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.
Ashutosh Malik
BRFite
Posts: 115
Joined: 07 Mar 2009 18:47

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Ashutosh Malik » 04 May 2012 09:44

Sudeep,

Appreciate your point about agreeing to disagree.

On the limited point about 'Dharmic', I would submit that realpolitic drives nations. We, who tried to be dharmic, in some ways, with respect to nuclear weapons, got screwed all over by those who had the weapons and the NPT.

On the limited point about changing negotiating stance - just one example - I can only say that Chinese do it regularly! The paper visa issue tamasha that they started for Arunachal and later J&K, is just one case in point - to keep India on tenterhooks and ratchet up their negotiating plank. For accepting Tibet as China's integral part, all that we have to speak of, is really an agreement on Sikkim. All substantial nations increase their national power, economic and military, to get the best deal.

Hope we, current version of Indians, can learn to live in the real world and get off our high horse of a nation with 'values' etc - as if we are the only civilisation with values. In fact if it were a question of values and civilisation, there is enough to see and learn from the Chinese civilisation and the Western civilisation as well.

Further, there is enough and more stuff in our civilisational thought going back thousands of years about using power judiciously to ensure gains for the nation.

In 50s/ 60s/ 70s etc. we used to try to punch above our weight trying to teach others 'values'. Nobody gave a damn, largely, except to use our own rhetoric back at us - just one example -when we finally did Pokhran II to validate our designs etc. the world was trying to teach us our rhetoric.

Best regards,
Ashutosh

abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3679
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby abhijitm » 04 May 2012 09:52

Pakistan is now even poorer state. Demilitarize siachen, save paki money so that they can invest it in holier purpose like luring and funding talibunnies, LeT to fight kashmir after 2014. afterall that is what LeT openly says isnt it? So we should go out of the way to help them to achieve their dharma.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7722
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 04 May 2012 10:01

sudeepj wrote:<SNIP>

Claim2. Saltoro ridge positions help interdict Pakistani moves up the Shyok valley.

For point 2, i.e. Saltoro ridge positions will help interdict any move down the Shyok valley.. Chalunka, Turtok etc. are shown in the map below.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF&m ... 460c2b3628

Chalunka lies to the east of Turtok, which is at the LoC in the Shyok valley. Presumably, the invasion of Chalunka can happen along the Shyok valley road. Please correct me if I am wrong, but the Shyok valley road runs, well, in the Shyok valley.. Is it possible to bring down corrected/observed fire on it from the Medium battery at Kumar base?


Please read my earlier post about threat to Sub-Sector West - that is what Chalunka and Turtok Complex is. The threat to SSW comes from PA position on southern portion of the glacier - in the area east and south-east of NJ9842. The access route to Chalunka is from Chulung on Pakistan side - the route comes from Chulung to Chulung La (PA hold north and we south end of pass) and thence down the gorge to Chalunka. This was PA can outflank the town of Turtok and Indian positions on the LOC along and around the Turtok. We maintain a series of high positions called as Bahadur Complex to dominate any access to Chalunka from Chulung Area. PA has repeatedly tried to gain advantage in this area - the second most dramatic operation after Bana Post action on Bilafond La happened in this area. Even in 1999, IA ensured double safety of the area - because any success of PA in this area will interdict IA supply lines mid-way in Shyok Valley making positions in Turtok difficult to maintain and posing threat towards Thoise.

See the map of the sector here: http://wikimapia.org/#lat=34.8251626&lon=76.9688855&z=11&l=0&m=h

PA does not need to occupy Siachen Glacier to pose threat to SSW.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1800
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby sudeepj » 04 May 2012 10:10

rohitvats wrote:
sudeepj wrote:<SNIP>

Claim2. Saltoro ridge positions help interdict Pakistani moves up the Shyok valley.

For point 2, i.e. Saltoro ridge positions will help interdict any move down the Shyok valley.. Chalunka, Turtok etc. are shown in the map below.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF&m ... 460c2b3628

Chalunka lies to the east of Turtok, which is at the LoC in the Shyok valley. Presumably, the invasion of Chalunka can happen along the Shyok valley road. Please correct me if I am wrong, but the Shyok valley road runs, well, in the Shyok valley.. Is it possible to bring down corrected/observed fire on it from the Medium battery at Kumar base?


