rohitvats wrote:Someone said earlier that Shaksgam Valley is useless and does not offer any advantage - then why did China ask for this region when boundary was settled in 1963 between China and Pakistan? From a pure military point of view, Shaksgam Valley gives depth to the Tibet-Sinkiang Road.
"Not a blade of grass grows in Aksai Chin
" - Nehru
"Nothing grows here ..should it be cut off or given away to somebody else?
" - Mahavir Tyagi, MP.
Quite frankly, I'm humble SDRE so cannot
understand the 'uselessness
' of any territory/specialty in any drastically competitive event
; such as War
Kargil and 1962 were a bitter fight to the end to reclaim one by one many 'useless' peaks.
We believe we inherited these mountains lawfully from British India and the Instrument of Accession; and being 70% shareholder of the Himalayas as of June 1948.
On topic, Shaksgam Valley is centrally placed - Karakoram Highway and the erstwhile Silk Route conjoin here.Hence, it is very useful
The Tibetans (not vocalized yet) and the Taiwanese/Chinese all have spiritual or historical claims to the entirety of the Himalayan territories.
All have individually fought wars in the past against Ladakh/Sikkim/Bhutan/Nepal/Garhwal etc. to restore their respective mandates.
In light of the above, the Rose Garden is a crucial outpost in the absence of Shaksgam Valley.The valley is unlikely to be ceded back by China; as per the below agreement:-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Sikh_War
The Chinese and the Sikhs signed a treaty in September 1842, which stipulated no transgressions or interference in the other country's frontiers.
“On this auspicious occasion, the second day of the month Asuj in the year 1899 we —- the officers of Lhasa, viz. firstly, Kalon Sukanwala, and secondly Bakshi Sapju, commander of the forces of the Empire of China, on the one hand, and Dewan Hari Chand and Wazir Ratnu, on behalf of Raja Gulab Singh, on the other —- agree together and swear before God that the friendship between Raja Gulab Singh and the Emperor of China and Lama Guru Sahib Lassawala will be kept and observed till eternity; for the traffic in shawl, pasham, and tea. We will observe our pledge to God, Gayatri, and Pasi. Wazir Mian Khusal Chu is witness.”
Source:The Sino-Indian Border Disputes, by Alfred P. Rubin, The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 9, No. 1. (Jan., 1960), pp. 96-125.
The Chinese are likely to say that are honour bound not to interfere in Shaksgam; and are merely exercising transit rights for transport of goods.
In the 1963 agreement, Pakistan is; partly recognised by the Chinese; as the legal successor to the Sikh confederacy/British India, pending final control over the Punjab & J&K.The agreement,according to the Chinese, only reiterated the already sanctioned use of transit rights.
The historical non-response to the British note/Ayub note can also be justified as abeyance to the non-interference clause, which was also a general commitment in Panchsheel.
Siachen is a cold "lesson" taught to all Indian soldiers such that they can separate between China's & Pakistan's qualities/methods from their common motive of containing India together.China
is no Tribal Warfare Association