UPA’s sinister plan to please Pakistan
A sell-off in the offing?
First Siachen, then Sir Creek to be surrendered?
By Prof. M.D. Nalapat
A sinister plan to undermine India’s national security is underway. In the name of confidence building a plan to gift first Siachen and thereafter Sir Creek to the Pakistan army is in the offing.
Goaded and prodded by shadowy quislings who enjoy the confidence of the UPA Chairperson Sonia Gandhi, the Indian Army is silently being pressurised to accept a withdrawal of its forces from the Siachen glacier. The reasons given, which not coincidentally are the same as those supplied by the Pakistan army, (1) maintaining the base on the glacier is “too expensive at Rs 4 crores a day”, (2) soldiers are at risk of mental and physical illness because of duty there and (3) the Siachen glacier is of “zero strategic value”. All three propositions are false.
First, the expense of the Siachen post. A withdrawal from the heights would save only Rs 1.2 crore per day in total expenses, as other expenses would continue to be incurred, hence creating an effective saving of less than Rs 450 crore a year after the withdrawal rather than the claimed benefit of nearly Rs 1500 crore. As it is safe to assume that Pakistan will use the Indian retreat from Siachen to infiltrate several hundred more jihadis, eliminating them would prove much more financially expensive than holding on to Siachen, and much more costly in blood. Thanks to the boost that the withdrawal will give to jihadi morale, the total expenses on fighting the ISI-led insurgency in Kashmir would substantially increase.Thus the argument that a Siachen withdrawal would save money is a lie.
By agreeing to a joint survey at the present time, the UPA government has begun the process of ceding Indian territory to Pakistan, that too without firing a shot.
Second, the troop morale. India’s jawans are among the finest in the world, ready to undergo incredible hardship and risk to protect the territory of the country, a quality demonstrated at Kargil in 1999. However, for this they need to be sure that their government will back them in their bravery and not stab them in the back the way it happened at Tashkent in 1966 or Shimla in 1972. Also, during the time when George Fernandes was Defence Minister, the soldiers at Siachen finally were given suitable winter kits and their living conditions improved, something that his many predecessors had not bothered about. Since the UPA took office, no significant extra effort has gone into making the living and working conditions for Siachen-based troops better. The reason lies in the desire of those close to Sonia Gandhi to speedily gift the glacier to Pervez Musharraf.
Third, far from having only “zero” strategic value, control over the Siachen heights enables the army to monitor infiltration of terrorists into the rest of Kashmir. The Indian army post—the world’s highest—dominates the surrounding area, providing a vantage point even towards the Karakoram Highway, which is just 180 kilometres away from the main force, well within range. One reason why the Pakistan army has been demanding an Indian withdrawal is that such a move would take away troops from a region of which 5,128 square kilometres of territory stolen from India have been gifted to China by Pakistan. A major reason for Beijing’s desire to force an Indian withdrawal from Siachen is that the glacier could in time be an ideal location to host sensitive equipment that could keep electronic watch over a huge swathe of territory that would include Xinjiang and Tibet. Small wonder that both Pakistan and China are delighted by the persistent US pressure on India to get its troops out of the Siachen glacier, the way Soviet bullying forced Lal Bahadur Shastri to surrender Haji Pir in 1966. The Bush White House, infatuated with Musharraf to the extent that it has condoned the A.Q. Khan coterie, wants New Delhi to make the painful concessions that the CIA and the State Department hope will stabilise Musharraf’s position among his restive Corps Commanders. In short, the US wants India to surrender territory to feed the jihadi beast that is the Pakistan army.
Fourth, the fact is that the “Siachen Line” does not exist except as territory on which Indian troops are stationed. Once the troops go, the line will itself be dissolved, as the facts on the ground will alter. Ominously, while the Pakistan Army has jeepable roads that can enable it to occupy (vacated) Indian posts in Siachen in less than 40 hours, the terrain on the Indian side is so inhospitable that it would take a minimum of 15 days to get back to the posts. Thus, the risk of a Pakistani capture of the Siachen positions is high, especially when Pervez Musharraf, the treacherous individual who broke all norms and commitments by his action in Kargil, remains in charge in Pakistan.
