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.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11857
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Aditya_V » 08 May 2012 18:55

Talks on Siachen in June, don't expect dramatic result: Antony

Good to hear Anthony's position, but why talks on Siachen alone. Can we have talks on Terror alone?


While informing the House that the 13th round of Defence Secretary-level talks on Siachen will take place in the second week of next month, Antony said during the last round Pakistan had refused to authenticate the troop positions of the two countries but India insisted on it.

"Don't expect dramatic results (from the next round of talks. It is a complicated issue," he said.

Making it clear that India was keen on authentication and had "not changed the position", he said, "it is the national position, not government position. We took the position after considered decision."


harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby harbans » 08 May 2012 19:03

An article with lots of maps, suggestions. Brig G Kanwal is one of the authors:

http://www.cmc.sandia.gov/cmc-papers/sand20075670.pdf

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

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby jimmy_moh » 08 May 2012 19:44

manjgu wrote:tsarkar ..very well said.

SudeepJ firing missiles( mostly duds) from their aircon rooms ...

new definitions

Military logistics = Tatra trucks, snow scooters... Arey ghadhey, khachar kya kaam ke hain phahad mein

Linkup = 6 lane highway with mcdonalds and Pizzaking with motels enroute

CBM = Indian withdrawing from its own territory

North = North West

Give and Take = Indian gives Siachen to Pakistan, Pakistan gives terrorism, jehadis, backstabbing in return !

Strategic Value = SudeepJ own home. ( rest all be dammed, saale move ho jayenge doosri place mein)


Another point SudeepJ fails to understand that when guns etc are placed at an altitude, how their range increases dramatically.

SudeepJ, if tomorrow chinese claim/occupy Siachen as part of their greater Tibet, whats the plan for their eviction?


dont go personal manguj...... what ever he is having the doubt i was also having.. what is ithe strategic value of this godforsaken glacier.....
but after reading the analysis in BR especially from rohit , am convinced.. after all IA is not fool to keep hold this land for more than 2 decades just for pride....

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5242
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby ShauryaT » 08 May 2012 19:55

Poster Manjgu has repeatedly crossed the line and gone personal. I have reported his post.

When someone goes personal like this, it hurts the poster the most as the value of his own message is devalued. Think about it. If you cannot cool yourself then do not post is a good rule.

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby harbans » 08 May 2012 20:10

As i mentioned the core debate is not whether Siachen is strategic or not, or for that matter what features across Arunachal are ours, or across the LAC. The core issue is why for 7 millenia these were never issues. But they became issues with the presence of Imperialist Han Chinese and the creation of an Islamist Pakistan in our neighborhoods. The day the Han walks into Nepal, India would have to start looking at maps and we will have a left lobby that will agree with China to give Bodh Gaya to China as well Gautama Sidharth is Chinese..right? Shiva is Chinese too as he is supposed to meditate in Kailash parvat (which is in Chna)..isn't he? We also will be looking at Chinese claims on North Bengal as that is East Nepal..all frames of reference would change. Imagine that..and from that perspective judge our present negotiating stance on Siachen, LOC, LAC..and you will see how sad it is.

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

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby brihaspati » 08 May 2012 20:18

ShauryaT wrote:Poster Manjgu has repeatedly crossed the line and gone personal. I have reported his post.

When someone goes personal like this, it hurts the poster the most as the value of his own message is devalued. Think about it. If you cannot cool yourself then do not post is a good rule.


Agreed! But did you also find tapeworm etc objectionable and report it? Even if you did you did not find it necessary to declare here that you did so? Is it possible that when we attack personal attacks, we do so selectively? I personally ever had to report only one post because it directly threatened me with "vanishing". Since then never reported anyone. Being abusive reveals the character. Being selectively responsive to such abuse is also revealing. Sooner or later people come around to their senses. If they don't admins usually take care of it. :D

Siachen is a complicated issue, and the discussion often turns emotive because - underlying it all, are very human thoughts and perceptions. If there was no humans around, no PA and IA therefore, and no India or Pakistan. That zone would have been a glaciated and cold desert, and a particular geological formation.

