Siachen News & Discussion

[rudradeep]

This is simply more and more OT stuff. What I said amply demonstrates my position.. (i.e. settle territorial disputes by give and take, taking into account the monetary costs to us of maintaining the conflict).. What more can I say to make my position even more clear?

err, excuse me, in all your sound expositions, what was the take? and more importantly whose "take" it is.

You said give off siachen, give off nubra valley, give off Dzingrulma.

The 'Take' if there ever was one is the Rs 1000 Cr....

Let us see, is this 'Give' going to give us any of the following:
1. Peace with Pakistan.. NO
2. Stop Paki Terrorism... NO
3. Resolve Kashmir........ NO

But c'mon why think of such petty things, when we get to save the Rs 1000 Cr....

[manjgu]

rohitvats...thanks..maybe with some maps SudeepJ may understand 'unhinge', outflank, link up!!

i dont know how to attach a scan ( which i did from Harish Kapadias book) for SudeepJ benefit. to make him understand Pak China linkup thru the glaciers. maybe someone can educate me

SudeepJ.. In ur considered opinion what is Strategic Significance of Demchok and Arunachal Pradesh for the Chinese? why do they constantly needle us in these areas and others?

[brihaspati]

You started out with monetary value. It is your responsibility to price alternatives and show that they are less costly in overall price terms. Your verbiage has simply gone on to mention X,YZ... factors that according to you makes holding the ridge unprofitable - but you have not been able to put a price on to it.

The monetary value of holding the Glacier is an approximately known quantity, from 750-1000 crores an year. To me, its an open question what the benefits are of holding it. Once that is known, people can come to decisions based on their own value systems, but right now, the benefits (beyond simply holding the glacier) are not known.

As for this that and the other, if you bring in random stuff unrelated to the thread.. well, its your choice.

Come on - with such great economic expertise in cost-benefit-analysis - you should be able to price alternatives - can't you? That was your bone of contention - its monetarily costlier than alteratives. You have to show it. Put a cost on each of the difficulties you mention and also prices on the uncertainties and risks on each of the alternative you mentioned.

Waiting.

Its going to be a long wait. Dont hold your breath.

When your eminence brings in "random OT" stuff - thats fine, is it? If your bringing in "investing in childrens education" was not OT then my bringing in costs of SPG and seucrity of elite politicos was not OT either.

You were shouting about "cost benefit analysis" and started off shoving the monetary cost argument and ended up providing qualitative value judgments to justify your claims. Don't pretend bringing in terminology that you do not seem to grasp at all. For a cost benefit analysis to be useful for decisions based on monetary as well as not directly pricable entities - you need to at least quantify your utility.

Your arguments make no sense if you cannot specify the utility numbers for the disadvantages you mention in geographical, logistical and potential military political outcomes over siachen and compare it with the alternative with similar utilities on risks of investing in childrens education or poverty alleviation programmes. You have brought those in and it is your responsibility to put quantitative values on them so that then only they make sense for decisions.

I know I will have to wait an eternity for such answers from you. You simply are not rigorous enough and with no experience in valuing such risks - as otherwise you would not have raised a naive cost-benefit scenario comparing the two cases you mentioned.

[brihaspati]

rohitvats ji,
do you really want to lay all the reasons - tactical and terrainwise - about the real reasons for the need to hold on to that ridge, [in fact the need to hold more if possible in a certain direction] out in the public? I request that you reconsider.

People with exposure to himalayan glaciers, and similar territory - from Ladakh and HP side, should understand, given the actual topology as to why it is militarily and strategically important. Those who decided to hold it knew what they were doing, and those conditions have not changed yet. If anything Chinese infratsructure on the "other side" has progressed more than stalled, and all the more reason for the Indian side have a firm grip on that neck.

Only a fool will imagine that large scale frontal assualts and set piece classical battles were on the mind of Indians when they took it. Real warfare will be far from that place. But it is an important stress point to elongate and dilute the enemy for any real conflict point far away from it.

I hope you do not swallow the bait.

[Amitabh]

I am now starting to get an understanding of the various layers of the mercentile lobby & their moral & intellectual bankruptcy. The continuous chain of events of what made narayan murthy to pressure Indian govt not to react when the parliament was attacked or what made the buddihst sramans to open the city doors to bring about their own destruction. The mercentiles of India do not seem to be able to go beyond short term profits.