Please read my earlier post about threat to Sub-Sector West - that is what Chalunka and Turtok Complex is. The threat to SSW comes from PA position on southern portion of the glacier - in the area east and south-east of NJ9842. The access route to Chalunka is from Chulung on Pakistan side - the route comes from Chulung to Chulung La (PA hold north and we south end of pass) and thence down the gorge to Chalunka. This was PA can outflank the town of Turtok and Indian positions on the LOC along and around the Turtok. We maintain a series of high positions called as Bahadur Complex to dominate any access to Chalunka from Chulung Area. PA has repeatedly tried to gain advantage in this area - the second most dramatic operation after Bana Post action on Bilafond La happened in this area. Even in 1999, IA ensured double safety of the area - because any success of PA in this area will interdict IA supply lines mid-way in Shyok Valley making positions in Turtok difficult to maintain and posing threat towards Thoise.

See the map of the sector here: http://wikimapia.org/#lat=34.8251626&lon=76.9688855&z=11&l=0&m=h

PA does not need to occupy Siachen Glacier to pose threat to SSW.


Ahh! Crafty Pakistanis have another route to Chalunka! and they even have a road right up to Chulung! :) Actually, so do we..

Yes, the portion of LoC south of NJ9842 is the most problematic. Ill add this to the map.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1800
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby sudeepj » 04 May 2012 10:14

Ashutosh Malik wrote:On the limited point about 'Dharmic', I would submit that realpolitic drives nations. We, who tried to be dharmic, in some ways, with respect to nuclear weapons, got screwed all over by those who had the weapons and the NPT.


Look, negotiating in bad faith has other real consequences. Who will take you seriously in trade talks, climate talks, energy negotiations - if we ignore our long standing positions, and adopt a foreign policy that changes depending on our relative strength to other nations.


Best Regards
Sudeep

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1800
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby sudeepj » 04 May 2012 10:25

Rahul M wrote:sudeepj, why don't you make up a list of all uninhabited areas of India and petition GOI for gifting them to our lovely neighbours to prove our peaceful intentions ?

by the logic you used about akshai chin, that govt didn't know of the chinese building a road there, similar thing happened in abujhmad. that means it's not a part of India and should belong to naxals in perpetuity, correct ?


Look, I put forward 5 criteria to decide whether its worth fighting a war over some territory that we claim.
(in no particular order)

1. Strategic Significance. [Can loss/gain of the territory affect our posture in other areas]
2. Economic Interests. [Can the loss/gain of the territory cause economic damage to the nation]
3. Cultural Interests. [Is the territory deeply woven into the cultural fabric of the nation]
4. Costs of Sustaining Operations in men and money. [Are the costs of sustaining operations too high? (Too: subjective here)]
5. Political Interests. [Will the loss/gain of the territory affect our internal politics? Will it change our external political situation?]

For something like Abujmad, or Andman and Nicobar islands, the answers are Yes to all five questions. For Siachen, in my opinion, the answers are No to (2, 3, 4, 5) and Generals and soldiers differ on 1. I am tending towards Gen. Chibber's position and not Gen. Hoon's.

If you have a better system of evaluating questions such as these, please post it in the forum, and we will all know more.. For e.g. many have the idea, that our land is our land, and that is their system.. Which is fine with me! Who am I to tell them how they should develop their positions.. Its like religion really, to me this makes sense. To you something else makes sense.. To each his own.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1800
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby sudeepj » 04 May 2012 10:28

Marten wrote:SudeepJ, while you're fully entitled to be sanctimonious about our stands and positions in negotiations on critical matters, it stinks like a horse's behind when you choose to not apply the learnings from the immediate past actions of the neighbors that you are dealing with. Have we already forgotten Kargil or perhaps the Mumbai attacks? Seriously, there has to be something quite off if you want to draw back from ground that we currently hold in "good faith". Basically your whole premise, despite your verbosity and aggro, is based on BS.


haha.. same to you.

abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3679
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby abhijitm » 04 May 2012 11:45

sudeepj, you can apply all your parameters to every tip of the high mountain range in the world and except for 1. all will be No. And you can fight with tooth and nail to convince 1 as No.