The real issues are the lack of trust India has by experience on both the Pakistani state as well as its army, and both the Chinese state as well as its army. The second important factor is the as yet unmeasurable prices to be paid or even feasibility of reversing the ground situation to status quo if India retreats under some agreement from its currently held positions - and PA+PLA decide to sneak in and occupy.

There is a serious need to study PA and PLA campaigns separately to study their evolving military doctrines [and not just what is oifficially claimed]. We may have lots of data points on PA, but very few on PLA. The IA has not really met in large scale engagement with the PLA since 62. What we are talking here about PLA+PA capabilities is partly based on speculation. It is never helpful to underestimate the enemy and to overestimate one's own. It might actually help to publicly underestimate one's own in discussions.

It is tactically a blunder to project - that India has this capacity or that capacity to rollback PA or PLA intrusions etc. In the public discourse it is way better to project weakness - because that then justifies not giving concessions. This is what Pakis do - India must do more because India is stronger. [Same argument tried by BD]. It limits our negotiating on the more mundane issues where diplomatic waltzes have to be danced.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5242
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby ShauryaT » 08 May 2012 20:19

rohitvats wrote:Just for information, Lt. General Katoch was Bde.Commander for Siachen Bde during Kargil.
And hence all the more important that his recent statement of Pakistan reneging of a local military agreement in 1984 for Gyong La should be known, if accurate. For, the 1989 Chumik Glacier disengagement has held, till date.
Last edited by ShauryaT on 08 May 2012 20:53, edited 1 time in total.

pgbhat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4125
Joined: 16 Dec 2008 21:47
Location: Hayden's Ferry

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby pgbhat » 08 May 2012 20:22


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

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby brihaspati » 08 May 2012 20:24

Can we have a point by point withdrawalist critique of Lt Gen Prakash Katoch's article that I posted?

repeating for convenience:

http://www.claws.in/index.php?action=master&task=1119&u_id=183
Not about Siachen
Prakash Katoch
Quote:
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.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1808
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby sudeepj » 08 May 2012 20:33

tsarkar wrote:
sudeepj wrote:I stand corrected, there is after all, a 105mm pack howitzer, though its range is only 11 kms.Oh.. crafty crafty humans.. :D

Oh.. ignorant ignorant human.. :(

http://ofb.gov.in/products/data/ammunition/lc/7.htm
17.6 km

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Histo ... arish.html has the image of a Pakistani medium lift helicopter capable of transporting 155 mm artillery. Low flying helicopters in the mountains cannot be detected by radar because of clutter.

BTW Sudeep, why did Pakistan violate the well defined LoC in Kargil sector? What guarantees do you provide against further misadventurism?


1. 17.6 kms is through the IFG and the LFG like high performance guns. Those cant be disassembled for mule pack. The barrel alone will be 300-500 kgs. We are talking about the 105mm pack howitzer, right? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OTO_Melara_Mod_56

2. The biggest chopper than Pakistanis have is Mi17v5, with a service ceiling of 6kms and height hover ceiling of 4kms or so. Helicopters payload varies greatly with height and the passes we are talking about are all 5.5+kms high, with the turkestan la at 5800 meters. Even if they do this, how many sorties are we talking about per battery?

2 for the gun, 1 for the crew+ammo and food/kerosene. You will need 9 sorties for taking across three 105mm guns. Now firing across a ridge, at least they would have had some protection, but firing down the Nubra valley, they will be easy pickings for a arty locating radar and counter battery action.

