Siachen News & Discussion

[ShauryaT]

Viv S: Thanks for the pitch. But I am not responding on this thread for now, unless admins decide to clear some of the grossly insulting and attacking posts, much less to myself but to credible ex service men. Attacks of the kind, that I have not seen slip by very often on this board.

It is very difficult to reason with a mob. It is so easy to use the seeming anonymity to act angry et al. Also, a thanks to rohitvats for making his points and standing up for someone's right to disagree and offer another view point.

What saddens me is BRF is one of the few public places to have a reasoned discussion on security matters and I do my part to make this discussion known to people in power or are near power. A mob type of unreasoned and insulting posts will be prone to comments of excessive "jingoism" on this board and in the process, even legitimate critiques of say Brig Kanwal's work on the matter are likely not to be appreciated.

Very few places on the net to find folks, interested in what lies north of NJ9842

[PratikDas]

Before accusing others of wearing "nationalistic blinders", as if being a patriot is a bad thing, one should wonder when a collar of submission found pride of place around his neck.

[Viv S]

Here we have an army that is completely against the Idea of co-existance with India. Its COAS is on record about not being ready for an accommodation with us. The perpetrators of 26/11, and countless other atrocities against Indians is shielded by that army. This is the army that launched Kargil after a visit by ABV to TSP and his proclamation from Minar E Pakistan that India in not interested in undoing Partition.

Yes their army has been fervently anti-Indian. Yet the question never asked here is how influential is the army today and is its influence growing or eroding. Its taken as an article of faith that their generals are all-powerful and have absolutely no checks or balances on how they employ their power. While that was certainly true not too long back, its a viewpoint that ignores the changes in their political environment and their changing equations with segments like say.. their judiciary, and instead treats it like a black and white issue.

Yet Kargil happened. How do I know, if the IA vacates what is Indian land, will TSPA, just sit in place or march and take over Siachen.

That depends on whether this is a genuine question or a rhetorical argument. In the first case, you need to put yourself in their shoes. What would be the aim? Given the authentication of positions, what would their legal status be? What would the diplomatic fallout be like? How would it impact the ceasefire along the LoC? What would the impact on Indian air power on their positions in the event of a localized conflict? What is the probability of the conflict escalating thereon if they can retain their positions? What would the financial cost of a conflict and how would it change with escalation? How would that impact their campaign on their western border? Given that their troop strength on the IB is at record lows, how would they counter even a small Indian conventional build up there? And most importantly how would they manage the domestic political fallout of such adventurism?

And then there's the way the agreement itself is reached. I suggest sign an agreement with Pakistan, while inviting all the fan-fare and media and liberals. And then do nothing on ground immediately. Cut troop strength by a tenth annually for three years (retain full strength at the passes) thereafter. After three years re-examine the issue and the subsequent response in Pakistan. Repeat the phase twice again in three year intervals.

[nachiket]

Yes their army has been fervently anti-Indian. Yet the question never asked here is how influential is the army today and is its influence growing or eroding. Its taken as an article of faith that their generals are all-powerful and have absolutely no checks or balances on how they employ their power. While that was certainly true not too long back, its a viewpoint that ignores the changes in their political environment and their changing equations with segments like say.. their judiciary, and instead treats it like a black and white issue.

Their PM has vehemently defended the TSPA and ISI whenever difficult questions have been raised about their activities, even by their sugar daddy, the Americans. The civilian government's position on Hafiz Saeed is the same as what you could have expected if a TSPA general had been in charge. There is not an iota of evidence that the civilian government is breaking free of Army influence or that they are capable of following a policy different from what the TSPA wants, especially regarding enemy no. 1, India. Incorrect assumptions in this regard will cost us dearly.

That depends on whether this is a genuine question or a rhetorical argument. In the first case, you need to put yourself in their shoes. What would be the aim? Given the authentication of positions, what would their legal status be? What would the diplomatic fallout be like? How would it impact the ceasefire along the LoC? What would the impact on Indian air power on their positions in the event of a localized conflict? What is the probability of the conflict escalating thereon if they can retain their positions? What would the financial cost of a conflict and how would it change with escalation?

Till here, each one of the questions you raised was valid even before Kargil. And the size of the incursion at that time was far bigger than what would be necessary for them to retake Saltoro ridge, should we vacate it. Such questions did not stop them then, they certainly won't stop them now. And doing an Operation Vijay redux to retake Saltoro is impossible as we all know.

How would that impact their campaign on their western border? Given that their troop strength on the IB is at record lows, how would they counter even a small Indian conventional build up there? And most importantly how would they manage the domestic political fallout of such adventurism?

The only reason the TSPA troops are deployed on the western border is because of American pressure. You should remember how long the americans were howling at them to redeploy their troops before they actually did it. Any build-up by India on the IB and LOC would give them enough reasons to bring all those troops back (who would rather fight kaffir Indians than the pious talibunnies anyway).

