing foreign expeditions to climb on the Baltoro Glacier, near K2, and to explore the no-mans-land around the Siachen.

Between 1974 and 1981, at least 16 major expeditions climbed up to the Siachen and beyond - 11 from Japan, three from Austria, and one each from Britain and the United States. Pakistan's motive for issuing the permits, it seems, was a desire to promote mountain tourism. But as expedition reports circulated through the mountaineering community made clear, the foreigners had concluded that the Siachen belonged to Pakistan. This impression also took root in the minds of the Pakistani government, and today the list of these expeditions is often cited as proof of ownership. "Our contention," Tahir told me, waving his stick, "is that this is our area."

India says the same thing, and both sides are unwilling to admit that neither has a solid legal claim to the region. (To avoid being dragged into the conflict, the United States has steadfastly refused to take a side.) Robert Wirsing, a professor at the U.S. Navy's Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies in Honolulu and one of the world's leading experts on the dispute over Kashmir, puts it more bluntly. In his view, the claims of both sides are equally spurious. "The Indian arguments are absolutely 100 percent false, and so are Pakistan's," says Wirsing. "The Pakistanis have no right to base their claim on permits issued to foreign mountaineers. And the only strength to the Indian argument is that it's backed by a force that cannot be dislodged."
Who is Robert Wirsing? Looks like he can decide the fate of India and Pakistan.


This is funny.
Kumar's involvement with the Siachen dates back to 1977, when he was approached by a German rafter who wanted to undertake the first descent of the Nubra River from its source at the snout of the glacier. The man brought Kumar a map of northeastern Kashmir that had an unusual feature. Beyond NJ9842, the point where the Kashmir cease-fire line ends and an invisible line was supposed to run "thence north to the glaciers," the map depicted a straight line canting off at a dramatic northeastern angle and terminating on the Chinese border at Karakoram Pass. The story behind this line, which suggested that the Siachen Glacier lay squarely inside Pakistan, remains mysterious to this day. One theory, however, is that it was drawn by the U.S. military.
This theory is true since the road to Karakorum and China was done with the help of US companies in the 70s.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14332
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by Aditya_V »

From the link above
The wind was so strong," Naveed, who is now a major, later told me, "that we had to dig in our heels to avoid being carried away." Over the next 40 days, six choppers relayed 86 soldiers and 38 tons of supplies onto the peak. Two Pakistani soldiers died and 30 were wounded during the defense of Naveed Top. That May - after the Indian advance was halted by a massive avalanche that killed a large number of their troops - both sides agreed to demilitarize the summit.

Or so say the Pakistanis. To this day, the Indian army denies that any of this ever happened.
False bravery to the core, on how they voluntarily gave up advantageous positions- Typical Pakis
ManuT
BRFite
Posts: 595
Joined: 22 Apr 2005 23:50

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by ManuT »

From a page 7 this thread
They say when sun shines brightly on Siachen in the last days of June and the upper layer of snow gets softened, a loud roar of Allah-o-Akbar resounds in the stupendous stillness of Bilafond region sending many an avalanche cracking down the slopes and the legend of the lone defenders of Quaid OP persists.
The legend is true we know now. OTOH poor Indians need kerosene to trigger avalanches. :(
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by ShauryaT »

vanand wrote: Kashi All the point k12, chumik kangri, Gyong kangri around Gayri post are with us, including pk 6512, ghent kangri, Saltoro Kangri. Gayri post 1 is the biggest one which have helipads. All Pak bases are at the bottom of the ridge.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/79363637@N05/7106339123/
The only thing that PA controls, which is of importance is Gyong La. They have some leverage of the Nubra valley from there, but they dare not come down from there.
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7830
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by rohitvats »

And AFAIK, it is we who got to Gyong La first.....both the sides withdrew as per some flag meeting but before the ink dried on the agreement, so to speak, pakees being pakees, occupied Gyong La.......So much for trusting this sh*theads...
Bishwa
BRFite
Posts: 314
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by Bishwa »

Regarding the descriptions of various operation in Javed Hussain (Retired Brig SSG) http://tribune.com.pk/story/368394/the- ... r-siachen/ posted by someone

1) Chumik Glacier : "But in May 1989 when the Indians succeeded in neutralising the supply base supporting the soldiers on the peak, the post was vacated."