Basically, anything that the Paks/Chinese can get into the Siachen, we can get more/better of, because we have a road, they dont.
*edited to correct obvious typos
Last edited by sudeepj on 08 May 2012 20:45, edited 2 times in total.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5242
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby ShauryaT » 08 May 2012 20:34

brihaspati wrote: Being abusive reveals the character. Being selectively responsive to such abuse is also revealing. Sooner or later people come around to their senses. If they don't admins usually take care of it. :D
I have the same objective that the poster comes around and refrains from language that are against the rules. Tried it gently a few pages back, did not work. The pattern of the poster continued, did not want the debate to go south and hence reported. Better than responding a gali with a gali, it is the quickest way to derail a thread.

As for selective responses, are we not humans and subject to our own biases. The best we can do is be very aware of these biases and then form our views and express them. Using language that is respectful and cordial - especially when you are differing is the essence of a good debate.

PS: See the previous pages, for Lt. Gen. Katoch's report posted first by me and also a point by point response has been provided. I think you missed it.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1808
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby sudeepj » 08 May 2012 20:39

btw. The biggest load a mule can carry is ~70-80kgs. At those heights, its probably less, and needs to be reduced by food for the mule (4kgs/day = 20kgs for a two day trip in, two day out and one day reserve) and the muleteer. The max weight of weapons deployable by foot, or hoof, is constrained by this.

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

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby brihaspati » 08 May 2012 20:43

ShauryaT wrote:
brihaspati wrote: Being abusive reveals the character. Being selectively responsive to such abuse is also revealing. Sooner or later people come around to their senses. If they don't admins usually take care of it. :D
I have the same objective that the poster comes around and refrains from language that are against the rules. Tried it gently a few pages back, did not work. The pattern of the poster continued, did not want the debate to go south and hence reported. Better than responding a gali with a gali, it is the quickest way to derail a thread.

As for selective responses, are we not humans and subject to our own biases. The best we can do is be very aware of these biases and then form our views and express them. Using language that is respectful and cordial - especially when you are differing is the essence of a good debate.

PS: See the previous pages, for Lt. Gen. Katoch's report posted first by me and also a point by point response has been provided. I think you missed it.


In the previous pages your responses have been mainly to rohitvats. Can you please refer me to the single post where you have criticized Lt Gen Katoch's points as mentioned in the article? Thanks.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5242
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby ShauryaT » 08 May 2012 20:45


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

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby brihaspati » 08 May 2012 20:50

ShauryaT wrote:http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2145&p=1274024#p1274024

Thanks very much. I dont have the time to respond to that post right now, but will get back later in the evening. However, for a start - why do you think that the leasing to China is not possibly true? [You are suspicious of its veracity, which means you do not rely on this information claim].

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby harbans » 08 May 2012 20:54

We should hold on to this for another decade at least. Pakistan is collapsing. Why think of making an international park and invite the world NJ9842-K2-Karakoram Pass? Who gave that authority to whom? Do we convert Gir forest to an International Park?

Another idea i have and am putting it here loudly..so please bear with me. What if we withdraw from Siachen..Paki's occupy it. Why are we thinking of trying to reoccupy Siachen without crossing the LOC? All we have to do is destroy Skardu and cut it off from the Northern areas completely. All logistic routes to Siachen pass through Skardu. Cut Skardu completely off from the Northern areas. A single winter will finish the Paki's however many at Siachen.

The only sense it makes to withdraw from Siachen is if in case of Paki misadventure, the IA has a free hand in cutting off the entire Northern areas from them. Not North to the Glaciers but West to the J&K border. So if at all we withdraw, the punishment for Paki's should be heavy. So can the IA squeeze that guarantee from the GoI? If not, then how can GoI even think of us withdrawing from our own territory?

