Siachen Theatre

RSaxena:

``But, ofcourse, you have my undying admiration:))...``

Wow....that`s recent. Methinks it has something to do with your photograph being on the web.


Pankaj:

Good post. I think it`s dumb to isolate individual instances and give them a moral edge when the entire gamut of relationships between India and Pakistan is based on hostility.

Either both countries change the underlying philosophy of interaction or things stay put. It is pointless giving a moral angle to any hostile action be it India or Pakistan, if the action is taken in percieved self interest.

Objectively speaking, Pakistan did the right thing in supporting the Kashmir insurgency in a tactical sense. Somehow they, I don`t think they have thought out the strategy completely. As things stand, we are in a stalemate in Kashmir, be it the valley or Siachen.

Now, it is just a matter of who blinks first and who is capable of taking a bloodier nose in the process.

Dost-Mittar

I think we all know the real reasons behind Siachin,Kargil and Kashmir wars. Apart from the ``religious angle`` Pak`s declared aim is to ``bleed India by thousand cuts`` in Kashmir and elsewhere or so the Indian establishment believes. India also naturally has a deep distrust for Pakistan. Whenever such a distrustful atmosphere prevails, the only ``rational strategy`` is win-lose. Thus if you dont avail of the opportunity, your opponent will and and you will end up a loser. This is a bloody game in which the cost of leaving your enemy alive may be your own life. Win-win is not possible without mutual trust. The roots of the problems lie in the psychology and hence these problems have no straight solutions.

damn injuns..poking oily noses in other peoples businesses

saxena,

In this world of ours, if ``A`` doesnt agree with ``B`s`` opinion or behavior; then ``A`` labels ``B`` a ``whacko``...

But if MOIS labels a person ``whacko``...it holds up in a court of law!!
Aint this insane world beautiful?!!

But, ofcourse, you have my undying admiration:))...

Dost-Mittar #32 . . . what I am saying, not hinting, is that in my considered opinion there are no more ``sides`` to the whole IndoPak issue, including Siachen.

Is it very disturbing for me to state here that it is in the interests of a vast variety of people on both sides, especially those using religion but not restricted to them . . . to keep this strife ongoing?

And that it is these inertias which are responsible?

Siachin...is also one of the other strategic problems that we will face in the times to come. If we resist the ``blowing each other to bits syndrome`` thats gripping our progressive and peace loving nations at this moment of time, we might live to see the water problem that will become the prevalent issue in the future. Glaciers as the budding geologists in you would know are ample water supplies and thus this raging battle fo them.

re: stuka

{Dude, that is really unfair. That`s like asking Shankar to judge you. What the hell??? }

...but shankar`s a whacko and many people will acknowledge that...i doubt anyone would consider sameer a whacko...and in any case, shankar has great admiration for rsaxena... :)

RSaxena:

``if you think anything romair says makes an iota of sense, you need to get your head examined...don`t believe indians?...just ask sameerjb and sac...``

Dude, that is really unfair. That`s like asking Shankar to judge you. What the hell???

RSaxena:

``if you think anything romair says makes an iota of sense, you need to get your head examined...don`t believe indians?...just ask sameerjb and sac...``

Dude, that is really unfair. That`s like asking Shankar to judge you. What the hell???

Lady Ana

there is an age-old saying about making assumptions... umm..can`t remember rightly what exactly it was, but it had something to do with a braying donkey...

ermmm, I`m not familiar with it but if I ever come across a braying donkey, I`ll be sure to ask...

:)


``Perhaps this might help: I am very much an Indian passport holder. And I very much do love India, as I love Pakistan, Bangladesh and Hawaii.
Someone said to me yesterday, and I quote: ``this earth is my God`s earth, so every country is my country``. I take the liberty of calling myself a citizen of earth. ``

Fine fine, so I made a mistake in assuming...how was I to know you`re Arundhati Roy`s long lost twin..Have a hard time understanding her as well.


``In 1984, India deployed the first forces to Siachen.


