India, Pakistan: Working Towards Thawing the Siachen Conflict?

On April 7, 2012, a deadly avalanche hit a Pakistani military camp in the Gayatri Sector, 30km west of the Siachen glacier, killing over 130 people, most of them military personnel. The scale of the tragedy once again brought into focus a long-standing conflict between India and Pakistan over Siachen, often referred to as "the world's highest battlefield."

Pakistan Army rescue operation at the world's highest border in Siachen. Photo by Mohsin Hassan © Copyright Demotix (April 8, 2012)

The frozen conflict
Since 1984, armies of both countries have engaged in military conflicts at altitudes as high as 22,000ft above sea level, at temperatures that plunge below -60 degrees centigrade. A ceasefire was agreed upon in 2003 but the conflict continues to this day, forcing both countries to deploy troops and run manned military camps/ stations in this completely inhospitable terrain. While some critics have called this a futile war, other analysts have stressed the strategic importance of this area in the geopolitics of both nations.

Avalanche near the Siachen glacier. Screenshot of a YouTube video posted by zubahan136

  

 Off and on, both sides have expressed desire to disengage and withdraw troops from the Siachen outposts. However, after the Kargil war of 1999, which saw infiltration from the Pakistan side into the Indian side of the LOC, India hardened its stand and decided against withdrawal of troops unless Pakistan agreed to sign off on the AGPL (Actual Ground Position Line) which would map the current positions of troops/outposts. India's worry was that unless this was done, Pakistan would perhaps commit cartographic transgressions again. Furthermore, India is also worried about becoming vulnerable to possible incursions by China and therefore hesitant to give up her tactical advantage of controlling the Saltoro Ridge.  

Stalled demilitarization talks 

In June 2005, the Indian Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh, during a visit to the Siachen base camp at Parthapur, addressed the troops and said that it was time to make Siachen 'a symbol of peace' through peaceful negotiations, though he also asserted that there would be no re-drawing of boundaries as a result. While quite a few rounds of talks have taken place between both nations since then, not much progress has been made towards conflict resolution. The recent tragedy of the avalanche has led the authorities in Pakistan to press for demilitarization of the area by pointing out the human cost and financial burden that maintaining these manned outposts were causing both countries. Rafeel Wasif, a Pakistani blogger writes:

When a bomb explodes, all we ask for is the death toll; we feel a bit of remorse, discuss it, and that more or less sums up our debate. Whatever this may be, a gift or curse of humanity – we forget all with time and move on to another day. But today, this time around, I am not going to just forget. Why were our soldiers there in the first place? Why do we continue to invest so heavily in protecting a block of snow, with no human inhabitation, except the soldiers who so precariously guard it against foreign intruders?

Once more, talks are on between both countries, though the Indian Defence Minister, A.K Antony has already cautioned against expecting any "dramatic" breakthrough unless Pakistan acquiesced to the 'authentication, delineation and demarcation' of the respective troop positions on the Saltoro Ridge. Disappointment has also been expressed from the Pakistani side regarding the futility of these talks. At pkarticleshub.com, Pakistani columnist and blogger Nazia Nazar talks about what she feels is holding back both sides from reaching a workable solution:

The answer is simple. The atmosphere of propaganda and distrust being the root cause of this issue is consistently hampering its amicable resolution. Unfortunately, the people in India take it as a symbol of Indian pride and gallantry while in Pakistan it is considered the fallout of Indian aggression, which should be retaliated in equal measure.

Building trust

Nevertheless, the fact that both sides have agreed to continue the dialogue in a cordial atmosphere is seen as a step in the right direction in the realm of bilateral ties and cross-border relations. At Youth Ki Awaaz, Indian blogger Shashank Bhashkar offers some suggestions regarding what could be a possible way forward. He writes:

A border can be created along the current LOC and surveillance cameras can be set up to monitor infiltration activities. Both sides can keep their armies in such a position that they can be quickly deployed whenever the other side breaches the agreement. Having cameras will also account for documented proof for the International communities. The need of the hour is to display trust from both sides and come to a reasonable conclusion so that no more valuable human life is lost.