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

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby brihaspati » 08 May 2012 20:57

^^What if the holy lakshman rekha of LOC cannot be crossed as per GOI, at any other point than where the Pakis have crossed? You have to maintain a principled stand as otherwise you lose face and credibility internationally regardless of what the Pakis do.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Lalmohan » 08 May 2012 20:59

another few winters up on the glacier without any subsidies and the PA will be skiing back to pindi of their own accord
talk peace by all means, but no need to do anything

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1808
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby sudeepj » 08 May 2012 21:08

harbans wrote:My understanding of North to the Glaciers is actually a line North West..right to where the Westernmost Glaciers exist in the Northern Areas. There should not be any of these beautiful glacial regions in Paki hands first place. Travesty and insult to nature and beauty.


:rotfl:

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5242
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby ShauryaT » 08 May 2012 21:09

brihaspati wrote:
ShauryaT wrote:http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2145&p=1274024#p1274024

Thanks very much. I dont have the time to respond to that post right now, but will get back later in the evening. However, for a start - why do you think that the leasing to China is not possibly true? [You are suspicious of its veracity, which means you do not rely on this information claim].
Because it fails a basic smell test. Look at the source of the report, it is clear it is mischievous with no ground in reality. Neither anyone from China, TSP or India has reacted to it. To me it looks like a trial balloon to gauge reactions. India did not give any. I know many in India would like India to be pro-active. I have been watching this region for 10+ years now. This way there are many other mischievous reports and a numerous CT floating on all sides. A "lease" of "Gilgit-Baltistan" - I mean crazy is the word for China to consider it. The person who suggested this, has never looked at a map or assumed that others will not. We cry for Shaksgam a desolate valley, ceded illegally to China have not done anything about it, so someone now tried to gauge our reaction to this lease report. Demographics, topology would not favor such a move for China. China is NOT interested in acquiring more trouble. They are happy, with the buffers they have with Tibet and Xinjiang largely in their control. So, at the end of the day does not pass my smell test.

Added: Read the following and form your own view.

http://www.memri.org/report/en/print6076.htm
Last edited by ShauryaT on 08 May 2012 21:18, edited 2 times in total.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1808
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby sudeepj » 08 May 2012 21:12

harbans wrote:We should hold on to this for another decade at least. Pakistan is collapsing. Why think of making an international park and invite the world NJ9842-K2-Karakoram Pass? Who gave that authority to whom? Do we convert Gir forest to an International Park?

Another idea i have and am putting it here loudly..so please bear with me. What if we withdraw from Siachen..Paki's occupy it. Why are we thinking of trying to reoccupy Siachen without crossing the LOC? All we have to do is destroy Skardu and cut it off from the Northern areas completely. All logistic routes to Siachen pass through Skardu. Cut Skardu completely off from the Northern areas. A single winter will finish the Paki's however many at Siachen.

The only sense it makes to withdraw from Siachen is if in case of Paki misadventure, the IA has a free hand in cutting off the entire Northern areas from them. Not North to the Glaciers but West to the J&K border. So if at all we withdraw, the punishment for Paki's should be heavy. So can the IA squeeze that guarantee from the GoI? If not, then how can GoI even think of us withdrawing from our own territory?


Why Skardu, IA has to drive down a scarce 30kms down the Shyok valley road to cut off the Pak garrison in Goma/rest of Siachen.

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

*I am not trying to tamp down your aggression, simply pointing out the enemies vulnerability too.

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

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby ManuT » 08 May 2012 21:43

Sudeepj

You are trying to 'fight' the wars of tomorrow, with the weapons of today, and saying it is impossible. 

Even Napoleon would have said vertical envelopment is impossible with balloons.

Aditya G
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3421
Joined: 19 Feb 2002 12:31
Contact:

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Aditya G » 08 May 2012 22:27

is total demilitarization the only way? if a deal is a must ... cant MMS start off with something smaller, like perhaps deinducting tube artillery?