Your entire theory of ceding territory is a load of BS

abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3679
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby abhijitm » 04 May 2012 12:34

arey he is very eager to give a piece of land to pakistan. Sudeepj, do us a favor. Ask USA to give up X sq km of land deep into antartica to you. I am sure it complies to all your 5 parameters. Then once they cede, take it and gift it to pakistan. This way you and pakistan both will be happy. But please leave us alone.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1800
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby sudeepj » 04 May 2012 12:35

abhijitm wrote:sudeepj, you can apply all your parameters to every tip of the high mountain range in the world and except for 1. all will be No. And you can fight with tooth and nail to convince 1 as No.


Aha! thank you for conceding that Siachen has no economic/cultural/political significance, and that there is a cost to continuing operations there. :D

About (1), the southern part of the Glacier certainly has consequences on the Nubra and Shyok valleys and at least some peaks around NJ9842 need to be manned. So its not completely strategically useless. That much, I can agree with. Even so, Pakistan is in no position to use this advantage today, and given our economic progress, wont be in a position to do so in the future. This risk will further go down by have the Glacier under effective monitoring West of NJ9842.

The Northern passes, and the northern part of the Saltoro ridge, I am not so sure.

Even so, a couple of statements were loosely bandied about at the start of the discussion. These have been conclusively proven to be false.
1. Saltoro ridge can be used to 'dominate' the Karakoram Highway. [Nonsense, its more than 100 kms away from the closest Saltoro post].
2. Chinese can roll down Indira Col, and down the Nubra valley. [Logistically impossible].

Your entire theory of ceding territory is a load of BS


Its a small matter that I am not asking for a concession of territory, only trying to find out more about (1): The strategic importance of holding the Saltoro ridge, but that wont make any difference to you. So I wont bother repeating the nuances here.
Last edited by sudeepj on 04 May 2012 12:38, edited 1 time in total.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1800
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby sudeepj » 04 May 2012 12:37

Marten wrote:
Marten wrote:SudeepJ, while you're fully entitled to be sanctimonious about our stands and positions in negotiations on critical matters, it stinks like a horse's behind when you choose to not apply the learnings from the immediate past actions of the neighbors that you are dealing with. Have we already forgotten Kargil or perhaps the Mumbai attacks? Seriously, there has to be something quite off if you want to draw back from ground that we currently hold in "good faith". Basically your whole premise, despite your verbosity and aggro, is based on BS.


sudeepj wrote:haha.. same to you.

Do you have a basis that is less juvenile than this? The time spent on Google Maps etc. is completely wasted unless you can understand basic geopolitics, which in this case is limited to perhaps some variation of Simpsons. Seriously :roll: !


Marten, you have used so many adjectives in your post, that its difficult to take it seriously. I mean "Sanctimonious, critical, stinks like a horses ass, verbosity, abro, BS".. I guessed you were just venting because something I said made you uncomfortable. I really cant help that..

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11825
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 04 May 2012 12:46

sudeepj wrote:Look, I put forward 5 criteria to decide whether its worth fighting a war over some territory that we claim.
(in no particular order)

For something like Abujmad, or Andman and Nicobar islands, the answers are Yes to all five questions. For Siachen, in my opinion, the answers are No to (2, 3, 4, 5) and Generals and soldiers differ on 1. I am tending towards Gen. Chibber's position and not Gen. Hoon's.



I disagree on the view on 2,3,4,5

1. Strategic Significance. Discussed above shown nessecary
2. Economic Interests. Possibly, due to such a large glacier and one can never guarantee any land may not have future important mineral deposits
3. Cultural Interests. Yes, especially for SDRE H&D, its such a sore point with Goras that SDRE's Helis fly higher and land at Higher points than thier TFTA Helis.
4. Costs of Sustaining Operations in men and money. Its worth it, we have developed many techologies has a result of such High Altitude operations.