And then there's the way the agreement itself is reached. I suggest sign an agreement with Pakistan, while inviting all the fan-fare and media and liberals. And then do nothing on ground immediately. Cut troop strength by a tenth annually for three years (retain full strength at the passes) thereafter. After three years re-examine the issue and the subsequent response in Pakistan. Repeat the phase twice again in three year intervals.

This still requires us to go out on a limb sooner or later, because we would be withdrawing our troops in good faith. The pakis haven't promised us anything in return. Their whole pitch is about how dangerous it is to maintain troops there, so India should withdraw. Any such gesture on our part will be interpreted as India acceding to their demands, nothing more. We have absolutely no reason to expect any response other than the pakis eventually occupying the Saltoro ridge heights when they think that the time is right.

[chetak]

Sum, I read an updated version of the turn the other cheek strategy.

Its perfectly acceptable to turn the other cheek if one is wrong, but if one is right slap twice.

I understand JLN strategy. He gave up POK as a CBM to TSP to keep them happy that they got one third of Kashmir. Instead it made them even more hungry to think they can grab more.

The only way to deal with civilizational delusions of greatness is to take the others' head in return for a slap. This is the only way they will understand.

But don't hold your breath waitin for this to happen as there will always be some moron in search for the imagined ( or slyly promised!) easy nobel just waiting to be plucked much to the distress of his country men

[PratikDas]

Viv S: Thanks for the pitch. But I am not responding on this thread for now, unless admins decide to clear some of the grossly insulting and attacking posts, much less to myself but to credible ex service men. Attacks of the kind, that I have not seen slip by very often on this board.

And yet he continues to respond. Good.

It is very difficult to reason with a mob. It is so easy to use the seeming anonymity to act angry et al.

I have my full name for you to see. Add me as 'friend' if you dare On the other hand, you are "ShauryaT". Who is claiming anonymity again?

Also, a thanks to rohitvats for making his points and standing up for someone's right to disagree and offer another view point.

Without speaking on behalf of rohitvats, even he called out chu****panti in the article you quoted.

What saddens me is BRF is one of the few public places to have a reasoned discussion on security matters and I do my part to make this discussion known to people in power or are near power.

Oooh, should we shudder? Sorry, just because someone is at the helm doesn't make them immune to incompetence. Incompetence is mild when you look at the number of MPs and MLAs with serious criminal records or those using Parliamentary privileges to obstruct criminal investigations.

A mob type of unreasoned and insulting posts will be prone to comments of excessive "jingoism" on this board and in the process, even legitimate critiques of say Brig Kanwal's work on the matter are likely not to be appreciated.

No legitimate answers to the tough questions from you either. Sorry boss, Gandhian largesse vis-a-vis Siachen is passe. That alone seems to be your position of great "vision". I prefer:

Its perfectly acceptable to turn the other cheek if one is wrong, but if one is right slap twice.

[ramana]

First of all one cant put themselves in Paki shoes and think like them. its a unique way of thinking which cant be obtained with shoes.

In the first case, you need to put yourself in their shoes. What would be the aim? Given the authentication of positions, what would their legal status be? What would the diplomatic fallout be like? How would it impact the ceasefire along the LoC? What would the impact on Indian air power on their positions in the event of a localized conflict? What is the probability of the conflict escalating thereon if they can retain their positions? What would the financial cost of a conflict and how would it change with escalation? How would that impact their campaign on their western border? Given that their troop strength on the IB is at record lows, how would they counter even a small Indian conventional build up there? And most importantly how would they manage the domestic political fallout of such adventurism?

None of these matters if they can rush in and occupy even an inch of Indian land.

They hosted OBL for a decade after 9/11 while he had three kids in TSP! What was the diplomatic fallout? Zilch. They got more AID for US.

They transferred nuke materials and Chinese technology for making nuke bombs all over the world. Did they get a diplomatic fallout. Zilch. US said "Past is past!"

Their President's have gone on public record that they hold treaties and agreements with same sanctity as Muahmmad di to the Hudbaya treaty: only a vehicle to gain advantage later.

I don't understand why the urge to give them an opportunity to take over more India land when they have an awful track record.

[manjgu]

ShauryaT...

nobody is contesting ur right to have a different view on the matter. But the essence of a good debate is to be able to find holes/weakness in other sides pov backed by reasonable evidence.

while the 'mob' has pointed out numerous holes, inconsistencies in ur arguments, precious little has come out from your side to convince the 'mob' that u indeed have a credible pov. and trust me this is no run of the mill 'mob' which will fail to comprehend any credible idea/evidence presented by you. rather than accusing the mob, try to counter the points raised by them..

[RamaY]

...