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5242
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby ShauryaT » 08 May 2012 22:35

rohitvats wrote:@ShuaryaT - I'll reply to your post. But when thing which is obvious from your post is that the onus of any sort of normalization rests on India and Indian Army. In the entire post, there is not a single argument on how PA can alleviate the Indian concerns - it is we must adjust and any how any arguments India (or I) put forth is an impediment in the peace process. This when it is India which has been the aggrieved party all through the history of Indo-Pak relations.
I have mentioned in other posts, how PA can alleviate Indian concerns. To repeat with some more thoughts on it. I do not consider PA a credible conventional threat to India. Their threat comes from unconventional means and this is where most action should be sought.

1. Dismantle Jihadi infrastructure
2. Stay away from being the spoiler for trade, people-people relations citing Indian security threats
3. Keep the larger resolution of Kashmir in cold storage and focus on normalization and less militarization of the area on both sides
4. Stop trying to compete with India's increasing national strength, they will not be able to and will only hurt themselves in the process
5. Limit their nuclear arsenal. India has no intention to annihilate the people of Pakistan
6. Cooperate with India on demilitarization of the region, as India gets ready to adjust its own doctrines and force structures, currently optimized for threats to Pakistan. India has no will or capability to consume the state of Pakistan, even if PA completely disappears tomorrow.
7. Limit its own size and structure to what the Pakistan state can afford, without external dependencies
8. Let the people decide, where they want to draw their lines of cooperation and conflict

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36409
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby SaiK » 08 May 2012 22:45

why are we not thinking using non human robotic force on the mountains? remote operations can be possible and survive the weather. the enemy would face the heat at first sight.

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

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 08 May 2012 22:47

sudeepj wrote:Why Skardu, IA has to drive down a scarce 30kms down the Shyok valley road to cut off the Pak garrison in Goma/rest of Siachen.

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

*I am not trying to tamp down your aggression, simply pointing out the enemies vulnerability too.


Sudeepj, a sincere request. Please don't hand wave and put a response on the fly.

Do you know how may troops PA has in the region? How many troops we have? What kind of troops we require to be able to "Drive just 30 kms to Goma?" What force ratios are involved? While you're at it, do remember that you're axis of advance is known and every inch of it covered, the enemy will hold the high ground all round and without taking those heights on either side of the Shyok, you're advance will get bogged down.

Let me give you an example - last time we wanted to do that was in 1987 when General Sundarji planned Operation Trident and an *entire division* was earmarked for assault on Skardu through Shyok.

And let me share another data point - another *division* was to attack along the Indus from Batalik towards Skardu along Indus. On top of all this, there was to be a diversionary assault from Guraiz towards Astore (over the Burzil Bai Pass) on Guraiz-Astore-Gilgit axis.

And what was the force ratio? - 62 Bde at Skardu and 80 Bde at Minimarg. There was 323 Bde at Dansam with main responsibility for Siachen. And wait - you also had 70 Bde from 3 Division and 121(I) Infantry Bde at Kargil to provide firm base for the two assaulting divisions.

And the grand finale, Operation Brass-tacks was cover for Operation Trident and meant to ensure that PA did not try stunts anywhere else when shooting match began in Northern Areas. This is the level of force required to "JUST DRIVE 30 KMS TO KHAPALU"

BTW - PA reinforced the sector with 3 additional brigades when it got wind of Indian plans.

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

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 08 May 2012 22:52

ShauryaT wrote:
rohitvats wrote:Just for information, Lt. General Katoch was Bde.Commander for Siachen Bde during Kargil.
And hence all the more important that his recent statement of Pakistan reneging of a local military agreement in 1984 for Gyong La should be known, if accurate. For, the 1989 Chumik Glacier disengagement has held, till date.


The Chumik Glacier agreement holds because it is Pakistan which holds the high ground. Please read the Pakistan accounts on this action. It was advantageous for them as they hold the highest feature in the sector and can look around.

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

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 08 May 2012 22:59

ShauryaT wrote:I have mentioned in other posts, how PA can alleviate Indian concerns. To repeat with some more thoughts on it. I do not consider PA a credible conventional threat to India. Their threat comes from unconventional means and this is where most action should be sought.