Actually it's about long term profits --> growth --> great power status. Something that China seems to understand. We can either be a nuclear power or a nuked power. Avoiding the latter fate requires us not to invade nuclear armed neighbours in response to media-inflated strategic irrelevancies like a major terrorist attack. The US blundered into an obvious strategic ambush with its armed response to 9/11; with far fewer resources at hand we would be wise to avoid doing the same.

Let me break the news to you: Pakistan has been sponsoring continual terror attacks against India, yet somehow it is Pakistan that is on fire. Seems like the "mercentile"-led Indian government understands something that you do not. Leadership is not caving in to yowls about "napunsaks" and whatnot. It is about cold calculation.

And for those attacking the cost-benefit frame of analysis, why don't you advocate a full-scale invasion of PoK? Or the immediate liberation of Tibet? Or converting every northern corps into a mountain strike corps? I'm guessing it would have something to do with "cost-benefit analysis".

[Virupaksha]

Amitabh,

I am not falling for your troll bait.

[gakakkad]

question of leaving siachen does not arise..

It will be an insult to IA if we do so..cost wise it is a fraction of our GDP ...We don't lose men in Siachen ..And the position is strategically important..It would be foolish to leave it...1000 crore is nothing for us ... Our presence in Siachen costs pakees more than it cost us..

[abhishek_sharma]

Actually it's about long term profits --> growth --> great power status. Something that China seems to understand.

Indeed..China seems to understand these motives. Why did they mess with a nuclear power in the Korea war? Even after their economic reforms, Chinese generals were threatening to nuke Los Angeles in late 1990s. And if Chinese understand that "growth ---> great power status", why do they increase their defense budget by more than 10% every year? Maybe you should teach your mercantile theory to them more forcefully.

Let me break the news to you: Pakistan has been sponsoring continual terror attacks against India, yet somehow it is Pakistan that is on fire. Seems like the "mercentile"-led Indian government understands something that you do not. Leadership is not caving in to yowls about "napunsaks" and whatnot. It is about cold calculation.

I have already mentioned that this is a type of chankian theory. If something bad happens in Pakistan it must be due to the "cold calculation" of GoI. Can we take the credit for the 2005 earthquake and 2010 floods in Pakistan too?

[ShauryaT]

Ok ShauryaT lets agree that we need to demilitarize Siachen. My question would be, why now? why today is the most right time? Its not that Kargil, parliament attack, AI highjack, 26/11 etc happened many paki generations ago. Its the same generation and crop of people who are running pak now. So why not judge their sincerity in some other civil , social, economical and more importantly terrorism areas first before jumping on to military bases. Why so sudden haste? Lets the trust building take its own natural course and then demlitarization of not only Siachen but many other parts may also happen. We can definitely afford to stay put for a while. What do you say?

Meanwhile we have much more important areas to concentrate on to save money and human life which can add much more value to our country than demilitarizing a military base on the border.

Fair question. There are various perspectives to the issue and its linkages to other things geo-political. I will leave the larger perspectives out of the picture here. Just like you are wondering, why now? Many ask, why has it taken so much time. After all, we have had had talks on Siachen since Zia/RG times. The simple answer to your question is Siachen is seen as a low hanging fruit. It is an inhospitable area, devoid of population and of none to low military significance. So, amongst the available options, this is seen as a good starting point, where risks can be managed. It also proves to both sides that a negotiated settlement with a meaningful impact on the ground can be had and serves as a model for the future.

Extreme positions on both sides, do not lend to conciliation. Think of this issue from a Pakistan perspective. When is the last time, we moved on ANYTHING major with Pakistan through negotiations. In fact one of their retorts is India uses negotiations to NOT make progress. Is it not a common wisdom on this board, let the chai-biskut discussions happen, nothing will move an inch. Put yourself in their shoes for a minute. Pakistan sees us as an existential threat and they do not have the conventional power to defeat us and take ANY land from us, if India decides to firm up its will. They simply do not have those type of resources. To compound matters, it is a dysfunctional state, if not a failed one. It severely lacks cohesion and control. It lacks control over internal provinces, it gets raped and gets some bones thrown at it at times by outsiders, its socio-economic-political environment has gone from bad to worse. One way or the other, all this will affect us and it has. One cannot wish away 180+ million and a piece of geography that makes India a virtual island. The Ostrich like syndrome that India has had so far, will not help. Ideally, I would have preferred all elements of Sama, Dana, Bheda, Danda to be used but wishes cannot be horses and I have to settle for what our own polity is capable of. It is my belief that by moving the ball forward, we will marginalize those elements of Pakistani polity that hold extreme views on India.