Lt. Gen V.R.Raghavan in his book "Siachen: Conflict Without End" describes the operation from the Indian POV. Makes very interesting reading on how the Indian Army neutralized the supply base.

2) Operations of 1992 "In November 1992, yet another attempt was made to get to the ridgeline by means of a major attack."

The Indian Army Operation was called Trishul Shakti. You will find the details in this book
http://books.google.com/books?id=Nqmg3x ... 22&f=false

These are some events listed in the google book link

1. An officer and 10 jawans were moved from Bahadur post to establish themselves at the ridge
2. Enemy made an attempt to occupy a saddle at 2330 the following day but could not make progress
3. July 30, 1992 saw heavy firing
4. At 1635 hrs on July 31, 3 Lama helicopters dropped an enemy observation party at Manjit OP to direct firre at Bahadur Post
5. At 1155 hrs on Aug 1, 2 enemy Lama helicopters were seen approaching Manjit OP. The first was shotdown by an Igla.
6. On Aug 2 there was heavy exchange of fire
7. Estimate of enemy casualties were 60 KIA, 70 injured. The dead included a Brigadier and 10 officers

This operation has quite a interesting history from the Pakistani POV. From http://criticalppp.com/archives/28382

FCNA at that time was headed by Zaheer ul Islam Abbasi and X Corps by Lt Gen Ghulam Muhammad Malik (known as GM)

When posted in 1991, GM and Abbasi hatched what they certainly thought was a cunning plan to thwart Indian troop deployment around Siachen by launching a light brigade attack in the Chulung sector. In the summer of ’92, the plan was carried out albeit disastrously with very heavy casualties. Brig Masood Anwari the brigade commander, was amongst the casualties when Indian troops responded swiftly to the attack and the helicopter was shot down by the Indians.

A H Amin writes that GM Malik had “a tacit understanding with Abbasi that in case he succeeds he was a part of the team and if Abbasi failed G.M did not knew about the attack ! A very typical and known phenomenon in all armies, organizations and bureaucracies all over the world”. He goes on to say that this event was “a sad reflection on how an operation was mounted by an overzealous divisional commander, with secret authorization of his direct superior corps commander, while keeping a so called professional army chief in absolute darkness ! A sad but logical end to the career of Abbasi who was a more upright and internally motivated general officer and shoulders above most of the general officers that I saw in my army service”[xiii].

After the Siachen debacle, Abbasi was recalled to GHQ and posted as Director General Infantry.
Misraji
BRFite
Posts: 401
Joined: 24 Dec 2007 11:53
Location: USA

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by Misraji »

Aditya_V wrote:
From the link above
--SNIP---
False bravery to the core, on how they voluntarily gave up advantageous positions- Typical Pakis
As the West Bank settlers say, "Facts on the ground, boss"
(* Yup. You can claim anything. Facts on the ground say its not yours. Pi$$ off. *)

--Ashish
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by Prem »