[PratikDas]

ShauryaT...

nobody is contesting ur right to have a different view on the matter. But the essence of a good debate is to be able to find holes/weakness in other sides pov backed by reasonable evidence.

while the 'mob' has pointed out numerous holes, inconsistencies in ur arguments, precious little has come out from your side to convince the 'mob' that u indeed have a credible pov. and trust me this is no run of the mill 'mob' which will fail to comprehend any credible idea/evidence presented by you. rather than accusing the mob, try to counter the points raised by them..

Just for the record, I agree. The strength of the entire argument for being excessively generous to Pakistan seems to be that it is in our interests to not see them fail. For the lack of a better word, I find this position to be ludicrous. It is the laziest form of blackmail. All Pakistan has to do is keep pouring funds into their military and nuclear program and keep spawning "non-state" terrorists, robbing their own people of a future, and India is supposed to not only forget about PoK but also withdraw from territory so they don't feel threatened? By India not harping on PoK over and over, they ALREADY have a CBM! By India not responding to Mumbai they ALREADY have proof that we're not a threat! If that is not sufficient for the kaminas at Rawalpindi HQ then why should India give a damn?

[Viv S]

Their PM has vehemently defended the TSPA and ISI whenever difficult questions have been raised about their activities, even by their sugar daddy, the Americans. The civilian government's position on Hafiz Saeed is the same as what you could have expected if a TSPA general had been in charge. There is not an iota of evidence that the civilian government is breaking free of Army influence or that they are capable of following a policy different from what the TSPA wants, especially regarding enemy no. 1, India. Incorrect assumptions in this regard will cost us dearly.

The civilian govt is trying to emphasize its control over the army and intelligence and it cannot do so by disowning them. As far as the evidence of the govt breaking free of Army influence goes, before I elaborate, just to establish a baseline I'd just like ask this one question - what gives the Army its disproportionate influence in the Pakistani power structure today? (Note: Think about what brought ZuH, Musharraf to power and in the latter case what caused the end of his regime.)

Till here, each one of the questions you raised was valid even before Kargil. And the size of the incursion at that time was far bigger than what would be necessary for them to retake Saltoro ridge, should we vacate it. Such questions did not stop them then, they certainly won't stop them now. And doing an Operation Vijay redux to retake Saltoro is impossible as we all know.

Yes and no. The Kargil incursion happened on the heels of the nuclear tests by both countries where the majority opinion amongst their leadership and public was that they had pulled a major equalizer with their touted six tests. The most illuminating idea garnered from a brief look into the planning of Op Badr is how the nuclear tests had convinced the 'Gang of Four' that conventional war was no longer a possibility in the subcontinent and that they would be no significant response from India. They subsequently did learn how very wrong they were, especially so when the Indian Navy arrived off Karachi. Incidently, its in the wake of the Kargil debacle that Nawaz Sharif started to move against Musharraf and met with a coup.

Today on the other hand, Pakistan is facing a haemorrhagic terrorist and insurgent campaign, it has a near stagnant economy, their forex reserves are propped up by the WB/ADB and they're locked in a tussle with the world's sole superpower. Also, the simple power equation vis-a-vis India is more lopsided today then ever before and they're well aware of that. Getting into an armed conflict with India over the Saltoro Ridge (with Kargil at least they could dominate sections of NH-1A) is very clear lose-lose option.

The only reason the TSPA troops are deployed on the western border is because of American pressure. You should remember how long the americans were howling at them to redeploy their troops before they actually did it. Any build-up by India on the IB and LOC would give them enough reasons to bring all those troops back (who would rather fight kaffir Indians than the pious talibunnies anyway).

You're thinking of the Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani group. The TTP on the other hand very much in favour of toppling the Pakistani state and not just by terrorism and insurgency but brute force as well (read: Bajaur, FATA). In addition, there's the insurgency in Baluchistan that's not dying down anytime soon.

This still requires us to go out on a limb sooner or later, because we would be withdrawing our troops in good faith. The pakis haven't promised us anything in return. Their whole pitch is about how dangerous it is to maintain troops there, so India should withdraw. Any such gesture on our part will be interpreted as India acceding to their demands, nothing more. We have absolutely no reason to expect any response other than the pakis eventually occupying the Saltoro ridge heights when they think that the time is right.

Well we'll continue to hold all three passes in force into the next decade (while withdrawing from less critical parts of the ridge). In the interim, the direction Pakistan is headed towards will become much clearer. This way you strengthen the peaceniks within Pakistan while semi-formalizing the AGPL and without substantively weakening India's current position in the region.

[abhijitm]

Mumbai bomb blasts, AI814 hijack & Kargil (both happenned in 1999 within a gap of few months), 26/11 the most heinous terror attack on India, and countless other crimes, murders of Indians in the hand of pakistanis, not in BC, not hundred years ago but yesterday....and instead of working overtime to bring justice to our brothers and sisters who sufferred and are sufferring those crimes we have people in India working overtime to shower concessions on pakis.