India should club the issue of Siachen, with other areas such as trade, extremism and geo-political access. But, we have to be careful, to not club too many things together, for it gets compounded and then the proposals fall on its own weight. Both have to accept that not ALL issues will be settled in one swoop.

[gakakkad]

why should we concede ground to pakees at this stage ? they are in deep sh1t not us..we should intensify pressure,not reduce it..

[manjgu]

Amitabh ji...

the reason why we cant recover POK or Tibet is because we dont have the capabilties to do it. The question of cost benefit does not apply.

Also you are forgetting that India is a status quo power while both China and Pakistan are non status quo powers. They have been constantly trying to change the status quo thru military and non military means since last 50 years. and so we need to be extra careful. How can one discount that?

What strategic significance does places like demchok or AP hold for the chinese. i have not seen them slack off on these issues in name of cost benefit analysis? I am sure they also understand cost benefit analysis as much as u do and worried abt their economy and their poor people. As someone said there are a few things which are non negotiable.

I am sure u do remember the famous reply of Pillo Mody to chacha nehru in indian parliament post 1962.

and for our BR members who dont know abt it , i will repeat it..

chacha nehru : oh well..chinese have occupied some of our territory but it was a barren place, not a blade of grass, nothing at all..

Pillo mody : showed his bald head to chacha nehru and Hon;ble MP's and said nehru ji , this is also totally barren , not a single hair , nothing at all .. can i cut it and give it to someone else?

and chacha nehru died soon after !!

[ShauryaT]

why should we concede ground to pakees at this stage ? they are in deep sh1t not us..we should intensify pressure,not reduce it..

To what end?

[shyamoo]

All this talk of give and take is just that .. India gives and TSP + China takes..

I have a questions for experts..
Since 1947, what have we given up ( after negotiations ) and what have we received ( including land won/lost during wars )?

We have precedence for not trusting TSP. What do they have for not trusting us?

[ShauryaT]

the reason why we cant recover POK or Tibet is because we dont have the capabilties to do it. The question of cost benefit does not apply.

It does. The reason we have not invested in these capabilities has something to do with cost benefit. But, it does not stop there. The reason we have not invested in these capabilities is because, our ideas of a nation-state and civilization are not ideologically driven. They have been borrowed from a colonial idea, alien to our ethos and hence lacks natural conviction. The reason we are weak and China is strong, comes down to this one fundamental difference. Mao almost ruined it. Deng Xiaoping saved it for them.

Added: But even Mao was on a ruining spree internally, externally, he did a credible job from where China was in 1912.

[abhijitm]

ShauryaT, let me ask you a question and then we will take this further.

What is your objective? Are you finding reasons to give up Siachen or there is a reason for which you want to give up Siachen? If it is latter then please state it clear and loud and then lets try to find a solution to that problem. I know the answer is somewhere in your many posts but as a favor on me please make it clear once more.

Thanks.

[ShauryaT]

What do they have for not trusting us?

In their view. Major ones are Bangladesh, Siachen and ofcourse the biggest one is Kashmir. Their view is we hide behind legalese to not move on issues. In their view, Kashmir should have been divided based on the principles of partition, which was a communal division. Their insecurity stems from the fact that our forces are optimized for the destruction of their state and its forces and that we have never accepted Pakistan and that we seek to destroy their state.

Again...this is their view at a high level.

[abhishek_sharma]

^^ That is why you said yesterday that the mistrust is "mutual". Thanks for the giant ==.

[ShauryaT]

ShauryaT, let me ask you a question and then we will take this further.

What is your objective? Are you finding reasons to give up Siachen or there is a reason for which you want to give up Siachen? If it is latter then please state it clear and loud and then lets try to find a solution to that problem. I know the answer is somewhere in your many posts but as a favor on me please make it clear once more.

Thanks.

My objective does not matter for I am just an old fart here with zero influence on policies of the nation. However, my desired objective is to find a way for the next generation to be on a better footing with regards to the issues Pakistan poses for us than we have been. (I do not have high regard for our political ancestors). I think the word "give up" can mean many things. I prefer the word "demilitarization" in context of Siachen and yes I am open for it, so that the ball can move forward, in context of "Sama".

[gakakkad]

>>To what end?