Indeed, some of them are now working out other locations from where they can get Indian troops to withdraw after Siachen is surrendered, on the grounds of “economy” and “rationalisation”. In this task, they are in close touch with individuals such as Ijaz Mansur and Farooq Kathwari, who have provided significant help to jihadis in Kashmir on behalf of the Pakistan army and are yet feted by the Bush White House. Sadly, such individuals were very influential even during the time of the NDA government, when a certain high official would get instructions on Kashmir policy from those who were acting on behalf of the Pakistan army. An example of such treachery, concerning Sir Creek, will be given later.
They are planning to beguile the Indian public by propagating some conditionalities under which this withdrawal is executed. These superficially plausible conditions include getting the Pakistan army “to agree in writing to verification of positions”, so as to prevent a Kargil-style intrusion into the space vacated by India. The entire post-1947 experience of consistent bad faith on the part of the jihadi army of Pakistan has been ignored by these quislings. The fact is that a written agreement with Pakistan is usually not worth the paper it is written on, and that once Siachen—as is inevitable—gets captured by a Pakistan army thrust after India deserts the post, it will be almost impossible to reclaim the lost land. Ironically, it was precisely because of extreme bad faith by Pakistan in 1984 that Rajiv Gandhi ordered that Siachen be captured, which it was, in a bold move by the army. Now the very government that claims to be guided by the memory of this young leader is silently working to destroy an important part of his legacy by following the example set by Jawaharlal Nehru of blithely surrendering Indian territory. The quislings who are active within key decision-making groups close to the UPA Chairperson want the reteat from Siachen to take place within the next three months. They have promised the Pakistan army that they will secure an Indian withdrawal from another territory, one that is potentially rich in oil deposits. This is the region known as Sir Creek on the maps. This month, clearly under orders from a level far above than that of Manmohan Singh, External Affairs Minister Natwar Singh conceded Pakistan’s demand that a “joint survey” by both countries would take place in Sir Creek. This means in effect that India will lose nearly 2000 square kilometres of (potentially oil-rich) territory to the generals in Islamabad, a fact well known to the shadowy individuals advising Sonia Gandhi. These quislings are well aware that the river in the area often changes course, sometimes moving to the west and sometimes to the east, and that at this particular point in time the river is on a course that would favour Pakistan. In other words, if a survey were carried out now, the resulting agreement would mean that the Sir Creek region—1920 square kilometres of India’s land—would get transferred to Pakistan. What is needed to protect Indian interests is to agree to a joint survey only when the course of the river changes westwards again, thus favouring the Indian position. However, the MEA was forced by some higher authority to agree to a survey now, a time that is totally disadvantageous to India. The reason of course is the rush by the quislings advising the UPA to cede even more Indian territory to their favourite country, Pakistan.
In fact, Pakistan has deliberately altered the course of the river to its advantage, by building dams upstream in specific locations. There is no need at all for a joint survey, for the region has already been fully demarcated as a result of the 1914 and 1924 agreements between the Rann of Kutch and Sindh Province. A clear east-west demarcation line was arrived at, which was later demarcated by pillars. Over time, several of these pillars have disappeared or been deliberately removed, but instead of replacing them, unfortunately the then NDA government made a major concession to Pakistan in 2003 by agreeing to a joint survey, rather than acting unilaterally on what is Indian territory. In the case of Sir Creek, all that is needed is to replace the pillars that have disappeared or been stolen with new ones, not consent to any formula that would surrender land. Unfortunately, by agreeing to a joint survey at the present time, the UPA government has begun the process of ceding Indian territory to Pakistan, that too without firing a shot.
Were the PMO to permit the MEA to go through with a fresh re-survey of the Sir Creek region at this time, when conditions on the ground are adverse to India, the UPA’s supremo Sonia Gandhi will be held accountable to the people of India for every square inch of Indian territory that is thereby surrendered to Pakistan. Unless the quislings who are playing the Pakistan army’s game on Siachen and Sir Creek are rendered ineffective, India may find itself once again losing territory now in its control, this time by internal subversion rather than by external aggression. Both Natwar Singh and Manmohan Singh need to refuse to play this treasonable game.