I am not bothered by the views of some tom dik and harry here but when the guardians of our country speak that language man my head sink with disgrace. rona hai to bas is baat ka hai

[SBajwa]

by Luxtor
I don't know if this view has been expressed before on this subject but if the situation were reversed, i.e. India had lost many soldiers due to an avalanche and made a request to the Pukis for such a mutual withdrawal from Siachen would they comply? I DON'T THINK SO !!! They would probably laugh at us and ridicule us in the traditional Paki way and prance around with their chest out, saying look at these weak Yindoos begging us for mercy.

NO!! You got it all wrong!! the moment they knew that our whole brigade has been lost they will attack and take over the land without thinking of any strategic repercussions!!


----
So what GOI can say to them is to evacuate Skardu and let our troops occupy it! Once we are entrenched in Skardu with good supply lines. that way they won't have to lost any more soldiers in Siachin!

Thus only way to save the soldiers of both countries is to give up Northern Areas by Pakistan to India., Then We only need to worry about Chinese

[PratikDas]

Mumbai bomb blasts, AI814 hijack & Kargil (both happenned in 1999 within a gap of few months), 26/11 the most heinous terror attack on India, and countless other crimes, murders of Indians in the hand of pakistanis, not in BC, not hundred years ago but yesterday....and instead of working overtime to bring justice to our brothers and sisters who sufferred and are sufferring those crimes we have people in India working overtime to shower concessions on pakis.

I am not bothered by the views of some tom dik and harry here but when the guardians of our country speak that language man my head sink with disgrace. rona hai to bas is baat ka hai

^^^^ +1

I'm quite happy to be one of the diks, if that is what it takes.

Unfortunately, we cannot yet recall elected members of government. So "South Block" is well-empowered to make a mess of things. We've given them the right to. What rubs salt on the wound though is when some of those "known to people in power or are near power" try to come here and tell us what to think, what to feel, and why everything is towards some chanakyan plan of killing the enemy (Pakistan Army) with -wait for it- kindness! Wah!

[abhijitm]

I know this is OT here but please bear with me. Learned ones must have read this but there is no harm in reading this article again. This is about Musharraff the war criminal's Agra visit in 2001, less than 2 yeras after AI hijack and Kargil. This what happens when we drop our balls, the pakis promptly pick them and calls the balls for them. read it carefully

Mushy's agra visit

And 5 months later pakis attacked our parliament.

[hnair]

The formalizing of AGPL has its merits. But strengthening of paki peaceniks is not possible because they dont matter inside pakistan. If the argument is "we need to grow them", we gave them enough time since Mushy times. There are no peaceniks worth losing Indian lives over, if these peaceniks cannot demonstrate basic capabilities of law enforcement in their urban areas.

This latest withdrawal talk is a roundabout way of helping that creep Kiyani, after the recently created Ghyari Trash Landfill. He needs to show some "statesmanship" for more than one audience, after Prez Obama decided to harden his stance over the NATO logistics fiasco. Kiyani is now nanga but under his direct watch 26/11 happened. Why should we provide a figleaf to cover his eroded wiener at this point?

Let him fire a few more of the red tips in anger. We all will pretend we care and life goes on.

[SBajwa]

The formalizing of AGPL has its merits.

We should prefer it at the real border of Kashmir thus joining India with Afghanistan and central asia and no access to China from Pakistan. Everything else is a moot.

This Siachin thing before the Avalanche was (as per naPakis)

"What is mine is mine and what is yours is also mine"

after it became

"What is mine is mine and what is yours is waste land and not worth it so let's withdraw to valleys"

[member_23370]

. Most Indian know a good and reliable paki is always a dead paki. The only withdrawal that is required will come from Paki army from POK. The snake oil merchants talking about diplomatic and political fall out seem to have blinkers on their eyes. Ramana's post 25622 brilliantly counters the BS they are peddling.

I am yet to see porkis getting punished for
1) Kargil : Where the AGPL was authenticated.
2) Nuclear walmart : Run by PA under the guise of AQK labs
3) Missile proliferation : Via china
4) Terrorist harbouring : Including OBL and various hafiz pigs.

Pakistan is on the last verge of its existence. India has no obligation to provide them any escape from their fate.

[chanakyaa]

....,real border of Kashmir thus joining India with Afghanistan and central asia and no access to China from Pakistan. Everything else is a moot.

Two thumbs up. Does PLA presence make it very painful?

[Satya_anveshi]

I totally agree with ShauryaT ji. The arguments put forth by him and Sudeepj ji have been quite civil/hugely informative and not without rationale from where they are coming from. It is quite OK to disagree with risk assessments and perceptions thereof wrt Siachen or Pukistan, but I think civility needs to be restored.