If we are to make a peace park, lets us make Tibet and POK as peace parks by asking the present miltaries occupying and polluting these lands to vacate these areas.
5. Political Interests. Yes, Externally it signifies to everyone, vacating means INdian elite is willing to put Indian Land on Sale and we are pushovers

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3622
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Kashi » 04 May 2012 12:59

Siachen

1. Strategic Significance- Established beyond any doubt or reproach.

2. Economic Interests- Mountaineering, high-altitude hiking is a big global business. In Nepal, the total economic contribution from Mt. Everest Expedition teams in one climbing season of Spring 2011 was $7m. Considering the number of towering peaks and explored valleys in the region, the potential can only be speculated. Plus, the spinoffs for Indian citizens living in Ladakh, who'll gain from hotel reservations, hiring of guides and porters, making available the appropriate supplies etc. will be immense. It also provides us an oppurtunity for scientific expeditions and ressearch, which can also be exploited economically.

3. Cultural Interests.- A nations cultural fabric is extremely diverse and complex to be simplified to a single entity. Local populations have their own belief systems and quite a few inhabitants of mountainous regions consider the surrounding hills to be sacred and divine. Considering that enough people are aware of the grit and valour of our armed forces in getting hold of Siachen, it is a reasonable assumption that Siachen, like Kargil has woven itself into our comprehensive national fabric

4. Costs of Sustaining Operations in men and money- Has been done to death. The costs have been made manageable over the years and can be easily offset by exploitng the economic potential- So points 2 and 4 are interwoven

5. Political Interests- It must be, for no party has dared (except some belonging to leftist lunatic fringe) to suggest that we give up our land for peace. Perhaps they are well aware of the political ramifications of such a move. Hell, even a trivial arrangement with Bangladesh on swapping enclaves has been stymied for one reason or the other.
Last edited by Kashi on 04 May 2012 13:00, edited 1 time in total.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1800
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby sudeepj » 04 May 2012 12:59

So heres an excerpt from "Trishul Ladakh and Kargil 1947-1993" by Brigadier Ashok Malhotra.

Trishul Ladakh and Kargil 1947-1993

While the Chinese were in physical possesion of their claimed territory because of the Xinjiang - Tibet highway, the boundary claimed by us lay beyod two high mountain ranges and was logistically impossible and militarily indefensible.

Indefensible, obviously because of the fact that legally it was not a very good case and
the military price this barren uninhabited wind-swept desolation would demand did not make it a worthwhile cause.


:rotfl: So much for "You Jaichand doing cost benefit analysis on Siachen.. How dare you!! Namakool Namurad Adharmic Want to cede territory to Pakistan"

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11825
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 04 May 2012 13:22

Ashok Malhotra is talking about Aksai Chin and how our Miltary infrastructure is poor and hence GRABBED away from us. Its Barren but can you guarantee its worthless, for minerela wealth etc. no.

We made a mistake before 1962 in Trusting China our neighbour and China has pis*** on our trust i.e stabbed us in the back, what makes you so sure that Pak requires that trust who have repeadtedly done that.

Hell we should give all our forests and Thar desert due to this barren logic.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7722
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 04 May 2012 13:25

For reference:

Image

Kanishka
BRFite
Posts: 330
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 06:44
Location: K-PAX

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Kanishka » 04 May 2012 13:29

Some people here think IA does not know what it is doing or why it is holding on to Siachin and they are happy to randomly quote from a book to support their argument.
The argument for and against holding on to Siachin has been going on for years both inside the IA and outside.
In the end the collective wisdom of the Army has/is prevailing and which is why we continue to be there.
Times change and so do technologies and strategic needs. What was/is militarily difficult before may not be so in the future.
We are there because we need to and should continue to do so.
In my opinion we will need to be in Siachin, not only because it is our territory but to ensure Pakistan ceases to exist and China is put in its place.