What is the time frame for all that you state?

1. Dismantle Jihadi infrastructurePlease define this? What is the time frame? Can India ask for arrest of Hafeez Saeed?Will ISI stop sprouting IM type of groups in India?
2. Stay away from being the spoiler for trade, people-people relations citing Indian security threats.How does India benefit from this? It is pakees who benefit from this.
3. Keep the larger resolution of Kashmir in cold storage and focus on normalization and less militarization of the area on both sidesAgain, what time frame?
4. Stop trying to compete with India's increasing national strength, they will not be able to and will only hurt themselves in the processWhat goes my father's if they try and compete with India..let them go bankrupt trying to emulate India.Indian militarization is a requirement in itself.
5. Limit their nuclear arsenal. India has no intention to annihilate the people of PakistanWhat do you mean by limit?Is 10 Nuclear Bombs limited arsenal or 20? And as long as a single one remains along with delivery mechanism, it threatens the Indian population.
6. Cooperate with India on demilitarization of the region, as India gets ready to adjust its own doctrines and force structures, currently optimized for threats to Pakistan. India has no will or capability to consume the state of Pakistan, even if PA completely disappears tomorrow.Again, why should I concede everything. Let PA rationalize and downsize. As it is, they are too big given the size of their country.


Are you telling me Pakistan will all the above because of Siachen? :roll:

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5242
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby ShauryaT » 08 May 2012 23:27

rohitvats wrote:Another question to the proponents of withdrawal and who give the argument about India reserving the right to strike across anywhere, please do elaborate on this -

(a) Where do you think India can do this?
This depends on the political objective to be achieved. But, it has to be a political and not just a military objective. My preference is for a massive conventional response to achieve some meaningful objective that guarantees a firm thrashing to the PA with loss of substantial and meaningful territory.

(b) If the answer to the above is across LOC and that too in Northern Areas only, can you please elaborate on the how does one do it and what is force structure required?
We are not ready now for overwhelming force in the mountains, except to make it a very long and bloody affair. Hence I support the idea of about 10 additional mountain divisions and a special forces command. Massive investments in lift assets. Light arty and integrated offensive rotary assets for IA with wheeled fast moving transport with light armor. Once we are ready, with such a threatening force structure, optimized for mountain warfare. we will be in a far better threatening position. Our misinvestment in the plains has not paid dividends. There is nowhere to go in the plains that meets political objectives. Remember: Even for the massive brass tacks in the plains, there was a small plan for the mountains as per Ravi Rikhiye. The forces raised for an aggressive defense doctrine against China can be used for an aggressive offense doctrine for TSP in NA, if ever there is a need. 8 Mountain Division is a fine example of that.

However, the best offense routes are though Pakjab and NWFP into the NA. The third best routes for a massive invasion of the area, should work for us, through PoK. However, it has to be massive. My view has been, it will be worth it. One way or the other, the strategic value of Pakistan has to be degraded. If not through peace then through war. But it has to be meaningful. A long protracted war, restricted to NA would be meaningful and can be kept below red lines, if managed well. It does not threaten the core pakistani state, its peoples or even the PA, if it so chooses.

(b) What is the present force level and the cost for raising additional force levels?
You have very good knowledge of the former with the structure of the Northern Command and responsibility of XIV corps for the area. As for raising additional mountain divisions, we have raised two as you know. There is talk of 3-4 more. So it is in process. Ostensibly for NE though.

(e) and please compare the above cost with holding cost of Siachen.
The material costs of Siachen does not bother me, the human costs do. Even after learning for nearly three decades now, we are still loosing 15-20 soldiers per year with another 100 or so injured due to non-combat related tolls. We should increase our defense spending to 3% GDP levels. Lack of an indigenous MIC concerns me the most.

If you dissect all the issues, you will realize 99% of the issues are with our own policies and structures and not about Pakistan.