Until that time, Pakistan had accepted the territory as no man’s land. What India did was seen as a violation of the 1972 Simla Agreement, which had stated that neither side would resort to the use of force to resolve bilateral disputes.``

Correct facts leading to a flawed interpretation. As Prem said, the Pakistanis did indulge in cartographic aggression. Also, giving visas to third country nationals implies ownership. Finally, Pakistani troops were present on the glacier at the time of Indian deployment. The operation was to take the high points, not the whole glacier. There were Pakistani casualties as well as Indian ones.

re: LadyAna

...if you think anything romair says makes an iota of sense, you need to get your head examined...don`t believe indians?...just ask sameerjb and sac....

Dear Dost-Mittar . . . how can there be any ``sides``?

The Siachen war is the perfect example of Indo-Pak mentality: more ``pride`` than brains..

OK, this is what my limited intellect has grasped after praying to the Most Merciful God Google a few times this evening:

The jad of the problem kuchh aisee thee (or hai):

Opening Scene:

After 1965, there was some gadbad regarding some frozen land that was not clearly marked.

Enters the cold-hearted villain: Siachen.

The inevitable ``differences:``

Pakistanis believe(d) that Siachin glacier fell within their territory. And they had a right to issue to outsiders permits etc related to areas within their own country. In early 1980s they issued a number of such expedition permits to westerners.

Indians believe(d) that Siachin glacier fell within an area of undemarcated land. By issueing permits to outsiders, Pakistanis were quietly effecting a cartographic take over of the glacier, including it within their Northern Areas.

Action:

So,

Indians launched an aggression on Pakistani land and occupied Siachin(Pakistani view)

Indians grabbed the glacier before Pakistanis could establish their control (Indian view).


For more detailed revelations, visit any number of a zillion plus links. I looked at a few-

http://www.cmc.sandia.gov/Links/about/papers/SAND98-0505-1/980505-1-40.html

http://www.pakistanidefence.com/Info/LocSeach1.html

http://panunkashmir.org/KashmirSentinel/3.9.html

OK, this is what my limited intellect has grasped after praying to the Most Merciful God Google a few times this evening:

The jad of the problem kuchh aisee thee (or hai):

Opening Scene:

After 1965, there was some gadbad regarding some frozen land that was not clearly marked.

Enters the cold-hearted villain: Siachen.

The inevitable ``differences`` about the cold-hearted villain:

Pakistanis believe(d) that Siachin glacier fell within their territory, as part of their Northern Areas. They had a right to issue to outsiders permits etc related to areas within their own country. In early 1980s they issued a number of such expedition permits to westerners.

Indians believe(d) that Siachin glacier fell within an area of undemarcated land. By issueing permits to outsiders, Pakistanis were quietly effecting a cartographic take over of the glacier, including it within their Northern Areas.

Action:

So,

Indians launched an aggression on Pakistani land and occupied Siachin(Pakistani view)

Indians grabbed the glacier before Pakistanis could establish their control (Indian view).


So ultimately, whose fault it was depends entirely on what you believe was the status of Siachin glacier after 1965. If it was part of Pakistan, Indians were the aggressors. If it was part of an undemarcated land, Pakistanis were upto no good there.

For more detailed revelations, visit any number of a zillion plus links. I looked at a few-

http://www.cmc.sandia.gov/Links/about/papers/SAND98-0505-1/980505-1-40.html

http://www.pakistanidefence.com/Info/LocSeach1.html

http://panunkashmir.org/KashmirSentinel/3.9.html

Of all the wars fought in the past, the war over Siachin was the stupidest. Several hundred people(perhaps thousands) from both sides have lost their lives or have become permanent handicaps in this fruitless war. people die not of bullets but frostbite in that God forsaken place. I read a detailed account of how around 800 Indian soldiers have died and perhaps twice or thrice the number permanently handicapped in the last 18 years over Siachin. I call it the stupidest war since there are apparently no material gains from this war and I am sceptical about its strategic geo-political value.