On the other hand, ShauryaT ji, hope you will also understand that passionate resistance such as on this thread will balance the pappi-jhappipanthi displayed by certain folks in admin.

Further, I have a different take on India *engaging* in this debate keeping in view the wider geo-political situation. This does not necessarily mean kowtowing to western dictates. As we play hardball on Iran (?), we can compensate the ire by appearing to make amends and listening to certain suggestions in another theater - all in the espirit of chai-biskoot. Let's evaluate what all Pukistan can put on the table - I am sure everyone understands that just because Gyari is gone due to an avalanche does not mean we should give up vantage position in that theater.

However, if Pukistan has decided not invest in that theater anymore, it gives us an option to vacate on our own at some point when we feel comfortable. Further, when we do so, we can extract more concessions by appearing to make a deal out of our voluntary move at a later time.

Let the folkers line up offers first..if not goliya bhi chal sakti hai as we have advantage of heights and pukis cannot retaliate.

[Victor]

The strength of the entire argument for being excessively generous to Pakistan seems to be that it is in our interests to not see them fail.

What exactly is this "fail" supposed to look like? What seems quite probable is a breakup of pukistan into managable pieces that would give us secure land routes to West and Central Asia. If that is considered a paki "fail", we should be doing everything in our power to hasten it, not delay it.

[ManuT]

There is no problem with the desire of peace. It is a worthwhile goal to be looked into. Peace with TSP of course "complicated", but least we can stick to the arguments.

But the discussion has to be civil and Rohitvats words have to be read in context.

ShauryaT ji is not coming from a wrong place. His hope is misplaced at this point as that hope will last only till the next big terror attack. For it does NOT matter what "you think" when you are in a hotel room where terrorists are looking to kill you only thing matters is that whether you have a gun or not.

When TSPs think of Kargil, all the can remember is that they were able to sneak in and their tactical brilliance. But when Indian talk of Kargil it is a list of betrayals.

Quoting Gen V P Malik, regarding TSPA withdrawal from Kargil. Pretty sure this has been posted before at least in parts.

...next Pakistan DGMO assured our DGMO that his side would not make any attempt to leave behind any mines and booby traps. He specifically requested that we should keep check our 'very aggressive media' and those official spokespersons making belligerent statements.

At the end of the discussion our DGMO displayed the marked Pakistani maps and several orignial identification documents of Pakistani soldiers. The Pakistani DGMO cursed the 'ahmak' (fool) who had marked the interformation boundaries on his map. A folder containing the incriminating material was given to his staff officer. { }

During the meeting, the Pakistani DGMO wanted both armies to consider de-escalation in other areas as well. What was the purpose of deployment during the monsoon season, he queried.

On the ground, the withdrawal of Pakistani troops from different sectors commenced smoothly. The DsGMO spoke to each other frequently, sometimes more than once a day. The Pakistani DGMO sought an extra day for pulling out from the Muskoh sector. This request was granted. At the end of the accepted time frame, we found that, while withdrawing , the Pakistanis had laid mines and booby traps indiscriminately, particularly in the Muskoh sector. Also, despite the 1000 metre distance agreement, they remained deployed in several pockets. Some of these pockets were vacated after we reported them to the Pakistani DGMO. But three pockets close to LOC on our side - Zulu spur in the Muskoh sector, Ring Contour in the Dras sector and Area Saddle in the Batalik sector - remained occupied by the Pakistanis. The details of these three intrusions were faxed to the Pakistani DGMO, but to no avail. One possible reason could be that they were still hoping to link these intrusions to the Siachen sector.

...(talks about election notification by CEC)...

Meanwhile, the withdrawal of the Pakistani troops which was extended by one day after 16 July, came under dispute. The Pakistanis claimed that they had pulled out completely and had gone over to their of the LoC. However according to the information available to us, they were still occupying three features on our side, close to LoC. Despite a discussion over the hotline between the DsGMO of India and Pakistan, the stalemate continued.

On 21 July, I briefed the prime minister on the latest operational situation. I said it would not be possible for the armed forces to conclude Operation Vijay successfully till the three Pakistani pockets on our side of LoC were cleared. I pointed out that we needed his approval to use force for evicting the Pakistanis. He gave the go-ahead signal. All the three pockets were cleared by 25th July.

Kargil is not Siachen but I hope there is some lesson in that.

The list of TSPA's crimes has only grown longer since then. *Now* TSPA wants some credit from the neighbour, on the basis of what?

Even the Jelly Bean has figured out only India can make TSP viable. That should not happen without first

As for TSPA power 'eroding' in TSP, only 'at the moment'. It is not something permanent.

I have posted in other thread ZAB talking about peace after 1971, (West Germany, blah, blah) right about the time he was pounding his fist on the table and saying he wanted the bomb in 3 years.



