A way needs to be found to work around the present deadlock and allow diplomacy to prevail. PHOTO: FILE
Siachen, as both peace activists and environmental experts have pointed out, is a heritage shared between India and Pakistan. It is the duty of both to protect it and for the sake of reduced tensions to vacate it of a military presence. The world’s highest battleground must be returned to nature. The presence of boots on it is immoral.
In this context, the entrenched position apparently taken by New Delhi is extremely unfortunate. If, indeed, an agreement has been reached, no time should be lost in putting ink to it. Both nations need to recognise the gravity of the situation and do their best to ease existing problems any way they can. The reluctance to do so can only be regretted. A way needs to be found to work around the present deadlock and allow diplomacy to prevail. We hope that the Indian High Commissioner to Pakistan, TCA Raghavan, who was present at the Saarc meeting, will convey the message delivered there back to his capital and persuade people who make decisions to move ahead towards solving the problems that are essential to building much-needed trust between Pakistan and India, thereby also easing the tensions which run through the region and add to the frictions which lead to violence and unrest within it at sporadic intervals.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 11th, 2013.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (13)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@moderator, why my comment not printed, polpot/np/nero all said same as i said, but my comment was much before them, still not printed
You gotta give to Pakistani leaders: They have lied so much that now they have started believing in their own lies. For the sake of your country please tell you people the dotted lines you signed on in 1949 and 1972. The glacier is on the east side of the line. Anyone can read the text and see that.
So it is Pakistans intransigence thats holding Indian withdrawal from Siachin +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Mr Aziz pls note.
@jay: Both cannot withdraw from Siachen since both are not present on Siachen.he is seeking unilateral withdrawal of India from Siachen. In light of Kargill no withdrawal can happen based on verbal agreements.
India and Pakistan have agreed on the conceptual definition of the LoC in writing in 1949 and reaffirmed it in 1972. India simply asks that both countries should actually physically demarcate what was conceptually agreed by both. Pakistan does not want to do that because it will prove once and for all that Siachen is on the Aindian side of LoC as per it's own signed agreement.
"The presence of boots on it is immoral." +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Lessons in morality from the architects of Kargil!.
@cynic: "Then no one is getting anywhere." +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ pls inform Sartaz Aziz he is the one making strange noises.
@polpot Then no one is getting anywhere.
Pakistan has no choice but to pay the price of Kargil +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ and that is to agree to Indian terms for Siachin !!.
@numbersnumbers: FYI- Pakistn does not occupy an inch of Siachen they occupy the western ridges which is the Gyari sector.
@numbersnumbers: He clearly said both need to withdraw. trust deficit between the countries caused by our blundering general is acknowledged but for a common Pakistani, hey, we have suffered as well and have found it hard to trust our leaders. But now let's hope we can move past all this and work towards solutions because a deadlock helps no one.
@numbersnumbers: Pakistani soldiers are not occupying an inch of Siachen. This is why after 3 attempts to dislodge India which failed followed by Kargill which also failed, this is the new tactic.
So this is the new angle. Indian soldiers should vacate Siachen because of environmental reasons. Good one.
Let us first review PAkistan's credibility to make a claim based on its own environmental record:
1) http://tribune.com.pk/story/643313/where-are-the-deer/ 2) http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009%5C12%5C25%5Cstory25-12-2009pg7_16 3) http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia/2011/06/201161717524413319.htm
Secondly Siachen was on Indian side of ceasefire line as per this agreement between India and Pakistan in 1949. http://www.kashmir-information.com/LegalDocs/KashmirCeasefire.html which was reconfirmed in 1972 as part of Simla agreement where the 'ceasefire line' was referred to as 'line of control'.
The issue is that Pakistan somehow feels that the term 'thence North to the glaciers' means thence North east to Karakoram pass. So India says, let us physically demarcate LoC as per agreement signed by both countries and let the chips fall where they may. Why do you think Pakistan resists this?
Afte Kargill happened do you think there is any chance that India would simply withdraw based on verbal understanding?
BTW, did Sartaj Aziz happen to mention the "significant environmental damage" the Pakistani military presence on the Saichen Glacier was causing??? Curious that Indian forces need to vacate the Glacier but Pakistani forces can remain because "they" are good for the environment!!!