The next round of talks, between the Foreign Secretaries of both countries, is set for July 4th-5th. The ministerial level discussions are likely to take place in August. However, it remains to be seen if both sides continue to stick to their respective arguments - if they do, Siachen will remain a trigger for interstate conflict between India and Pakistan and the stalemate will continue. The challenge will be to find a way out of this and work towards a mutually acceptable solution to this icy conflict.

 This post was first published on the ISN blog, cross-posted on Global Voices Online.

India, Bangladesh: Water Disputes and Teesta River Diplomacy

India and Bangladesh share 54 rivers between them. Despite setting up a Joint River Commission for water management as early as 1972, tensions between the countries on how to share resources recently came to a head in a dispute over the Teesta River. At stake are the lives of countless people from West Bengal and Bangladesh who depend upon the river for survival. To date, only one comprehensive river pact has been signed by India and Bangladesh – a 1996 bilateral treaty that established a 30-year water-sharing arrangement between the two countries. This was set to change in September 2011 when India’s Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh, was due to sign a pact with his Bangladeshi counterpart regarding access and use of the Teesta River. 

 

Aerial View of the Teesta River. Flickr photo by Prato9x (CC-BY-NC-ND 2.0)

The Teesta - which has its source in Sikkim - flows through the northern part of West Bengal in India before entering Bangladesh, where after coursing through about 45km of irrigable land, merges with the Brahmaputra River (or Jamuna when it enters Bangladesh). In 1983, an ad-hoc water sharing agreement was reached between India and Bangladesh, whereby both countries were allocated 39% and 36% of the water flow respectively. The new bilateral treaty expands upon this agreement by proposing an equal allocation of the Teesta River.

However, the deal fell through when the then newly elected Chief Minister of West Bengal, Ms. Mamata Banerjee, refused to approve the treaty, fearing that the loss of higher volume of water to the lower riparian would cause problems in the northern region of state, especially during drier months.

  

The river Ganges, flowing through Hrishikesh, India. Flickr Photo by Sanj@y (CC-BY-2.0)

Given that water is a state issue in India, and that Banerjee’s political party, the All India Trinamool Congress, is a key coalition partner of the ruling central government, the deal could not go through without her approval. While a large section of the Bangladeshi populace as well as the Indian media vilified her rigid stance, her opposition to the terms of the treaty was not without its share of support.

In May 2012, during a visit to India, the Bangladesh Foreign Minister, Ms. Dipu Moni, warned that bilateral relations would be complicated if India fails to deliver on the Teesta water-sharing agreement. Despite this pressure tactic, the treaty remains a slow burner as India continues its efforts of domestic political consensus building. However, the Indian Minister for External Affairs, S.M. Krishna tried to diffuse tensions and assured Bangladesh that India remains committed to an early solution on the issue of sharing Teesta waters. 

 

Jamuna (Brahmaputra) river in Bangladesh. Flickr photo by bengal*foam (CC BY-ND 2.0)

Bangladesh also wants a quick resolution to the issue, and may even be willing to soften their stance because of mounting pressure at home to get the deal done. Bangladeshi journalist and blogger Farid Ahmed writes:

It is apparently quite clear now that…Bangladesh for now has failed to ensure that India inks a deal…to share water of common rivers, mainly Teesta … Now it is Bangladesh which has to do what it should have started long ago. Apart from traditional diplomacy, they should have transmitted the feelings of its public to those on the other side of the border. The sky is locked for Dhaka as no Bangladeshi channels are broadcasted by Indian cable operators… Most Indian newspapers were supportive for Bangladesh’s cause on Teesta. That’s a positive side. What about engaging with West Bengal’s public?

Nevertheless, looking beyond the political rhetoric, West Bengal’s concerns about water security for its northern region cannot be overlooked and need to be allayed. India is already beginning to feel the strain on its water security given the ever rising demands for more water for its burgeoning population. According to a 2010 report ‘Water Security for India: The External Dynamics’ published by the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA):

India is facing a serious water resource problem and as trends suggest, it is expected to become ‘water stressed’ by 2025 and ‘water scarce’ by 2050

Both countries, therefore, need to develop a well thought out, balanced treaty that will enable equitable sharing of the waters of the Teesta, thereby enhancing bilateral ties and reducing the possibility of water conflict.

This post was first published on the ISN blog, cross-posted on Global Voices Online.