First Siachen, then Sir Creek to be surrendered?
By Prof. M.D. Nalapat
A sinister plan to undermine India’s national security is underway. In the name of confidence building a plan to gift first Siachen and thereafter Sir Creek to the Pakistan army is in the offing.
Goaded and prodded by shadowy quislings who enjoy the confidence of the UPA Chairperson Sonia Gandhi, the Indian Army is silently being pressurised to accept a withdrawal of its forces from the Siachen glacier. The reasons given, which not coincidentally are the same as those supplied by the Pakistan army, (1) maintaining the base on the glacier is “too expensive at Rs 4 crores a day”, (2) soldiers are at risk of mental and physical illness because of duty there and (3) the Siachen glacier is of “zero strategic value”. All three propositions are false.
First, the expense of the Siachen post. A withdrawal from the heights would save only Rs 1.2 crore per day in total expenses, as other expenses would continue to be incurred, hence creating an effective saving of less than Rs 450 crore a year after the withdrawal rather than the claimed benefit of nearly Rs 1500 crore. As it is safe to assume that Pakistan will use the Indian retreat from Siachen to infiltrate several hundred more jihadis, eliminating them would prove much more financially expensive than holding on to Siachen, and much more costly in blood. Thanks to the boost that the withdrawal will give to jihadi morale, the total expenses on fighting the ISI-led insurgency in Kashmir would substantially increase.Thus the argument that a Siachen withdrawal would save money is a lie.
By agreeing to a joint survey at the present time, the UPA government has begun the process of ceding Indian territory to Pakistan, that too without firing a shot.
Second, the troop morale. India’s jawans are among the finest in the world, ready to undergo incredible hardship and risk to protect the territory of the country, a quality demonstrated at Kargil in 1999. However, for this they need to be sure that their government will back them in their bravery and not stab them in the back the way it happened at Tashkent in 1966 or Shimla in 1972. Also, during the time when George Fernandes was Defence Minister, the soldiers at Siachen finally were given suitable winter kits and their living conditions improved, something that his many predecessors had not bothered about. Since the UPA took office, no significant extra effort has gone into making the living and working conditions for Siachen-based troops better. The reason lies in the desire of those close to Sonia Gandhi to speedily gift the glacier to Pervez Musharraf.
Third, far from having only “zero” strategic value, control over the Siachen heights enables the army to monitor infiltration of terrorists into the rest of Kashmir. The Indian army post—the world’s highest—dominates the surrounding area, providing a vantage point even towards the Karakoram Highway, which is just 180 kilometres away from the main force, well within range. One reason why the Pakistan army has been demanding an Indian withdrawal is that such a move would take away troops from a region of which 5,128 square kilometres of territory stolen from India have been gifted to China by Pakistan. A major reason for Beijing’s desire to force an Indian withdrawal from Siachen is that the glacier could in time be an ideal location to host sensitive equipment that could keep electronic watch over a huge swathe of territory that would include Xinjiang and Tibet. Small wonder that both Pakistan and China are delighted by the persistent US pressure on India to get its troops out of the Siachen glacier, the way Soviet bullying forced Lal Bahadur Shastri to surrender Haji Pir in 1966. The Bush White House, infatuated with Musharraf to the extent that it has condoned the A.Q. Khan coterie, wants New Delhi to make the painful concessions that the CIA and the State Department hope will stabilise Musharraf’s position among his restive Corps Commanders. In short, the US wants India to surrender territory to feed the jihadi beast that is the Pakistan army.
Fourth, the fact is that the “Siachen Line” does not exist except as territory on which Indian troops are stationed. Once the troops go, the line will itself be dissolved, as the facts on the ground will alter. Ominously, while the Pakistan Army has jeepable roads that can enable it to occupy (vacated) Indian posts in Siachen in less than 40 hours, the terrain on the Indian side is so inhospitable that it would take a minimum of 15 days to get back to the posts. Thus, the risk of a Pakistani capture of the Siachen positions is high, especially when Pervez Musharraf, the treacherous individual who broke all norms and commitments by his action in Kargil, remains in charge in Pakistan.