End of discussion.
Last edited by Kanishka on 04 May 2012 14:22, edited 2 times in total.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11825
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 04 May 2012 13:33

From the Map it looks like Gyong LA on the map, illegally occipied by Pakis falls east of line drawn Northwards from NJ9842.

abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3679
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby abhijitm » 04 May 2012 14:18

sudeepj wrote:Aha! thank you for conceding that Siachen has no economic/cultural/political significance, and that there is a cost to continuing operations there. :D

You are a first class troll who is consuming bandwidth making ridiculous arguments and making others to take the bait.

jimmy_moh
BRFite
Posts: 179
Joined: 14 May 2009 12:33
Location: LOC

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby jimmy_moh » 04 May 2012 14:26

Kashi wrote:Siachen

1. Strategic Significance- Established beyond any doubt or reproach.

This is the part where we still not reached conclusion , as long as it dont have any stragetic importance am with sudeep

2. Economic Interests- Mountaineering, high-altitude hiking is a big global business. In Nepal, the total economic contribution from Mt. Everest Expedition teams in one climbing season of Spring 2011 was $7m. Considering the number of towering peaks and explored valleys in the region, the potential can only be speculated. Plus, the spinoffs for Indian citizens living in Ladakh, who'll gain from hotel reservations, hiring of guides and porters, making available the appropriate supplies etc. will be immense. It also provides us an oppurtunity for scientific expeditions and ressearch, which can also be exploited economically.

So how can all these possible if the millitary presence is there


3. Cultural Interests.- A nations cultural fabric is extremely diverse and complex to be simplified to a single entity. Local populations have their own belief systems and quite a few inhabitants of mountainous regions consider the surrounding hills to be sacred and divine. Considering that enough people are aware of the grit and valour of our armed forces in getting hold of Siachen, it is a reasonable assumption that Siachen, like Kargil has woven itself into our comprehensive national fabric
there is nothing sacred about this glacier

4. Costs of Sustaining Operations in men and money- Has been done to death. The costs have been made manageable over the years and can be easily offset by exploitng the economic potential- So points 2 and 4 are interwoven
Cost is managable only but same can be used for the welfare of our soldiers


5. Political Interests- It must be, for no party has dared (except some belonging to leftist lunatic fringe) to suggest that we give up our land for peace. Perhaps they are well aware of the political ramifications of such a move. Hell, even a trivial arrangement with Bangladesh on swapping enclaves has been stymied for one reason or the other.
no political interest , but political drams can happen

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3622
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Kashi » 04 May 2012 14:42

jimmy_moh wrote:1. Strategic Significance-

This is the part where we still not reached conclusion , as long as it dont have any stragetic importance am with sudeep


Read Rohitvats' posts again. I fully agree with him and many others including fellow rakshaks, defence analysts, retried armed forces personel about the imporatnce of the area.

jimmy_moh wrote:2. Economic Interests- So how can all these possible if the millitary presence is there


They can be facilitated by the military. Recently quite a few expeditions were permitted to explore Siachen under army supervision. Cannot see any reason why it will not happen here. After all the Joint Security Area on the Korean border is a big draw isn't it? So is the Wagah border.

jimmy_moh wrote:3. Cultural Interests.
there is nothing sacred about this glacier


Maybe not for you. But for military personel who pray at OP BABA Shrine, the glacier and the surrounding areas are more scared than perhaps you'd care to admit. Plus, you do not know what sentiments the nearby residents of Ladakh and Turtuk may have for the glacier.

jimmy_moh wrote:4. Costs of Sustaining Operations in men and money- Cost is managable only but same can be used for the welfare of our soldiers


There are enough provisions for armed forces welfare than dipping into the cost of Siachen operations. Siachen directly helps devlop supporting infrastructure in those remote regions.

jimmy_moh wrote:5. Political Interests- no political interest , but political drams can happen


Political dramas are intricately linked with political interest. No neta worth his salt will let go of a chance to gather any political capital that comes with the dramas

abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3679
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby abhijitm » 04 May 2012 14:46

kashi, aditya_v, if you start arguing on those lines then that only implies "otherwise we can give up the land"

Kanishka
BRFite
Posts: 330
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 06:44
Location: K-PAX

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Kanishka » 04 May 2012 14:46

abhijitm wrote:
sudeepj wrote:Aha! thank you for conceding that Siachen has no economic/cultural/political significance, and that there is a cost to continuing operations there. :D

You are a first class troll who is consuming bandwidth making ridiculous arguments and making others to take the bait.


Yeah it was a set up. His five points/requirements are carefully crafted but irrelevant to India's short term and long term interests and should be ignored.
What this shows is how frustrated some people are. :P Enjoy!