http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9 ... or-tragedy#
Siachen: folly, tragedy or comedy?
headquarters of the Pakistani army in the Gyari sector of Siachen was engulfed by a massive landslide, Nawaz Sharif became the country’s first political leader to visit the area. Zardari followed the next day, when he left the presidential bunker for a few hours to make the obligatory journey. Both of them viewed the avalanche site from their helicopters. Neither of them undertook the jeep ride-admittedly not very comfortable-to the place of the disaster.After his aerial tour, Zardari expressed appreciation for the efforts being made by the army in the search-and-rescue operation and-through a press release of the government – ”paid glowing tributes to the valiant soldiers.” But, inexplicably, he did not personally utter a single word to express sympathy for those who lie buried under a mountain of rock and ice, and for their families. Some of our private TV channels have followed the same business-as-usual attitude. They could at least have suspended their entertainment programmes for the duration of the search-and-rescue operation. Our “civil society,” quite well-rehearsed in holding vigils when people of their own class are victims, has also not bestirred itself into action over Gayari.Some sections of our press have carried reports saying that India has welcomed Kayani’s call for demilitarisation of Siachen. This is not quite true. All that Indian minister of state for defence Pallam Raju said was that he was glad Pakistan also “realised the challenges and the economic problems of maintaining troops on the Siachen Glacier.” A fresh justification being advanced by India now for its refusal to honour the bilateral understanding on troop redeployment reached in 1989 is the alleged presence of Chinese construction and engineering teams in Gilgit-Baltistan. One Indian “security analyst” writes that any ultimate agreement on Siachen has to be part of an overall package that would address not only India’s concerns relating to the “increasing Chinese presence” in the area but also the “suppression of the Shias of Gilgit-Baltistan who have ethnic links with the Shias of (Indian-occupied) Jammu and Kashmir.”

Pakistan is a Garib , poor Mulk
As regards our defence budget, it is doubtful that we can cut it down drastically, given our security environment. According to figures on global military spending released by SIPRI last Monday, Pakistan spent $5.685 billion on defence in 2011. This compares with $44.282 billion spent by India, 7.8 times that of Pakistan. Pakistan’s defence expenditure as a share of GDP was 2.8 percent, while that of India was 2.7 percent of its GDP.
arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by arun »

Retired Vice Chief of Army Staff Lt. Gen. Vijay Oberoi:

Why quitting Siachen will be disastrous
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by svinayak »

We have another sermon now

India Must Be Careful With Its Missile Pursuits

Whatever move India makes, whether continuing to purchase oil from Iran or test nuclear missiles, it must do so responsibly because their footprint is clearly present, and its actions have stronger results not only regionally, but around the world more than ever before.

Sara Anwar is an Emory alumna from the Class of 2009.
Jayram
BRFite
Posts: 362
Joined: 14 Jan 2003 12:31

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by Jayram »

A Paki graduate perhaps either NRP or 2 gen student who is still carrying on for papa. It is a student newspaper too so more toilet paper...
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by ShauryaT »