SudeepJ had posed questions I would considere valid or at least worth looking into. Such questions need to be asked from time to time, irrespective of what WKKs and TSPA says, that is, if you really care for the men deployed there.

Think of it another way, if this Question is NOT ASKED periodically then GOI can be accused of, what it is often accused of being oblivious to the condition of the army jawan.

Another from my POV, to put another situation are(?) troops deployed at the most difficult stretch of border in the Thar desert. Is there a need to hold it? If the answer is no and If the response is that it is because of IB. Then a maybe convert it to an IB. It is with the same poisonous neighbour.

Can the deployment in Siachen be looked at that point of view, of making it a more optimal?
Should India wait for a deal with TSPA to get to look at that?

At the very least, the language of some posters we can do without.

[PratikDas]

Deccan Chronicle: Track 2 musings
May 23, 2012 By Arun Kumar Singh [The writer, former vice-admiral, retired as Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief of the Eastern Naval Command, Visakhapatnam]

As a self-confessed hardliner, I must admit that being a part of the team engaged in Indo-Pak Track 2 dialogue has been very interesting. A lot of good work is going on by a dedicated team of retired military officers from India and Pakistan who have spent the best years of their lives preparing for war against each other. The two-nation team also includes a handful of retired diplomats, who had, whilst in service, tried to score brownie points at international forums.

It must be mentioned here that mutually agreed military confidence building measures (CBMs) have so far worked (including the ceasefire in Kashmir), though CBMs in international waters have failed, with the Pakistan Navy warships routinely carrying out dangerous manoeuvres close to Indian warships while Pakistani aircraft routinely make low passes over Indian warships. An incident at sea, involving loss of life due to collision, can lead to a major Indo-Pak crisis.

While the Track 2 deliberations cannot be revealed, since their primary purpose is to provide inputs for Track 1 talks, media reports indicate a possible visit by Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Pakistan by the end of 2012 or early 2013. Mention has been made of Siachen and Sir Creek disputes being on the agenda.

Recent media reports about Pakistan wanting to reschedule the Track 1 Sir Creek meeting to sometime after the June 2012 Siachen meeting indicates the possibility that the Sir Creek dispute is now being linked by Pakistan to the Siachen dispute.

Frankly, I would be very happy if these two disputes are resolved amicably. I may add that India needs to give up what is jocularly called “out of box diplomacy” with regard to its western neighbour. It refers to the unilateral, unconditional goodwill gesture made by Indian Prime Ministers who had lived in pre-Partition Pakistan and have nostalgic memories of their childhood years there.

If media reports are to be believed one such Prime Minister disbanded India’s entire intelligence setup in Pakistan (as a unilateral goodwill gesture), resulting in complete loss of intelligence, followed by the Kargil War in 1999 and numerous terror strikes across India. The damage to Indian intelligence will take decades to undo, as building up human intelligence is a time-consuming process. Then we had the Sharm el-Sheikh agreement in 2009, which brought in the fiction of “India’s involvement in Baluchistan”.

Having lived and sailed in the freezing Siberian Fareast and having visited cold places in the Arctic circle, I was frankly not too overawed by the terrain when I made very brief visits to Siachen and Sir Creek though I do salute the men who stand guard there under very difficult conditions.

These two (and other) Indo-Pak contentious issues need to be resolved, not because of difficult terrain or costs but because it will make greater sense for the two countries to work together and improve not only their economies but their national security also.
The two leaders — Dr Singh and Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari — would do a signal service to humanity (and be truly deserving of a Nobel Peace prize) if they can sign an most favoured nation agreement, put territorial disputes on the back burner, “peacefully” demolish Pakistani terror camps, give up Pakistan’s 2011 plan to deploy tactical nuclear weapons and put trade on the front burner. Rich nations generally do not fight against each other.

Though both countries started out at the same time as independent nations, the differences between India and Pakistan have become more and more marked since 1947 despite having common ailments like corruption, massive tax evasion and numerous scams. The differences are writ large on India’s continued growth and march into a new century (due to its hardworking private entrepreneurs) while Pakistan (due to a “martial population” brought up in madrasas) slid into economic collapse and became a victim of self-created terrorist monsters.

Pakistan is caught in a time warp — that of 1947. It needs to emulate India’s land reforms and secular ethos. It also needs to look after its minorities who have dwindled from 15 per cent in 1947 to below two per cent in 2012. Well-known Pakistani human rights activist Asma Jahangir is reported to have remarked that “if Muslims in India constantly crib to have no say and no power, they should come to Pakistan to see the plight of the minority Hindus with their own eyes. They will never complain and learn to live peacefully with their Hindu brethren in India”.