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3622
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Kashi » 04 May 2012 14:53

abhijitm wrote:kashi, aditya_v, if you start arguing on those lines then that only implies "otherwise we can give up the land"


No where does it implies that. I do not wish to imply that at all. I do admit that I fell for the bait from a wind up merchant on a trolling expedition of brobdingnagian proportions.

Nevertheless, I am merely pointing out that even as per sudeepj's convoluted demented, warped worldview, holding on to Siachen is a no-brainer.

My posts are an attempt to demolish this rubbish that Siachen is a socio-politico-economic-military wasteland. It is not, not by any stretch.

Regardless, it is our land and we are not letting it go.

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

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Amitabh » 04 May 2012 15:39

abhishek_sharma wrote:
Amitabh wrote:Er, they do focus on growth. In fact they are the most successful growth story of the late 20th century as I am sure you have noticed. Which is what has allowed them to increase military spending. Which was my original point to begin with.


Your original point was "Long term profits ---> growth ---> great power status". What %age of their GDP is spent on defense? Is it less than what India spends on defense? If no, then India focuses more on non-military matters.

Secondly, they have an ally like Pakistan which takes care of their concerns w.r.t. India. Fostering Hafiz Sayeed in UNSC is not the best way to show that you care for "long term profits".

Perhaps you misunderstood my original point. Cross-border raids by Indian forces --> higher probability of war --> higher probability of nuclear war --> bad for economy --> by bye future prospects, everyone say Ni hao ma...

No confrontation with neighbours --> absorb terror attacks/use proxies/indirect approach --> low probability of war --> low probability of nuclear war --> good for economy --> bring on the competition for Asia's future

Fostering Hafiz Saeed is in keeping with the second approach from a Chinese perspective (low cost). Bashing on regardless to Lahore is in keeping with the first, costlier approach. Zimble.

Defence budget discussion is entirely separate, to do with threat perceptions and even further off topic. It's not like the Indian defence budget is shrinking. Does that mean that Manmohan Singh is the next Ranjit Singh? I think not.

abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3679
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby abhijitm » 04 May 2012 15:47

Kashi wrote:Nevertheless, I am merely pointing out that even as per sudeepj's convoluted demented, warped worldview, holding on to Siachen is a no-brainer.

Very premise of the argument that the Indian land is avaible for grab if it does not meet X Y Z criteria is ridiculous. And I am pretty darn sure that no one from GoI will set a precendence for this.

Nation boundaries are not defined and defended like that. So take his theories, find a suitable hole and stuff em.

Supratik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6435
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 10:21
Location: USA

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Supratik » 04 May 2012 16:13

Aditya_V wrote:From the Map it looks like Gyong LA on the map, illegally occipied by Pakis falls east of line drawn Northwards from NJ9842.


Gyong La is in Indian hands according to wiki.

rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7722
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 04 May 2012 16:15

^^^It is in PA hands.

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11825
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 04 May 2012 16:24

Gyong La was fiercely contested in 1987 and after a flag meeting was agreed both Army's will descalate, but as usual PA stabbed IA in the back.

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5770
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby vishvak » 04 May 2012 16:40

Aditya_V wrote:Gyong La was fiercely contested in 1987 and after a flag meeting was agreed both Army's will descalate, but as usual PA stabbed IA in the back.

Such meetings directly or indirectly, documented or otherwise etc, could be a better way to look at how a contested post could not be assumed to be peaceful even after de-escalation, thereby negating assumptions that flag-meeting at crucial posts may not work.

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3622
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Kashi » 04 May 2012 19:15

Aditya_V wrote:Gyong La was fiercely contested in 1987 and after a flag meeting was agreed both Army's will descalate, but as usual PA stabbed IA in the back.


And yet Rajiv was willing to sign an agrement in 1989? Or was it the usual Paki tosh?

chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby chaanakya » 04 May 2012 19:37

Those who favour withdrawal by India from Siachen as proposed by Pakis...

What is offered by Pakis in return??
and How did you develop so much trust in Pakis to believe in their "Iron Clad" offers.

ManuT
BRFite
Posts: 595
Joined: 22 Apr 2005 23:50

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby ManuT » 04 May 2012 20:12

My 2 cents. I do realise a lot of the points already made.