Lt. Gen. Prakash Katoch wrote:The Siachen issue is not about Siachen Glacier but the Saltoro Massif. Strategic significance of the latter can hardly be gauged by armchair warriors.
Holding on to the glacier is strategic and in order to hold the glacier, dominating the heights of the Saltoro ridge is essential, is the way this armchair person sees it.
Widening the China-Pakistan handshake (collusive threat) to include Gilgit-Baltistan (reportedly being leased out by Pakistan to China for 50 years), Shaksgam Valley (already ceded by Pakistan to China in 1963),
How credible is this report of a lease? While China is not above doing so, it would seem like a serious and bold move to box India in. In fact, it makes sense for TSP to NOT negotiate with India, if they are indeed serious about this lease offer. But, I have my doubts on the veracity of this report for many reasons.
• SSN and Eastern Ladakh will become focused objectives of Chinese strategic acupuncture. Defence potential of SSN will be totally degraded with western flank exposed and KK Pass to north, which India stopped patrolling years back for fear of annoying the dragon. We continue to remain thin in Eastern Ladakh against Chinese threat via Aksai Chin – heightened more now with possibility of two front war.
The only way for SSN/Ladakh to be threatened by China is through Karakoram pass and Aksai Chin and NOT through Siachen. The ability of TSPA to occupy the ridges and come down from there is slim to none. The maximum TSPA can do is occupy the ridges and threaten the valleys and the glacier itself, but then India should be smart enough to provide a disproportionate response. The only case that TSPA has is if PRC joins in from the east and even then the axis of attack through Siachen would not make sense. SSN/Ladakh can be exposed, if Pakistan threatens the Shyok/Nubra valleys. Which leads us to the next point.
• Our next line of defence will perforce base on Ladakh Range with possibility of Leh coming within enemy artillery range.
This is where our non linear response options come into play. It will be stupid for us do an upfront assault on the ridges. As Kargil shows it is very expensive and hence other options SHOULD come into play.
Ladakh and Zanskar Ranges will be targeted for terrorism by ISI nurtured groups while Pakistan will say they are ‘out of control’. ISI has been nurturing Shia terrorist outfits with an eye on Ladakh since late 1990s.
Then co-existence breaks and all options are open again.
Why are the Ottawa University, the Atlantic Council and the National Defense University, Washington not discussing a ‘Peace Park’ astride the Durand Line? Will demilitarization of Siachen increase the chances / avenues of conflict between China-Pakistan and India?
I think we should ignore the desires and pontifications of the west and act on Siachen, strictly based on how we see our interests and our ability to manage the risks.
• If the whole exercise is based on trusting Pakistan, what exactly has Pakistan done to earn that trust? Has the anti-India terrorist infrastructure including 40 terrorist training camps in POK been dismantled? Has ‘any’ progress been made in punishing the perpetrators of 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks?
TSP has to act BEFORE de-escalation takes place. However, Siachen would be a low risk way to test the waters before other larger de-escalation steps are considered.
• How will Ladakh be defended post de-militarization?
There is no attack force coming in from the Glaciers or the Saltoro, so I do not get the import of this question.
• What force levels we will need to hold ground - mainly along the Ladakh range? On face value ‘many more times’ the current strength north of Khardung La will be required – remember while one brigade was deployed in Kargil earlier, post 1999, the same area is held by a division with nine battalions deployed on the LC and additional troops required during summer months to check infiltration.
A reserve force would be different from a holding force. I think the comparison to Kargil is not accurate. What is fair is to ask, Why is Kargil de-escalation not being considered, maybe the answer is because Siachen is less risky and hence should go first?
Where and in what quantum will reserves for Saltoro Ridge locate, how will they be acclimatized, time frame for launch and what is our capability to launch them at those heights on a ridge already occupied?
While these questions can be explored, I feel our response should be asymmetric and not just limited to getting back the Saltoro ridges, definitely not limited to a frontal assault, in case TSPA is able to execute on this, with our eyes and ears open. I mean it is not like we are trusting them blindly. Our guns may not be on the ridges, but our eyes and ears will be. Look at the details in Brig: Gurmeet Kanwal's presentation for a proposed template.
What troops will we need to counter infiltration and possible terrorist influx into Ladakh? Even requirement of placing reserves on the Zanskar Ranges will need examination.
That is quite pessimistic or extreme caution whichever way one wants to put it, to think about defending all the way back into Zanskar for TSPA. It assumes loss of control below NJ 9842. I think this way it just opens the entire pandora's box then. Let us stick to risk management of Siachen/Saltoro. Below 9842, we do what we do today at the worst.
Expenditure on establishing next defence line post-demilitarization; posts, bunkers, gun positions, helipads, administrative echelons, new communications infrastructure with increased quantum of troops, time frame, tenability, maintenance and recurring expenses.
