Withdrawal from Siachen – a
Manifestation of Prithviraj Chauhan Syndrome
Major General
Mrinal Suman
Siachen is in the
news again. Having served at the glacier, one is aware of the ground realities.
It is being suggested that ‘demilitarization’ of the glacier will act as a
catalyst to foster friendly relations between Indian and Pakistan. To be
honest, one has not heard of a more convoluted and outlandish logic.
Demilitarization
of an area implies withdrawal of the opposing military forces from the
designated area with an agreement that neither side would undertake any
military activity till the resolution of the conflicting territorial claims.
Thus, demilitarization necessarily entails withdrawal by both the sides from
the disputed area. The area becomes a de facto frontier between the two
nations.
In the case of
Siachen, Pakistan has no presence on the glacier – not even a toehold. Their
positions are well west of the Saltoro Ridge. If they are not present on the
glacier, the question of Pakistani withdrawal just does not arise. Therefore,
demilitarization of Siachen means unilateral withdrawal by India and
nothing more.
It is
understandable for the Pakistani military to use the term demilitarization as
it wants to continue deceiving its countrymen that it is occupying part of the
glacier. However, it is simply preposterous for Indian strategists to speak in
terms of demilitarization and thereby mislead the public. They should be honest
and refer to the proposal as ‘unilateral vacation of Siachen by India’.
'Demilitarization
of Siachen will assure Pakistan of Indian sincerity in resolving contentious
issues and help bring about a reduction in Pakistan’s hostility towards India.
Both countries can live peacefully thereafter' is the commonly touted argument
of the Indian advocates of the withdrawal.
The above logic is
absurd and farcical. It is based on three phony contentions. One, it is for
India to convince Pakistan of its good intentions and not the vice versa. Two, a placated Pakistan will shed its enmity
and be a good neighbour. And three, Pakistan should be trusted to honour its
commitment.
Over the
last six decades India has tried various measures to convince Pakistan of its
sincerity to develop a rancor-free relationship. India has never coveted
Pakistani territory. It stopped short of re-conquering the whole of Jammu and
Kashmir and went to the Security Council. It gave back the strategic Haji Pir
Pass as a goodwill gesture in 1965 and returned 96,000 Pakistani Prisoners of
War after the war in 1971. It has never trained and sent terrorists into
Pakistan to create mayhem.
As a
matter of fact, India’s over-indulgence and conciliatory gestures has
emboldened Pakistan into considering India to be a soft state and increased its
intransigence and hardened its anti-India attitude. While the Indian leadership
was trying to break ice through ‘bus diplomacy’ in 1998-99, Pakistani military
was busy planning the notorious Kargil incursion.
As
regards the second issue of changing Pakistan’s mindset, it is nothing but
self-delusion. Pakistan’s shedding of hostility towards India and adoption of a
friendly stance would amount to the negation of the two-nation theory, the
raison d'être for its very existence. A nation born out of hatred needs hatred
to feed itself on for continued sustenance and to justify its existence.
Issues
like Kashmir and Siachen are merely a manifestation of Pakistan’s infinite
hostility towards India. Were India to hand over Kashmir to it on a platter and
withdraw from Siachen, Pakistan will invent newer issues to keep the pot
boiling. Pakistan cannot afford to shed its antagonism towards India as that
would amount to questioning the logic of its very creation.
Coming
to the third premise, can Pakistan be trusted not to undertake clandestine
operations to occupy the Siachen heights vacated by trusting Indians? Who can
guarantee that? Remember, deceit is a part of Pakistan’s state policy.
Independent
Pakistan started its track record with treachery. Despite having signed a
‘stand-still agreement’ with the state of Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan unleashed
Pashtun marauders on the hapless Kashmir valley with the active participation
of Pak army. Breaching undertakings given to the US, it surreptitiously used
American equipment to launch a surprise attack on Kutch in April 1965.
Even
before the ink had dried on the Kutch agreement, Pakistan was back to its
perfidious ways. Covertly, it infiltrated its forces into Kashmir, expecting a
local uprising against India. Under the Tashkent agreement, Pakistan promised
to abjure the use of force to settle mutual disputes and adherence to the
principles of non-interference. However, Pakistan continued its proxy war
through its notorious secret agencies. Sanctuaries and safe passage were
provided to underground elements of North-Eastern India.
Under
the Shimla Agreement, Bhutto had given a solemn verbal undertaking
to accept
LOC as the de facto border. Instead, true to its perfidious nature, Pakistan redoubled its efforts to create
turmoil in India. In addition to regular terrorist attacks, it never misses an
opportunity to embarrass India in every world forum.
Finally,
India has been repeatedly duped and cheated by Pakistan. What has Pakistan done
in the recent past to earn another chance to be trusted? Has it arrested and
deported all terrorists? They are roaming free in Pakistan spewing venom
against India. Pakistan is colluding with China by bartering away territory in
Gilgit-Baltistan. One is not aware of a single step taken by Pakistan to
assuage Indian feelings and earn its trust.
Pakistan is adept at achieving through negotiations what it loses
in war. The current dialogue on Siachen is an extension of the same
subterfuge. Indian soldiers shed blood
to gain military ascendancy, only to see their hard fought gains being lost
through the misplaced zeal of some self-proclaimed advocates of peace.
We should never forget that deceit, betrayal, duplicity and
perfidy are synonym with Pakistan. Therefore, any Indian who suggests vacation
of Siachen should be treated as an anti-national element and tried for high
treason. Enough of Prithviraj Chauhan syndrome. He repeatedly trusted
Ghori and set him free; only to be captured and blinded later on. Pakistani
text books portray Ghori
as an ideal leader whose exploits should be followed. It is time India
learns. (End)