@ ShauryaT .. Pakistan is unlikely to survive this decade if we keep intense pressure on them ...If we concede ground , and help them financially in anyway , we ll not let pakistan arrive to its natural consequence..self destruction...they lost 106 people recently because we keep soldiers in Siachen..why change such a thing ?why not let them lose more people ?

[Amitabh]

Actually it's about long term profits --> growth --> great power status. Something that China seems to understand.

Indeed..China seems to understand these motives. Why did they mess with a nuclear power in the Korea war? Even after their economic reforms, Chinese generals were threatening to nuke Los Angeles in late 1990s. And if Chinese understand that "growth ---> great power status", why do they increase their defense budget by more than 10% every year? Maybe you should teach your mercantile theory to them more forcefully.

Let me break the news to you: Pakistan has been sponsoring continual terror attacks against India, yet somehow it is Pakistan that is on fire. Seems like the "mercentile"-led Indian government understands something that you do not. Leadership is not caving in to yowls about "napunsaks" and whatnot. It is about cold calculation.

I have already mentioned that this is a type of chankian theory. If something bad happens in Pakistan it must be due to the "cold calculation" of GoI. Can we take the credit for the 2005 earthquake and 2010 floods in Pakistan too?

Let me be clear: post-Mao China understands this clearly. None of your other points IMO contradicts my main thesis about actual Chinese policy.

Re:Pakistan I am observing a correlation. Causation is up for debate and reasonable people can disagree. But the Pakistanis certainly seem to believe that India has a hand in their affairs. However they do not seem to believe India responsible for earthquakes and floods (at least their policymakers do not.

This is somewhat off topic so I will stop here.

[abhijitm]

Siachen is seen as a low hanging fruit. It is an inhospitable area, devoid of population and of none to low military significance.

Lets try to arrive to a conclusion here. We are going nowhere with this argument.

Assume that on a late evening you are walking with your daughter. You are going to destination X. Now the road is crowded and it will probably take some time for you to reach. You spot a backdoor alley, taking that route might save you some time. Since it is dark you ask a question to two people "Is it safe to take my daughter through the alley?". One say Yes, the other one says No, there is a danger, there were couple of rape attempts in that alley. What will your instinct tell? Will you take the bait, be a machoman and take your daughter through the unknown alley or you will try to play safe and avoid the route? A rational father will avoid the route because its not the only route.

When you ask similar question about Siachen you will get both the views. Both from credible sources. What should our instinct say? Avoid the bait and take another safer, non disputable or less disputable route.

Do you agree?

[Aditya G]

Can we have the link to this presentation again pls?

[ShauryaT]

>>To what end?

@ ShauryaT .. Pakistan is unlikely to survive this decade if we keep intense pressure on them ...If we concede ground , and help them financially in anyway , we ll not let pakistan arrive to its natural consequence..self destruction...they lost 106 people recently because we keep soldiers in Siachen..why change such a thing ?why not let them lose more people ?

This will go OT, request you to continue in managing pakistan thread. But, before you post, if you decide to, request that you think through the full cycle of likely possibilities. What does "survive" mean? What does "pressure" mean? What does "self destruction" mean? Do look at these very carefully at the volumes of socio-econopmic data for various regions of Pakistan and geopolitical permutations to carefully evaluate the likely possibilities of a self destructing Pakistan, and even if they turn out to be your envisioned possibilities, what will India do with that end result? How will it impact us? What does it mean for India to have a completely failed state as its second largest neighbor.

Let us focus on Siachen on this thread.

[abhishek_sharma]

None of your other points IMO contradicts my main thesis about actual Chinese policy.

Really? Why are they wasting their money on huge hikes in defense budget? They could focus on growth, no?

[abhijitm]

my desired objective is to find a way for the next generation to be on a better footing with regards to the issues Pakistan poses for us than we have been.

I respect your objective.

Now, to the problem:

do you think that Siachen is the only way to take first step ahead in that direction? In your point of view it could be the best way, but is it the only way?

[PS: please also read my earlier post]

[ShauryaT]

Siachen is seen as a low hanging fruit. It is an inhospitable area, devoid of population and of none to low military significance.

Lets try to arrive to a conclusion here. We are going nowhere with this argument.

