|
|
Siachin disappointmentThe POST, Sun, April,15, 2007.Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema
For a common man it is indeed surprising that why can’t India and Pakistan able to agree on something that was once agreed between the two countries in a relatively tenser environment than what exists today. Siachin dispute started in 1984 when the Indians decided to occupy area that was traditionally considered as under Pakistani control. While it is somewhat difficult to determine who fired the first shot, but the dispute only surfaced after the Indian made aggressive moves in the area 1984. In response to Indian moves the Pakistanis also deployed their troops. Admittedly the fighting was limited and more soldiers from both sides died of extremity of weather rather than in actual combat. The Karachi Agreement of 1949 defined the temporary ceasefire line which was later converted into Line of Control (LOC). The line was defined up to the map point NJ 9842 and glacier area was not demarcated as it was considered to be not fit for human habitation. The Siachin glacier is situated in the extreme northwestern edge of the British Indian territories at an altitude of over 22000 feet high with a temperature ranging from -50 C to -60C. It was presumed that humans could not survive north of point NJ 9842. Undoubtedly the roots of conflict are the non-demarcation of glacier area. The Pakistanis argue that India forcibly occupied sections of the Siachin glacier which was under Pakistani control in 1984 in violation of both the 1949 Karachi Agreement as well as the 1972 Simla Accord. The Simla Agreement clearly says that neither side shall seek to alter (LOC) it unilaterally irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations. Hence the occupation of certain heights in 1984 was a blatant violation of the Simla Accord. The Indian side argues that it would withdraw from the Glacier only after authentication of the existing position of troops. Pakistanis believe that if they agree to current authentication of troops, then they are likely to legitimize the Indian aggression and occupation of areas that were deemed to be under Pakistani control. Besides, it is also argued that why this objection was not raised at the time of 1989 when understanding was reached but agreement was not signed because of political reasons. The records indicate that during the 70s and 80s many mountaineering expeditions climbed Siachin heights via Pakistan. While all such expeditions sought permission from the Pakistani authorities, no objections were raised by the Indians then. Even an Indian mountaineering expedition secured permission from the Pakistanis. Most of the maps published in the Western magazines depicted the area as part of Pakistani controlled. Why the Indian military did occupy the area and established military foothold? The answer to this question primarily revolves around denying perceived advantage to the Pakistanis. Some feel that some Indian also felt that it would not only strengthen the defenses of Leh but could also give strategic advantage to India. Despite the existence of concepts like Peace Park, Peace Mountain, Science Park, the two sides were still unable to work out a feasible solution. In many parts of the world such solutions have been implemented. While the two sides have been making very encouraging statements but when one reviews the record regarding conflict resolution, one is bound to be disappointed. Admittedly it is not all that easy to resolve disputes quickly as these have been stagnating over time, but then start has to be made somewhere and Siachin was deemed such an issue that could be easily provide the necessary start. It is somewhat surprising to learn that Indian leadership is now projecting the notion that Siachin is a complicated issue. Many Pakistanis are now becoming somewhat convinced that India is playing for time and unnecessary delay in its resolution is generating adverse impressions. There are three categories of people; those who are very optimistic about the eventual outcome of the peace process and then there are those who have firm belief that no dispute would be resolved. The third category consists of those people who believe that eventually something will be produced by this ongoing dialogue process but it would be only on Indian terms. It is difficult to deny that with a huge baggage of adverse relationships that has been accumulating over the years, to expect quick resolution of any dispute is a futile exercise. But the disappoint steps in when one realizes that even a resolvable dispute like Siachin has not yet been resolved even after 12 meetings. A question is frequently raised now that if the two parties are unable to resolve a resolvable dispute like Siachin then how long, more complicated disputes like the ongoing Kashmir, would take. Thus the optimism initially generated by strides made in the area of people to people contact is gradually beginning to be eroded. To reverse this creeping trend, it is imperative that some headway is made in conflict resolution area as well. Since the easiest of the dispute between India and Pakistan has not yet been able to secure some agreement, it seems advisable that the level of negotiations may be raised to ministerial level. In addition the main leaders should express their determination to get Siachin resolved by the end of this year. Mr. Manmohan Singh’s latest statement that Siachin talks are complicated appears to be reflective either of lukewarm attitude or increasing influence of Indian military over decision making. What the Indian needs to comprehend that the current year is an election year and one does not know what would be the outcome of the election, therefore it is important to realize that dispute should be resolved within the tenure of present leadership. At the moment the chemistry of the two leaders appears to be working and both express their determination with varying intensity to take the peace process to its logical ends but even then one cannot ignore the unpredictable nature of South Asian politics. It is not too difficult to assume that opposition in both countries would not like to see the advent of an agreement as such an agreement is likely to not only strengthening the hands of incumbent governments but could also pay enormous dividends. Besides, an agreement on Siachin would generate positives vibes and could further help in removing trust deficit between the two countries and could also accelerate efforts to resolve other disputes. Further delay in Siachin’s resolution could also take a heavy toll of people’s patience as it is already propagated in some quarters that India is never going to resolve any of the disputes with Pakistan. It is also stated by increasing number of people in Pakistan that it has already conceded too much without any constructive response from the India, hence the Pakistanis should reconsider its policy towards India. An objective analysis of Pakistani as well as Indian efforts in the area of conflict resolution clearly gives an edge to the Pakistanis. Even at the International level questions are now being raised regarding the intentions of the India. It is indeed advisable that another meeting should be held to resolve the Siachin dispute. The delay is also communication to all of us that the Indian Prime Minister will not be able to visit Pakistan in near future.
|
|