Are we not talking of de-escalation. A reserve force will not require the long logistic tail and special infra that it currently takes to support men on the Glacier and high ridges. So, the expenses will/should be less than what it takes to support the men on the Glacier.
Effect of demilitarization on population in the area, especially the Nubra and Shyok Valleys considering army provides livelihood to most.
Build a reserve force in the these valleys? A base?
Nawaz Sharif’s call for Pakistan to take the lead and withdraw troops from Siachen glacier is nothing more than a political statement and Kayani’s call to resolve the dispute saying his country follows “the doctrine of peaceful co-existence with its neighbours especially India”, words of a sly fox. Without remorse for her dead during the Kargil conflict, Kayani is capitalizing recent loss of soldiers in an avalanche to rake up demilitarization because:
I think this mistrust is the heart of the issues. Deescalation on Siachen is a trial of sorts.
Pakistan is at great disadvantage vis-à-vis India at the Saltoro Ridge with Pakistan holding Gyong and Bilafond glaciers on lower ground to the West.
Small Nitpik, I thought we controlled Bliafond La? We should ask for action on other items such as 26/11, PoK camps and dismantling of other Jihadi infra as good faith by them, since we are at an advantage here.
The situation in Gilgit-Baltistan is becoming explosive due to neglect of Shia dominated areas, enforced demographic changes, subtle but deliberate conversions to Sunni form of Islam and state sponsored Shia massacres. Any outbreak of insurgency will adversely affect communications to Siachen.
The population base here is really small to do any major damage. They are largely rural, socio-economically weak. There is fragmentation along language, religion, regional etc. This is probably the most diverse region in all of Pakistan. There is only so much this population can do, without active support of outsiders. But, the good part for India is they are not Sunnis for the most part. So, the issue can be kept alive for India's benefit in the future. Who knows, how things will shape up in the distant future.
In conjunction Shaksgam Valley, ceding Gilgit-Baltistan region to China for 50 years (reported by USA’s Middle East Media Research Institute) can extend to Siachen-Saltoro through to Aksai Chin, forcing Indian defences south and increasing the vulnerability of Ladakh region.
If true, is this not a whole different issue. But I do agree, if it is true, then Siachen de-escalation does not make sense.
Demilitarization will open avenues of infiltration and terrorism into Ladakh. Since late 1990s, Pakistan’s ISI has been nurturing Shia terrorist organizations including Tehreek-e-Jaferia (TJP) and its many sub groups with an eye on Ladakh and Zanskar Range south of it.
But not from Siachen. The scope is strictly limited to north of 9842. This is not an be all end all solution. It is only a step.
To say that Pakistan will be in no position to re-occupy Siachen is foolish. Even while Indian troops were deployed at Saltoro, the Kargil intrusions were never visualized on plea that terrain was not negotiable. Additionally, in 1984, when both India and Pakistan rushed for Gyong La, an agreement was reached following a flag meeting for both parties to withdraw. Indians did, but the Pakistanis re-enacted their back-stabbing legacy and occupied the pass in clear violation of the agreement made hours ago.
My question is why did we not counter attack as we have done in so many places and take these positions back from them. Need some more light here. Maybe we did try but not succeed?
Compared to Saltoro Ridge, we have many times more troops deployed on Ladakh and Pir Panjal ranges in Kashmir, some of them holding equally, if not more, tenacious posts including some in glaciated terrain. Equally dangerous avalanches occur periodically in such areas resulting in loss of lives. Yet, there have been units who have done a full tenure in Siachen without losing a single man to weather and terrain. Yoga and religiously following pre-induction training saves precious lives.
True one thing at a time. Siachen can be first, since it is least risky amongst the options.
Lack of strategic forethought and political unilateralism has been typical to India ever since Independence. More significantly, ambiguity and deceit have been the hallmarks of China and Pakistan. Ask yourself have they ever bothered about world opinion? Will their expanding nexus and US pullout from Afghanistan, not make Pakistan more uppity? India would do well not to look at Siachen in isolation.
It cannot be in isolation. It has to be a step in an overall vision. The crux of the issue here is one of trust. But, there seems to be as much mistrust on the Indian government as on Pakistanis. Not without cause and hence this issue of trust and if this trust is broken and consequences thereof should be codified, to the degree possible.
In case of Siachen, first the AGPL and posts held by both sides must be duly delineated on ground and map. We need dispassionate analysis of all issues mentioned above before taking any step towards demilitarization.
Only ways it shall be done.
Lt Gen PC Katoch is a Special Forces veteran who has commanded the Siachen Brigade
My million praams to the General and his men, due to whose sacrifices, we are able to pontificate as civilians and exercise our right. The nation owes it to them to listen to these men carefully.
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5350
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by ShauryaT »