Let's put aside 'Strategic significance of Siachen' because what is being argued in the name of this strategery is are really tactical issues.

So there are 4 positions on the issue
1. Withdraw
2. Don't withdraw
3. Withdraw with authentication and ironclad guarantees.
4. None of the above :mrgreen:

The 3. is a nuanced position as it has been mentioned here that LOC WAS authenticated and that did not stop TSPA from crossing it in the case of Kargil. But at least it makes such a withdrawal worth a shot.

The point of authentication is AGPL is converting it into LOC. That would be a step forward, if India knows what it is doing.

Cost in money terms is nothing. What was the cost of CWG or IPL. This has been already been posted here.

Human cost is there, it has been reduced but will be there.

A few years ago the bus service across LOC was started. Any benefit, if any, India muddled it by dropping its insistence on passports. There was no need for it.

Similarly, by in what is being sold for vacating Siachen (i.e. unauthenticated from TSPA side) is in the hope that it becomes a peace park. IMO, It opens the door for joint ownership, is India open to that idea, :?: because joint onweship of Siachen (for trekking expeditions, etc, etc) set a precedent.

Second, again, why only territory in India's control in dispute? Occupation of parts of Kashmir by TSP and China is still illegal.

Third, from a conflict resolution POV when you have a complex issues and an a such high level of mistrust (which TSP has well earned) you have to make list of the issues in the least order of difficulty and approach them one by one and in the same order.

This is for 2 reasons. 1. You build mechanisms for conflict resolution 2. you build trust (not on some warm & fuzzy feelings but a track records). It allows the two sides to go up OR down in a calibrated manner. (For that reason, there cannot be any terror proof negotiations)

What you DON'T DO is like Musharraf to head long right into the "Core Issue".

The other thing you DON'T DO is, pick something piece meal from the middle. It sends conflicting signals. Siachen is not on the bottom of the list of issues (at least not mine). For that reason alone IA should stay, I mean, with authentication.

---
Added later: Is POK-Gwadar rail line connecting to China logistically impossible today?

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby abhishek_sharma » 04 May 2012 20:33

Amitabh wrote:Perhaps you misunderstood my original point. Cross-border raids by Indian forces --> higher probability of war --> higher probability of nuclear war --> bad for economy --> by bye future prospects, everyone say Ni hao ma...

No confrontation with neighbours --> absorb terror attacks/use proxies/indirect approach --> low probability of war --> low probability of nuclear war --> good for economy --> bring on the competition for Asia's future

Fostering Hafiz Saeed is in keeping with the second approach from a Chinese perspective (low cost). Bashing on regardless to Lahore is in keeping with the first, costlier approach. Zimble.


1. The first mistake is "Cross-border raids by Indian forces --> higher probability of war --> higher probability of nuclear war". How high is the probability of nuclear war? What makes you think that Pakis are suicidal enough to risk it? In particular, why didn't they use nuclear weapons before withdrawing from Kargil. Surely those peaks had strategic value. Why didn't they use their nuclear weapons when their plane was shot down shortly after the Kargil war? And Indian forces have punished Pakis many times after the nuclear tests (before ceasefire). I have not noticed any nuclear war. Why can't we use those methods?

2. The second part of the argument "No confrontation with ..." sounds like a typical dhimmi approach because you included the phrase "absorb terror attacks". What is the cost of lives of people who die in terror attacks? Shouldn't you include it in your mercantile approach? Some people might say that the value of lives of people is insignificant. In that case, I will ask them to send their addresses to Hafiz Sayeed. We can minimize our "losses" if those insignificant people are killed. (Ignore this point if you are suggesting that we should use covert methods for punishing Pakistan.)

3. Thirdly, China is not facing the problem of cross-border terrorism. Is any country sponsoring terror attacks in China? (When Pakis did so, they were forced to do Lal Masjid raid). So comparing India to China in these matters is an apples to oranges comparison.

abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3679
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby abhijitm » 04 May 2012 20:42

ShauryaT wrote:I am afraid that inaction is not the answer.