Assume that on a late evening you are walking with your daughter. You are going to destination X. Now the road is crowded and it will probably take some time for you to reach. You spot a backdoor alley, taking that route might save you some time. Since it is dark you ask a question to two people "Is it safe to take my daughter through the alley?". One say Yes, the other one says No, there is a danger, there were couple of rape attempts in that alley. What will your instinct tell? Will you take the bait, be a machoman and take your daughter through the unknown alley or you will try to play safe and avoid the route? A rational father will avoid the route because its not the only route.

When you ask similar question about Siachen you will get both the views. Both from credible sources. What should our instinct say? Avoid the bait and take another safer, non disputable or less disputable route.

Do you agree?

Ofcourse, I agree but if you believe that they are rapists then the only thing you ought to support is their elimination. The details of a Siachen plan should not matter, for you believe the counter party does not have basic credibility to sit across the table from you. I mean why should I even allow a rapist to exist in my neighborhood. Most in our polity will term this to be an extremist view and have been side lined. We just do not have the type of polity that will say, let us physically eliminate these rapists for that is who they really are, so that the alley is safe again. Cannot wait for a rapist to reform and till then not use the alley. The rapist will then only get the next alley. The issue of debate here seems to be "pakistan = rapist" hence no point in ANY conciliation with such a party. In that case, the discussion on this thread goes OT into the nature of Pakistan and not Siachen. Let us focus on the issue here, there are other threads to talk about the larger aspects of the nature of Pakistanis.

[abhijitm]

No, you cant eliminate those rogue people. Its a reality and we have to accept that.

I am not discussing pakistan here. But do we agree that pakistan is a rogue state and needs to be dealt with care?

[sudeepj]

All these years, when Pakistanis yelled Kashmir, we said calm down.. Lets talk about other less important issues first in a framework of composite dialogue. Siachen, by some opinions, is the easiest issue to settle, as:
1. The terrain holds no economic/cultural value, (at least this point, we should all be able to agree on).
2. Its not as emotive (except for a subsection of people) as Kashmir.
3. By some opinions, it holds no value for the strategic objectives of India/Pak.

There is a political assertion that both India and Pakistan have on that area, but a disengagement means, that at least in that domain, we have both decided that we will not resort to arms to settle the differences. This is an important step, as since 1948, Pakistan has resorted to arms, to settle differences in opinion about maps.

*It appears some have been influenced by Pakistani talk here, yelling.."But But.. will it help solve Kashmir??.. Hain jee.. Batao BAtao.. Hai koi jawab !! "

[abhijitm]

Ofcourse, I agree but...

ShauryaT, a simple question. A disputable issue, opposite views all from various credible sources. What your rationality says? Take the bait?

[Ashutosh Malik]

All these years, when Pakistanis yelled Kashmir, we said calm down.. Lets talk about other less important issues first in a framework of composite dialogue. Siachen, by some opinions, is the easiest issue to settle, as:
1. The terrain holds no economic/cultural value, (at least this point, we should all be able to agree on).
2. Its not as emotive (except for a subsection of people) as Kashmir.
3. By some opinions, it holds no value for the strategic objectives of India/Pak.
................

*It appears some have been influenced by Pakistani talk here, yelling.."But But.. will it help solve Kashmir??.. Hain jee.. Batao BAtao.. Hai koi jawab !! "

Sudeep,

1. How is Saltoro issue separate from the larger J&K issue?
2. Why should it be solved separately from J&K?
3. What makes us think that solving it separately will lead to a J&K solution?
4. If Saltoro is an issue for Pakistan why should Gilgit/ Baltistan not be solved first?
5. In fact why should not the Shaksgam region issue be solved first - it happened before we stopped Pakistanis from moving into Siachen as well?

Best regards,
Ashutosh

[sudeepj]

Amitabh ji...

the reason why we cant recover POK or Tibet is because we dont have the capabilties to do it. The question of cost benefit does not apply.

Well Tibet was never ours to recover, it was an independent buffer state. And you argument against China is sound, they are a much bigger economy with a deeper manufacturing base. But surely we can take over PoK? And the expenditure wont even be to burdensome.. Simply by bumping up the defense budget from the current 2% to 4% of GDP for 5 years should do the trick! But successive Indian govts. have not done so. If all of Indian land is sacred and non negotiable, why not?

we need to be extra careful. How can one discount that?

Hence, examine the strategic consequences of a disengagement in Siachen.. Whats wrong with that? Its not as if GoI will lurk in the forum and make up its mind about what to do..