Facts on Siachen
Kayani’s bluff can’t erase
Redeployment from the Siachen glacier without asserting correct delinea-tion of land will mean accepting the Pak claim.
.....
Siachen has no intrinsic strategic value. Both sides should withdraw or redeploy from there once there is clear acceptance of the 1949 CFL-cum-LOC. Thereafter the triangle NJ 9842, K2 and the Karakoram Pass can be designated an International Glacier and World Weather Park, hopefully with Shaksgam as a partner, to study and measure climate change. India should therefore welcome Kayani’s second thoughts and pursue it without getting snow-blinded regarding the facts, larger perspectives and the national interest.
krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5868
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by krisna »

Story of Saltoro -- From Ababeel to Meghdoot
Misleading: Pakistan is nowhere near the Siachen Glacier. The glacier is at least a two-three days’ march away from Gyari and is attainable after first climbing the heights of Saltoro
There has been considerable talk in Pakistan about the recent avalanche in Gyari west of the Saltoro Ridge and it is shown as having occurred in the Siachen area. Pakistan is nowhere near the Siachen Glacier. Please everybody, let us get the facts right. The glacier is at least two-three days march away from Gyari and is attainable after first climbing the heights of Saltoro. It lies to the East of the Saltoro Ridge which is manned by Indian troops at those heights and is lower than the Saltoro. It is therefore not visible from the forward most posts on the Pakistani side. Saltoro overlooks, in a manner of speaking, the land to the west that is the Skardu Astore regions of Gilgit and Baltistan which we assert is ours. Siachen’s northern tip is close to Shaksgam, a slice of J&K territory ceded by Pakistan to China, while its southern tip is the source of water to the Nubra.
No Prime Minister, no General would want his troops to be there if it were not absolutely necessary. This is not an ego battle. It is a matter of preservation of our interests served best by ensuring that two countries hostile to us do not have another link up just north of Leh and Kargil. There is a famous Ladakhi saying which says that only the best of friends and the fiercest of enemies visit this barren land. Let it be known that the Indian Army makes the fiercest of enemies.
One, there can be no piecemeal solutions with regard to Saltoro. Second, these are positions held by India justifiably even under the 1949 Karachi and 1972 Shimla Agreement, which says that from PT NJ9842 the line would run due north. Depictions on some maps including those in the West, that draw a straight line due east up to the Karakoram pass from PT NJ 9842 is deliberate cartographic misrepresentation. Third, let it never be forgotten that India holds an Instrument of Accession with the State of Jammu and Kashmir in the same manner in which Pakistan had with the princely states like Bahawalpur at the time of its independence. Therefore, Indian troops will be located wherever required for strategic and security reasons.
Some despatches have made out that India “after starting the war in 1984 occupies higher positions.” India did not start the war in 1984 but today occupies the heights. Pakistan started the war in 1947 and has continued that in different forms since then. Intelligence reports in 1983 had clearly warned that Pakistan had begun planning an assault on the Saltoro Ridge. A force called the Burzil Force would be launched from Skardu under ‘Operation Ababeel’. In a dramatic push, almost like the crossing of Zoji La in 1947, an Indian force under ‘Operation Meghdoot’ captured the heights of Saltoro barely 48 hours before the Pakistan operation got going. That is how it is and that is how it will be for the foreseeable future unless there is a dramatic shift in Pakistan’s attitude.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59773
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by ramana »

I am sick of those who say there is no strategic value to land that India possesses. Its defeatist talk similar to Chacha Nehru after losing Aksai Chin.
manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2615
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by manjgu »

ShauryaT....

"There is no attack force coming in from the Glaciers or the Saltoro, so I do not get the import of this question." ..

you need to get ur geogrphy right..there are ingress routes from the southern glacier region into the Ladhak valley..if u let go Siachen then u should be prepared to let go Ladhak and make a last stand at Khardung La!!! . Ladhak will become double vulnerable both from east and north.

Everybody is talking of Pakis reoccupying the heights..however what abt possibility of chinese occupying these heights? then which reserve force of yours will come into play??