Unfortunately, despite courageous activism by the Pakistani judiciary and the press, there is little palpable change in Pakistan’s foreign policy and strategic posture. The gloves may be off once the US withdraws from Afghanistan in 2014. Pakistan is, perhaps, realising that the era of getting foreign aid because of its geo-strategic location is over. The Americans have managed to maintain their logistics supply to troops in Afghanistan, despite the Pakistani ban on use of its soil since November 2011, but may require Pakistani land and sea route to remove their heavy equipment post 2014, and also Pakistani non-interference in Afghanistan.

India for its part too needs to improve relations with all its neighbours for some very selfish reasons. It cannot “break out” of South Asia to occupy its rightful place as a global economic power by 2050, by which time Pakistan will, going by the current trends, be a very poor country of 350 million people.

How will the border disputes ever get resolved? Sometime in the distant future, when leaders of a rich India meet the leaders of a rich Pakistan and a rich China, they may discover that between rich nations it’s perhaps easier to find “out of the box” solutions, especially when the people are educated, well-fed and gainfully employed in activities other than terror.

===========================================

Personal comment: The devil is in the detail. In the spirit of "trust but verify", if this is not meant to be another instance of “out of box diplomacy”, i.e. unilateral, unconditional goodwill gesture [thank God]:

1) How do you verify the peaceful demolition of Pakistani terror camps?
1.1) Are all the camps disbanding and not relocating?
a) How do you know all have been accounted for?
b) How do you know they are not relocating?
1.2) Do we only learn of another hidden terrorist camp after another Mumbai-style graduation ceremony?
1.3) What will be the repercussions for the next "non-state" terrorist attack from Pakistan, then our CBM endowed-neighbour?

2) How do you verify Pakistan's relinquishing of tactical nuclear weapons?
2.1) Are they going to let you inspect all their tactical warheads?
a) How do you know all have been accounted for?
2.2) Does the Indian Army only get to realize that soldiers have been exposed to tactical nuclear radiation after the fact?
2.3) What will be the repercussions for violating the agreement?
2.4) Is India also promising to reciprocate by relinquishing all tactical nuclear weapons for the front with Pakistan?
2.5) Is India then promising to relinquish all tactical nuclear weapons completely, e.g. along our disadvantageous front with China?

[Yayavar]

The uncivil responses are no reason to opt out of a discussion. People can flag the uncivil posts and the admins can then take relevant action. There are lots of civil replies and civil counter-questions.

[Yayavar]

I am not sure why we are letting these traitors continue this discussion any further. Most Indian know a good and reliable paki is always a dead paki. The only withdrawal that is required will come from Paki army from POK. The snake oil merchants talking about diplomatic and political fall out seem to have blinkers on their eyes. Ramana's post 25622 brilliantly counters the BS they are peddling.

I am yet to see porkis getting punished for
1) Kargil : Where the AGPL was authenticated.
2) Nuclear walmart : Run by PA under the guise of AQK labs
3) Missile proliferation : Via china
4) Terrorist harbouring : Including OBL and various hafiz pigs.

Pakistan is on the last verge of its existence. India has no obligation to provide them any escape from their fate.

Bheeshmaji, please tone down your passion a bit. This is the second time you have called people traitors or such including a retired high ranking IA officer.

[PratikDas]

If an explanation is owed by me, it is this:

I started responding to this thread after it had developed quite a bit. One bit was very evident. Some people are teflon-coated to the vast majority of opinion. Is this thread supposed to be a lecture theatre?

A few individuals repeatedly keep serving sermons about a vision and about patriotism, jingoism, or "nationalistic blinkers" being a sign of incivility. That the aforementioned signs of incivility constitute the predominant opinion, opinions clearly based on history and past performance, and therefore well deserving of the benefit of the doubt, does not seem to register. This becomes tiring very quickly.

To them this thread remains a lecture theatre. I reject this notion.

1) There has been virtually no data presented for trust based on verification.
2) There has been virtually no data presented for repercussion for violating trust.

There was one article on some semblance of verification and it was found wanting by someone far more civil than I. That the article of such quality was written by a Brigadier (Retd.) clearly suggests that being an ex-serviceman alone does not entitle you to the final word. It should not, evidently. However, giving the author the deserved benefit of the doubt, if the author is unable to share data on verification and repercussion then his article too is incomplete and not worthy of consideration in that state.

In light of the above, the lecture is premature and I have no problem in calling it that. Without the aforementioned data, all the talk is Bollywood drama along the theme of Aman-ki-asha, i.e. all talk, no substance.

[merlin]

Interesting. The article from the former vice-admiral give the timelines of when MMS intends to give away Siachen to the Pakis - end 2012 or beginning 2013. So there will be an orchestrated media campaign before that to build up public opinion in India in favour of "peace for land".

[PratikDas]

It just occurred to me that while there were many 'patriots' clamouring for a white paper on the safety of the Kudankulam project, the same patriots are missing in action when it comes to demanding a white paper on Siachen and the proposed CBMs with Pakistan, complete with verification and repercussion.