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

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 08 May 2012 23:35

sudeepj wrote:<SNIP>http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF&msa=0&msid=214354392437017481925.0004bf182f1460c2b3628 <SNIP>


Sudeepj, excellent map. It is off the mark on certain accounts - I will revert on the same. This sure is a keeper for any future reference on the topic.

Virupaksha
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 3110
Joined: 28 Jun 2007 06:36

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Virupaksha » 08 May 2012 23:53

ShauryaT wrote:
rohitvats wrote:Another question to the proponents of withdrawal and who give the argument about India reserving the right to strike across anywhere, please do elaborate on this -

(a) Where do you think India can do this?
This depends on the political objective to be achieved. But, it has to be a political and not just a military objective. My preference is for a massive conventional response to achieve some meaningful objective that guarantees a firm thrashing to the PA with loss of substantial and meaningful territory.

If we take the minimum firm trashing scenario in a single sector, in short you are ready for a definitive 25000 crore war with loss of 500-1000 soldiers - but somehow you are disinclined to put less than 1000 crores and single-low double digit casualities per year in the first place. And even after all that, there is no guarentee that Pakis will back off from Siachen, where if we attack while they are on peaks, the casualities will be in mid thousands.

Eg: Kargil which was a single sector operation costed 500 soldiers and ~10000 crores, and knowing the Pakies, it is a question of when but not if they backstab.

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

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby brihaspati » 09 May 2012 00:20

ShauryaT wrote:Because it fails a basic smell test. Look at the source of the report, it is clear it is mischievous with no ground in reality.

How would you know whether this has no ground in reality? You would have to be present there - more so if you feel that everyone with access is deceptive.
Neither anyone from China, TSP or India has reacted to it.

China or TSP obviously will not react to it. Ignoring it helps in keeping attention away. Denials by them can be used by opponents as proof positive or as pressure points for verification. India officially will not react to it either, because it has no means of enforcing verification. If it tries to raise the issue and then fails it means diplomatic and political defeat. Bad for its image globally and in internal politics.
To me it looks like a trial balloon to gauge reactions.

If they had no intention of experimenting with such a move - logically - there would be no reason for them launch a trial balloon.

India did not give any. I know many in India would like India to be pro-active. I have been watching this region for 10+ years now. This way there are many other mischievous reports and a numerous CT floating on all sides. A "lease" of "Gilgit-Baltistan" - I mean crazy is the word for China to consider it. The person who suggested this, has never looked at a map or assumed that others will not. We cry for Shaksgam a desolate valley, ceded illegally to China have not done anything about it, so someone now tried to gauge our reaction to this lease report. Demographics, topology would not favor such a move for China. China is NOT interested in acquiring more trouble. They are happy, with the buffers they have with Tibet and Xinjiang largely in their control. So, at the end of the day does not pass my smell test.


You seem to have a lot of faith in Chinese "rationality". If China has apparently done nothing about Shaksgam [it just might not be prudent to assume this] why was it so important for Pak to cede it and for China to get it? What does a map really have to do with Chinese expansive moves? China wants as much land as possible and claims more than it controls physically.

Are you consistently watching how the Chinese communists have seized territory - right from the beginning of their post long-march settlement in NW China in the late 30's? Why do you say demographics is against them? They have consistently pandered up to Islamics whenever it was convenient to do so. The chinese also know that Islamists usually are devoted to those who almost genocidally thrash the islamists. They did this to the very same Muslim cavalry they used in NW adjunct areas of CAR - and literally wiped a large portion off once the communist PLA plains Han hold was strong in the region.

In an uprising against Chinese overlordship - at most Iran may come to help the Gilgit-Baltistanis, but Iran cannot lose one of its only two powerful friends, Russia and China.