Indeed, some of them are now working out other locations from where they can get Indian troops to withdraw after Siachen is surrendered, on the grounds of “economy” and “rationalisation”. In this task, they are in close touch with individuals such as Ijaz Mansur and Farooq Kathwari, who have provided significant help to jihadis in Kashmir on behalf of the Pakistan army and are yet feted by the Bush White House. Sadly, such individuals were very influential even during the time of the NDA government, when a certain high official would get instructions on Kashmir policy from those who were acting on behalf of the Pakistan army. An example of such treachery, concerning Sir Creek, will be given later.
They are planning to beguile the Indian public by propagating some conditionalities under which this withdrawal is executed. These superficially plausible conditions include getting the Pakistan army “to agree in writing to verification of positions”, so as to prevent a Kargil-style intrusion into the space vacated by India. The entire post-1947 experience of consistent bad faith on the part of the jihadi army of Pakistan has been ignored by these quislings. The fact is that a written agreement with Pakistan is usually not worth the paper it is written on, and that once Siachen—as is inevitable—gets captured by a Pakistan army thrust after India deserts the post, it will be almost impossible to reclaim the lost land. Ironically, it was precisely because of extreme bad faith by Pakistan in 1984 that Rajiv Gandhi ordered that Siachen be captured, which it was, in a bold move by the army. Now the very government that claims to be guided by the memory of this young leader is silently working to destroy an important part of his legacy by following the example set by Jawaharlal Nehru of blithely surrendering Indian territory. The quislings who are active within key decision-making groups close to the UPA Chairperson want the reteat from Siachen to take place within the next three months. They have promised the Pakistan army that they will secure an Indian withdrawal from another territory, one that is potentially rich in oil deposits. This is the region known as Sir Creek on the maps. This month, clearly under orders from a level far above than that of Manmohan Singh, External Affairs Minister Natwar Singh conceded Pakistan’s demand that a “joint survey” by both countries would take place in Sir Creek. This means in effect that India will lose nearly 2000 square kilometres of (potentially oil-rich) territory to the generals in Islamabad, a fact well known to the shadowy individuals advising Sonia Gandhi. These quislings are well aware that the river in the area often changes course, sometimes moving to the west and sometimes to the east, and that at this particular point in time the river is on a course that would favour Pakistan. In other words, if a survey were carried out now, the resulting agreement would mean that the Sir Creek region—1920 square kilometres of India’s land—would get transferred to Pakistan. What is needed to protect Indian interests is to agree to a joint survey only when the course of the river changes westwards again, thus favouring the Indian position. However, the MEA was forced by some higher authority to agree to a survey now, a time that is totally disadvantageous to India. The reason of course is the rush by the quislings advising the UPA to cede even more Indian territory to their favourite country, Pakistan.
In fact, Pakistan has deliberately altered the course of the river to its advantage, by building dams upstream in specific locations. There is no need at all for a joint survey, for the region has already been fully demarcated as a result of the 1914 and 1924 agreements between the Rann of Kutch and Sindh Province. A clear east-west demarcation line was arrived at, which was later demarcated by pillars. Over time, several of these pillars have disappeared or been deliberately removed, but instead of replacing them, unfortunately the then NDA government made a major concession to Pakistan in 2003 by agreeing to a joint survey, rather than acting unilaterally on what is Indian territory. In the case of Sir Creek, all that is needed is to replace the pillars that have disappeared or been stolen with new ones, not consent to any formula that would surrender land. Unfortunately, by agreeing to a joint survey at the present time, the UPA government has begun the process of ceding Indian territory to Pakistan, that too without firing a shot.
Were the PMO to permit the MEA to go through with a fresh re-survey of the Sir Creek region at this time, when conditions on the ground are adverse to India, the UPA’s supremo Sonia Gandhi will be held accountable to the people of India for every square inch of Indian territory that is thereby surrendered to Pakistan. Unless the quislings who are playing the Pakistan army’s game on Siachen and Sir Creek are rendered ineffective, India may find itself once again losing territory now in its control, this time by internal subversion rather than by external aggression. Both Natwar Singh and Manmohan Singh need to refuse to play this treasonable game.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home