With predictability of risk and reward comes trust, this much even I can attest to without being a Brigadier.

[Aditya_V]

Breaking News: I think an Army Cheetah Pilot crashed in Siachen and Pilot has died, sad to hear.

[nelson]

Young, brave pilots sacrifice their lives for no fault of their own
Note:

A young Army Aviation pilot died in Siachen this morning, trying perhaps to eke out non-existent power from the ageing Cheetah Helicopter.

His co-pilot is seriously injured and in hospital.

Despite this accident the brave pilots will continue flying on the World's most inhopitable and highest battlefield.

What went wrong, no one will know but the fact is the Cheetahs and Chetaks have far outlived their lifespan.

They were good machines when they were inducted. Not any longer.

We need replacement. As of yesterday.

As someone who tracks defence matters closely, it saddens me to report that almost 15 months ago, I had done a report on problems with the ageing fleet of Cheetahs and Chetaks.

But the defence minister and the defence ministry will continue to cite flimsy reasons to delay the procurement of helicopters to replace the ageing fleet. We will continue to lose young, brave pilots for no fault of their own.

RIP our brave warrior.

My earlier report is below.

http://nitinagokhale.blogspot.in/2012/0 ... l?spref=tw

[Narad]

Very Very sad news. RIP

[Pratyush]

My condolences to the family of the airman.

[Gaur]

RIP.
But I wonder how long would it take for some quarters of the media to shamelessly use this sacrifice for their own agenda. I expect to soon see articles using this incident to point out why India should vacate Siachen.

[sum]

RIP.
But I wonder how long would it take for some quarters of the media to shamelessly use this sacrifice for their own agenda. I expect to soon see articles using this incident to point out why India should vacate Siachen.

Exactly my thought when i read the report first!!!

When will the DDM create enough pressure on GoI to clear the cheetah replacement deal?

[Jarita]

^^^ Wait for the propaganda media to start cackling

[jimmy_moh]

NEW DELHI: An Indian Army officer was killed and another injured on Wednesday when the helicopter they were piloting crashed on the Siachen glacier, the world's highest battlefield, during a routine supply sortie, the army headquarters here said.

The two officer-pilots were trying to land the chopper at the Bhim post helipad in northern glacier area at 11.45am when they lost control of the flying machine and it crashed 400 metres short of the helipad, an officer in the army headquarters said.

"The pilot was killed and the co-pilot was badly injured. The Army is evacuating the injured officer to a military hospital," the officer said.

He, however, refused to identify the two pilots immediately.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 408319.cms

[SSridhar]

I understand JLN strategy. He gave up POK as a CBM to TSP to keep them happy that they got one third of Kashmir. Instead it made them even more hungry to think they can grab more.

But, Ramana, JLN had seen in close quarters for at least two decades the perfidy of Jinnah, his cohorts and the Muslim League. For him to expect that Pakistan would be satisfied with POK and would venture no further was a first rate failure, especially when the most coveted Vale of Kashmir remained with India. JLN even had to be goaded into action on the eve of October 26, 1947 by Vallabhai Patel as he was procrastinating under one pretext or another. We have none other than FM Manekshaw's account of that. Anyway, that is OT here.

On the discussion going on here, I believe that anyone who has taken a cursory glance of the map beyond point NJ9842 and who has been following the Pakistani perfidy and its collaboration with China would not demand withdrawal from Siachen and Saltoro.

[sum]

But, Ramana, JLN had seen in close quarters for at least two decades the perfidy of Jinnah, his cohorts and the Muslim League. For him to expect that Pakistan would be satisfied with POK and would venture no further was a first rate failure, especially when the most coveted Vale of Kashmir remained with India.

Arent we seeing same issue even now where some are ready to believe TSP after 50 years of perfidy just because we shouldnt allow a scum state to "fail"

[Pratyush]

SS ji,

Should, first had experience not have made JLN, a first rate realist. Should first hand evidence of Paki perfidy not have made the Indian media first rate realists. Yet countless key strokes are being made, telling us that we ought to trust the TSPA and TSP. why?

[nachiket]

RIP.
But I wonder how long would it take for some quarters of the media to shamelessly use this sacrifice for their own agenda. I expect to soon see articles using this incident to point out why India should vacate Siachen.

Exactly my thought when i read the report first!!!

When will the DDM create enough pressure on GoI to clear the cheetah replacement deal?

RIP to the pilot. Truly sad event. What I can't understand is, since the Dhruv has already demonstrated its ability to fly to Siachen a while back, why are the Cheetah's still being used? I don't think the deal for the 197 light helos will have any bearing on this as they, although lighter than the Dhruv, will still not be able to fly to that height. So we have an indigenous helo tailor made for these conditions, but we still continue to use smaller older machines. It makes no sense.