Added: Read the following and form your own view.

http://www.memri.org/report/en/print6076.htm


If its smell by which we have to go, I do not see any reason to trash the possibility relying on a model of China based on India's self-assessment. You are talking the quitessential "rational" Indian voice - "why should we taken on more trouble than we already have? see all that different demography, difficult terrain - thats not us! We cannot and do not want to manage all that just for territorial dominance!"

That could be the Indian way of thinking - but does not necessarily imply it is also the Chinese way!

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1808
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby sudeepj » 09 May 2012 00:28

rohit

apologies for the light hearted response.. but a lot of handwaving has been done in the thread, my response was only concerning the flight of fancy to Skardu, and pointing out that to isolate the Siachen garrison, one does not need to go that far.

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

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby rohitvats » 09 May 2012 01:01

sudeepj wrote:rohit

apologies for the light hearted response.. but a lot of handwaving has been done in the thread, my response was only concerning the flight of fancy to Skardu, and pointing out that to isolate the Siachen garrison, one does not need to go that far.


Well, you've to...w/o taking Skardu, Siachen Bde cannot be isolated.

johneeG
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3473
Joined: 01 Jun 2009 12:47

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby johneeG » 09 May 2012 01:05

I think the more pertinent question is: Why the increasing clamor for de-militirization of Siachen now(particularly from the paid media and similar circles)?

I think there must be some connection with the recent avalanche. But, is that the whole reason or is there more to the story? Is the nearing end of UPA regime connected to it? Also, how much is 'general-fixing' scam and coup-gate related to this issue.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby Lalmohan » 09 May 2012 01:46

sudeepj, excellent map - thank you

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby harbans » 09 May 2012 02:00

Sudeep and Rohit Ji, thanks for raising excellent points. IMHO this is exactly the kind of discussion that BRF needs on these vexing issues. .and i personally was encouraged to learn more on this through your posts. For those that indulged in personal invective, i think their opinions are baggage..but Sudeep ji, please do take into consideration the fact that these would not be disputed, fought if the Islamic Pak and Imperial Han was not in our neighborhood. This has happened only in the last few decades over millennia when we never had issues across LAC and in Kashmir.

Consider also why Kashmir itself is a problem..6 centuries the Hindu and Buddhist Kashmiri made it a home for the settling Muslim..all were welcome. When the Muslim became a majority, now no one is allowed to settle there? The original populations too are kicked out? Fair?

SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5337
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby SBajwa » 09 May 2012 02:10

by nelson
^ +1

All these talks of demilitarisation is from the comfort of couches and chairs of power. Ultimately the price will be paid by some unknown soldiers' lives. I challenge anyone proposing demilitarisation to enlist themselves or one of their near and dear in the field army and then speak of the p"ss process in Siachen.


Sure!! Why do we keep soldiers in the jungles of Assam, Bengal, Nagaland? There are too many wild animals
How about heat in Rajasthan? Soldiers need more comfortable environment.
How about bringing back all our naval ships and submarines., why put them in harms danger (Even for training)
How about forcing the young vulnerable lads to train on flying the fighter planes? Why do we need to do that and waste money, effort and valuable gasoline?

--- India does not need any military all we need is pindi chana which Pakistanis can outsource to us.

SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5337
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby SBajwa » 09 May 2012 02:13

GIVE PEACE A CHANCE! DESTROY PAKISTAN. At least give some chance to this slogan? and by destroy I meant destroy Pakistani army so that they forget that they are "Martial" for next 20 generations. This solution can solve 100% problems in our neighborhood!!!

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36409
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Siachen News & Discussion

Postby SaiK » 09 May 2012 02:38

SBajwa, everybody likes that rhetoric.. that slogan lives in everyones core heart, but it is not practical unless we are practical in changing our democratic system, and governance. Policy based demoracy of the west can bring in changes faster.

The only way, now is show the power.. that they can't handle it. make them invest more, till they give up. squeeze is the only option.

Even with the possible ABV, we could not cross the yellow sea.


Return to “Military Issues & History Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: brar_w and 35 guests