Siachen has to be held at all costs. This ambigous/lax attitude towards our own territory emboldens our enemies and gives them hope of squeezing us more. I was talking to Lt Gen Hoon ( Retd) who was one of the architects of Op Meghdoot and the plans at that time were to go much deeper into POK to secure our borders and to cut off KKH or atleast reach close to it almost till Skardu !! . However, Mrs Gandhi cautioned against that and gave permission for occupying Saltoro heights.

Even authenticating the AGPL is only at best a precaution and no more.
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7830
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by rohitvats »

^^^Thanks for validating what I've been hearing from people in know. The objective of Op. Meghdoot was not to take Saltoro - it was to take Skardu and deny Pakistan any access to Saltoro itself. Gilgit would have been a much more difficult target given the geography and distance but eminently doable if someone is really willing to go the whole hog.

The second missed opportunity to solve the Northern Area problem was in 1987...alas, if we had taken the decisions to their logical conclusion.
manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2615
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by manjgu »

He said Militarily it was doable and the planning had been done for it , but ofc shelved once political clearance was not available. However, he was appreciative of IG as a woman of courage..willing to bite the bullet. after her, its been one disaster PM to another !

i dont how many of u followed the news of pak-china joint patrol into Baltoro glacier!! what are chinese doing in baltoro? Preparing?

i dont know how short sighted and foolish indian policy makers are. Somehow the narrative always becomes that its india which has to make compromises on kashmir , its india which has to compromise on Siachen, compromise on Sir creek? !! what BS . I want to see Indian PM's assert that whole of POK etc is Indian territory and will be reclaimed by talks or force in every session of parliament and atleast 100 times out of parliament !!
manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2615
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by manjgu »

Gen Hoon terms KKH as the noose around our neck. and he said well standing on Indra Col, i could see on the left Pakistan, Afgahnistan, Uzbekistan? russia, china all in one sweep of the neck :-) we need to be there !!! no question abt it !!
manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2615
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by manjgu »

Another myth which many people have is about thinning out troops from the posts on the ridge. the current no of troops on each post and no of posts have been calculated very precisely with very little possibility of thinning out. and thinning out at best will be very cosmetic if at all...
gunjur
BRFite
Posts: 602
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by gunjur »

Apologies if posted already
PM picks Army chief who will accept Siachen pact
PM Manmohan Singh has put in place the full set of officials who will to support his desire to settle the Siachen dispute with Pakistan in a "Big Bang" visit across the border in a few months. The other dispute on the brink of resolution is Sir Creek. Siachen remains a problem because Indian Army chiefs starting from General A.S. Vaidya and continuing to General V.K. Singh have refused to support what they perceive will be a major concession to Pakistan, as it is India which will have to withdraw.
During the last five years, Pakistan has decided that what it could not win by war it can achieve through diplomacy as long as Dr Singh is PM. Lt. Gen. Bikram Singh, the new Army chief, is expected to lead the reversal of the Army's position in order to help Dr Singh achieve his dream of leaving a "peace mark" on Indo-Pak relations.
The PM also has the support of Home Minister P. Chidambaram. Defence Minister A.K. Antony is the only holdout, but could be pacified if Sonia Gandhi agrees to support Dr Singh on his Pak initiative.
The expectation in Delhi is that a peace settlement between India and Pakistan would strengthen the civilian leadership vis-à-vis the military, thereby promoting a "culture of peace" in Pakistan. In the weeks ahead, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will be devoting increasing attention towards fulfilling his "legacy of peace" with Pakistan, with his proposed Pakistan visit as the "crowning glory" of his legacy.

If this is true, then pakis are doing extraordinary job :( :( :(
nits
BRFite
Posts: 1156
Joined: 01 May 2006 22:56
Location: Some where near Equator...

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Post by nits »

The other dispute on the brink of resolution is Sir Creek
^^ What resoluition is in sight for Sir Creek
Post Reply