I am sure u do remember the famous reply of Pillo Mody to chacha nehru in indian parliament post 1962.

and for our BR members who dont know abt it , i will repeat it..

chacha nehru : oh well..chinese have occupied some of our territory but it was a barren place, not a blade of grass, nothing at all..

Pillo mody : showed his bald head to chacha nehru and Hon;ble MP's and said nehru ji , this is also totally barren , not a single hair , nothing at all .. can i cut it and give it to someone else?

and chacha nehru died soon after !!

Masterful rhetoric by Mody, but very little of meaning. And in any case, OT!

[Lalmohan]

the siachen glacier is the head of at least one significant river - that gives it economic value. leave aside future tourism opportunities. to dismiss the high mountains as being of no intrinsic value is naiive

siachen - kargil - leh - kashmir valley - are all interconnected in terms of military posture, you cannot just randomly walk away from one piece of the jigsaw without upsetting the whole picture

the strategic value is way beyond that, it is about maintaining a particular posture for India that asserts her structure, role, position and security against hostile neighbours. yes its domino theory all over again.

[sudeepj]

All these years, when Pakistanis yelled Kashmir, we said calm down.. Lets talk about other less important issues first in a framework of composite dialogue. Siachen, by some opinions, is the easiest issue to settle, as:
1. The terrain holds no economic/cultural value, (at least this point, we should all be able to agree on).
2. Its not as emotive (except for a subsection of people) as Kashmir.
3. By some opinions, it holds no value for the strategic objectives of India/Pak.
................

*It appears some have been influenced by Pakistani talk here, yelling.."But But.. will it help solve Kashmir??.. Hain jee.. Batao BAtao.. Hai koi jawab !! "

Sudeep,

1. How is Saltoro issue separate from the larger J&K issue?
To me it appears separate as the dispute there arose in a different time frame and since populations are not involved, the political importance is much less than Kashmir valley.
2. Why should it be solved separately from J&K?
Oh this has been the GoI position for ever! Kashmir is the most difficult problem, lets solve other issues first.
3. What makes us think that solving it separately will lead to a J&K solution?
I am not sure anyone is under any illusions that J&K will be easy to solve
4. If Saltoro is an issue for Pakistan why should Gilgit/ Baltistan not be solved first?
5. In fact why should not the Shaksgam region issue be solved first - it happened before we stopped Pakistanis from moving into Siachen as well?
If you feel so strongly about it, you should petition the govt. This govt. and govts. before it, including BJP govts., have gone nearly on record to state that LoC be made the final border.

Best regards,
Ashutosh

[sudeepj]

the siachen glacier is the head of at least one significant river - that gives it economic value. leave aside future tourism opportunities. to dismiss the high mountains as being of no intrinsic value is naiive

You cant use Nubra waters, except for existing use, as it becomes a part of the Indus. Further, if any run of the river hydel dams and so on are to be built, they can only be built at least a few kms south of NJ9842.

Tourism in Siachen is a pie in the sky.. The terrain will only attract fakkad guys like myself whose idea of fun is to walk up and down hills. Apart from that, you cant have any tourism without that place having a ceasefire/disengagement first.

siachen - kargil - leh - kashmir valley - are all interconnected in terms of military posture, you cannot just randomly walk away from one piece of the jigsaw without upsetting the whole picture

This we should try to figure out.. Many Generals say that this is so, and many others say, it isnt. They know the issues at hand, they must become clearer to the lay public as well.

the strategic value is way beyond that, it is about maintaining a particular posture for India that asserts her structure, role, position and security against hostile neighbours. yes its domino theory all over again.

Tamils/Assamese/ will break away because India does a negotiated disengagement from an unpopulated place? If the place was populated, I would tend to agree with it more, but not one persons will go from being an Indian to some other nationality.. I doubt itll mean anything to the separatists in other places.

[ShauryaT]

Ofcourse, I agree but...

ShauryaT, a simple question. A disputable issue, opposite views all from various credible sources. What your rationality says? Take the bait?

I am myself biased towards finding a better future for the next generation. I am in no doubt, it affects a completely "rational" and "logical" view but I am also of the view that a completely "rational" view does not exist and if anyone says so, they are not aware of their own biases. So, one has to be rational with a deep awareness of your known biases. This way at least you know, when you are discounting certain events. For being completely rational, you will have to take humans out of the equation Most people will not admit this but they make emotional decisions and then rationalize them. Anyways, going OT here again.

