ELECTIONS '98
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ARCHIVES

Pakistan rejects Siachen ceasefire

Tara Shankar Sahay in New Delhi

The seventh round of Indo-Pak talks ended, expectedly, without achieving anything.

Sitting down together in New Delhi on Friday, Indian Defence Secretary Ajith Kumar and his Pakistani counterpart, Lieutenant General (retired) Ifthikar Ali Khan, discussed, disagreed, reiterated, restated -- and, finally, called it a day after three hours without moving an inch forward on the Siachen issue.

The Indian stand, Kumar told reporters later, was that the ground situation on the glacier, the world's highest battleground, be first addressed before moving on to related issues.

Consequently, the delegation proposed a ceasefire agreement in Siachen.

Such a step, it argued, would immediately defuse tension there.

The Pakistani delegation, however, rejected the proposal outright.

Pakistani high commission officials, who requested anonymity, said this was because it violated the Simla Agreement.

They underscored that in 1989 there was an agreement between the two countries, which was not implemented because "India was not prepared [to implement it]".

They reiterated that India continued to illegally occupy the glacier.

Kumar pointed out that the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir, demarcated following the Simla Agreement, extended only up to map grid point NJ 9842. The areas north and east of NJ 9842 had always been under India's administrative control; its troops were located at Daulat Beg Oldi, Sasoma, and Zingrulma. Siachen and the area till the Karakoram Pass were patrolled regularly since the 1950s.

But Pakistan, the defence secretary underscored, had deliberately encouraged activities like "illegal" mountaineering there.

Further, it flew photo missions, acquired special snow clothing, and made plans to induct specially trained and equipped forces for the military occupation of Siachen. Thus, India had no option but to secure its positions "in an area historically under its control in a state that was entirely its integral part", Kumar said.

Answering questions, the defence secretary and his colleagues emphasised that Pakistan's rejection of the proposal was made with the contention that ceasefire in the past had not succeeded.

Pakistan wants third-party intervention.

Kumar said the Indian side categorically rejected any role for a third party in Siachen because, under the Simla Agreement, it is strictly a bilateral affair.

The crowded press conference witnessed persistent queries from reporters who were dissatisfied with the defence secretary's torso answers. A Pakistani newsman wanted him to confirm whether the two sides had reached any agreement in the 1989 talks. Ajith Kumar replied in the negative, explaining that if an agreement had been reached then, the 1992 talks would not have been needed.

The newsman persisted with more questions, but was cut short by the principal information officer.

Director-General of Military Operations Lt General I K Verma, answering another reporter, pointed out that contrary to Pakistan's claims, it had made several attempts recently to dislodge Indian troops from their positions.

He said Pakistani troops attacked the Soloro range, but were effectively repulsed.

The DGMO said he was in constant touch with his Pakistani counterpart.

Kumar said India wanted redeployment of troops according to the positions at the time of the Simla Agreement.

"We are disappointed (at Pakistan's rejection)," Kumar said, "but we are hopeful that they will see our point of view in subsequent talks."

Commenting on the loss of lives on both sides on Siachen, and the staggering cost of maintaining troops there, both the defence secretary and the DGMO said, "We are on dominating heights and Pakistan is telling us to vacate our legitimate position."

Kumar underscored that the cost of maintaining troops in Siachen was part of the overall defence budget.

"Siachen is a national frontier. We consider it sacrosanct," the DGMO added. "Security measures have to be taken there. Troops will be deployed according to the enormity of the threat emanating from Pakistan."

Would the dialogue between the two sides continue? The defence secretary was optimistic. There is "no reason" why further talks will not be held, he remarked.

Tell us what you think of this report