Agree. But who is saying don't act? Just take gradual steps.
Let us put it this way. I want to control the evolution of Pakistan to the degree possible and remove any outside interference. I can do that only if I engage with them.
Unfortunately engagement will not guarantee control over a nation's evolution. You can to a certain extend if they become our client state. We are much more engaged with Bangladesh, Sri Lanka etc than pakistan. Do you think we have a control on their evolution?

"rogue" sounds too American an adjective. Dysfunctional, failing, paranoid are the words that come to my mind.
Based on the past and most recent experience I will also add untrustworthy, offensive and opportunists.

Also note that Talibans, LeT have been recruiting heavily to fight USA. 2014 is just around the corner and the situation is Soviet invasion redux all over again. We need to see if Kashmir again starts boiling or IM cells of LeT in India becomes lethally more active. We need to engage with pakistan even more carefully with ever watchful eyes. Your don't want to watch your bribe of Siachen going into drain, do you?

We should always think towards peaceful co-existence but the attitude of now or never will not work.

Ha, but if you want to keep dangling siachen carrot and make pakis dance on your tune then that's another matter :mrgreen:

brihaspati
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12410
Joined: 19 Nov 2008 03:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby brihaspati » 04 May 2012 21:00

rohitvats,
please do not discuss details. There is a concerted effort as part of the Good Friday circle to get the Pakis and China [which has a degree of leverage on EU and UK in particular] their conquests permanently recognized. This is getting urgency as both Pakis and the Chinese are lobbying strongly as they fear that with political uncertainty facing all three govs [Pakis/Chinese/India] things on ground may get changed in India's favour if the "line" remains unsettled.

You are likely wasting your time and providing arguments that will help more these "western" think tanks and their internal collaborators. I have reasons to know that these opinion pieces are probes. A decision that has already been taken somewhere as a successful strategy to manipulate public opinion. In this, politically wavering or unsure ex-military personnel, desi eminents or academics, are sussed out to see whether they would become voices in the name of "problem solving".

Lets say someone interacts with such circles on a regular semi-professional basis where he pretends the exact opposite of what he says anonymously. This helps in obtaining insights into the methods and their thought processes. Do not provide detailed arguments and locational stuff. People sit down regularly to review chat/blog logs to measure trends and what to use. This then gets briefed to disseminators through perfectly innocent academic means.

Jarita
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2260
Joined: 30 Oct 2009 22:27
Location: Andromeda

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Jarita » 04 May 2012 21:14

^^ How does the Indian system aid and abett

pragnya
BRFite
Posts: 728
Joined: 20 Feb 2011 18:41

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby pragnya » 04 May 2012 21:36

not related to the thread but an article which summarises the blunders committed by successive indian govts and pakistan's commitments and their action. just posting in the light of the heated dicussion on siachen withdrawl or disengagement.

Seven blunders that will haunt India for posterity

should we be repeating the same again??

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1800
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby sudeepj » 04 May 2012 21:52

abhijitm wrote:
sudeepj wrote:Aha! thank you for conceding that Siachen has no economic/cultural/political significance, and that there is a cost to continuing operations there. :D

You are a first class troll who is consuming bandwidth making ridiculous arguments and making others to take the bait.


As opposed to you, who is only a third class troll? I simply hold a different opinion and a different methodology than you, I really cant help it if it bothers you so much.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1800
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby sudeepj » 04 May 2012 22:02

Marten wrote:
sudeepj wrote:Marten, you have used so many adjectives in your post, that its difficult to take it seriously. I mean "Sanctimonious, critical, stinks like a horses ass, verbosity, abro, BS".. I guessed you were just venting because something I said made you uncomfortable. I really cant help that..

I guess the only part of "buttress your argument" that you got was "butt". Congratulations, you've earned your epithets.
So much for your comprehension.


Rite, somewhere in the horses behind was a stuck a request to "buttress your argument". Honestly speaking, if you say to someone, (paraphrasing) "despite your sanctimoniousness and your verbosity and your aggression, your argument stinks like a horses rear end, and your argument is based on BS, and oh btw. you are forgetting our recent experiences with Pakistan".

Do you expect me to address your argument or get distracted by the adjectives? I am having a fairly decent, and at least to me, fruitful conversation with Ashutosh, Rohit and others, but what do you expect when you start of the bat with a bouncer like that?


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w, greatde, Sagrawal and 108 guests