[Lalmohan]

its about the encouragement teh paks and chinis will get

[KrishnaK]

I don't really have the knowledge required to understand and assess opinion pieces posted here and couldn't really grok the satellite maps posted here. So I've tried to come up with a set of questions given this simple one and we vacate Saltoro

* Does that mean we lose an advantage we have over China and/or Pakistan. An example of that would be say our ability to threaten the KKH. What is the real significance of KKH. I know it's a land route between China & Pakistan, but is it the only possible one over land ? I see the words 'Karakoram Range' sprawled along the Pakistan/China border. Does that mean there's no way for them to setup a land route along any other point in the border, that our occupation of Saltoro won't threaten ?
* If so, what is the magnitude of that advantage ?
* Do we cede any advantage to China and/or Pakistan, i.e. our occupation of the Saltoro is only to deny them from gaining said advantage. I think Rohit's coming up with examples of these

[chetak]

ShauryaT, let me ask you a question and then we will take this further.

What is your objective? Are you finding reasons to give up Siachen or there is a reason for which you want to give up Siachen? If it is latter then please state it clear and loud and then lets try to find a solution to that problem. I know the answer is somewhere in your many posts but as a favor on me please make it clear once more.

Thanks.

My objective does not matter for I am just an old fart here with zero influence on policies of the nation. However, my desired objective is to find a way for the next generation to be on a better footing with regards to the issues Pakistan poses for us than we have been. (I do not have high regard for our political ancestors). I think the word "give up" can mean many things. I prefer the word "demilitarization" in context of Siachen and yes I am open for it, so that the ball can move forward, in context of "Sama".

You are seriously wrong.

They will never trust us because we are we (infidels) and they are they. It's how it has always been and will ever be as long as they see their prophet as the only one. Infidels are living evidence that they have failed their prophet. Infidels who are also doing very well makes them doubt their faith. Every abdul and non abdul outside of porkiland is undoubtedly doing better than the porki abdul. That's the existential threat that they always talk about and our government willfully misunderstands.

You could present them with the red fort on a pork chop decorated platter. It would not matter a whit, porkis will be porkis. They always covet what is not theirs and their philosophy sanctions that as well as also rape and plunder and terrorism as legitimate tools of intimidation, coercion and propagation of their "faith"

Best to keep what you have and kick them hard in their collective balls every time. The unwashed abdul understands only force. If you hesitate to use it to protect yourself then they all see you as fair game. Lying, cheating and duping the "enemy" is sanctioned in their dharma kotli. That is exactly what kayani and zardari are doing now.

It would be very very foolish to back off now after having been fooled so very many times in the past.

[manjgu]

China can be assertive on Demchok and AP because its economy is bigger than ours and we cant be assertive on siachen !!! isnt our economy also bigger than Pakistan? nice logic sudeepJi.

and for the last time let me explain u , a link up does not mean a 6 lane highway !! I would advise u to read Harish kapadias book on Siachen to understand what is link up !!

Yes, all OUR land under OUR occupation is non negotiable. ( for a majority of us, I cant say how you the JNU jholawallas feel abt it). I explained u that India is a status quo power. will never go to take POK militarily but the same cant be said abt Pakistan and chinese...samajh mein nahi aa raha bhai ?

I give up....

If SudeepJ sees Pillo Modis words as masterful repartee and OT , then i have nothing more to say. (psssst.. he meant that Indian territory even if its a barren, hostile land it is not something u can lose/give away under any circumstance or for any reason or justification...does it not sound familiar with the topic under discussion)

Bhains ke aage been bajana ho gaya hai sudeepJi !!
ram ram bhaya ji...

[abhijitm]

I am myself biased towards finding a better future for the next generation. I am in no doubt, it affects a completely "rational" and "logical" view but I am also of the view that a completely "rational" view does not exist and if anyone says so, they are not aware of their own biases. So, one has to be rational with a deep awareness of your known biases. This way at least you know, when you are discounting certain events. For being completely rational, you will have to take humans out of the equation Most people will not admit this but they make emotional decisions and then rationalize them. Anyways, going OT here again.

What you said is absolutely right. There does not exists a complete rational view and people do tend to make emotional decisions and then rationalize them. Hence we both need to be careful, especially when the dispute is about national security. After all what we want is better future for our children and we surely don't want to burden them with our misjudgment at this point.

What I guess is that you want to make a friendly gesture at pakistan so that they feel secured and at the same time it should not cost us strategically. Am I right?

.. and yes, do you agree that pakistan is a rogue state?