The deadly avalanche that struck the battalion headquarters of the Northern Light Infantry (NLI) in Gyari sector of Siachen Glacier on April 07, 2012 underlined the appalling human and economic costs of the protracted conflict over the possession of the terribly inhospitable roughly 70 kms glacier, which has eaten up over 8,000 Indian and Pakistani soldiers since April 1984. It was yet another bitter reminder to both India and Pakistan. The snow-wall buried buried 135 NLI soldiers of Pakistani Army alive, depriving 135 families of their near and dear ones in a region where no living creatures can survive without protective gear. It certainly is not the fault of the nature but a direct consequence of bloated national egos in New Delhi and Islamabad/Rawalpindi. Both nations continue to stick to their stated positions, thereby prolonging a conflict that, we believe, was close to resolution in 1989 as a result of foreign secretary talks in Islamabad.
The genesis of the Siachen conflict’— lies in the formulation of the cease-fire line (CFL) defined in the 29 July 1949 Karachi Agreement following the first India-Pakistan war.’ At the time of finalizing this agreement both parties did not pay much attention to this very mountainous region, which now forms 70 kilometer long Siachen glacier.[1] At the time of this agreement, the Truce Subcommittee of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan did not explain the CFL all the way to the international border with China. The text of this agreement defines the CFL in this area as running from ‘— thence north to the glaciers.’[2] Hence this unfinished work ‘—led to the current conflict that began in 1984 (when India moved its troops to occupy the heights in the glacier region).’[3] Whereby both the states interpreted the 1949 agreement according to their own understanding: ‘Indian interpretation— is that the line of control (LOC), that divides Kashmir between India and Pakistan, should run northeasterly from NJ 9842 along the Saltoro Range to the Chinese border. Pakistani officials maintain the LOC should run from NJ 9842 straight to the Karakoram Pass (KKP) on the India China border.’[4] In order to enforce its understanding and take control of the territory, India sent forces to the glacier in 1984 ( Operation Meghdoot was carried out to gain control of the glacier), prompting the s Pakistani military to make a similar move in order to deny India exclusive control over the area.
A satellite image of the contested Siachen Glacier, available at http://www.cmc.sandia.gov/cmc-papers/sand20075670.pdf
According to careful estimates by defence analysts, Pakistan spends approximately Rs15 million ($1.65 million) a day to maintain three battalions at the Siachen Glacier, which makes Rs450 million ($47 million) a month and Rs5.4 billion ($1.6 billion) a year. On the other hand, the deployment of seven battalions at the glacier costs India Rs50 million ($1 million) a day, Rs1.5 billion ($.52 billion) a month and Rs30 billion ($4.5 billion) a year.[5] Similarly, according to some other estimates, ‘The total cost could be between $1 million and $3 million a day for the two countries. This entails that both countries have been and are incurring opportunity cost.’[6]
Counting the human cost of the conflict, defence experts estimate that one Pakistani soldier is killed every third day on the Siachen Glacier, amounting to approximately 100 casualties every year. Similarly, one Indian soldier is killed every other day, at an annual average of 180 casualties. According to unofficial figures, over 3,000 Pakistani soldiers have lost their lives on the bloody Siachen Glacier as against over 5,000 Indian casualties. At present, there are approximately 7,000 Indian Army troops and about 4,000 Pakistani troops stationed at the glacier.[7]
Discussing the environmental aspects of the conflict during a round-table discussion forum at the Center for Research and Security (CRSS), engineer and water expert, Arshad Abbasi opined that the accident might have been the result of a glacier surge due to rising temperatures, movement of military men and possible movement of tectonic plates in the region.. There are three airfields on the Indian side of the glacier and fumes from kerosene and other fuels is contributing to the spike in temperature. Chemical blasting of the the rocks to create space for military camps for the soldiers is also hazardous for the glacier. Total mass of the glacier has dwindled considerably during the last two decades. Moreover, in 2001 India laid down kerosene oil pipelines on its side of the glacier, adding another burden to the already endangered climate in the region. Huge economic and human losses as well as damages to the environment because of military activities at the glacier, both Pakistan and India must urgently assign technical and legal experts to discuss complex technicalities and legalities of the Siachen conflict which has become a global environmental concern too. Both countries would do a great service to humanity and the environment if they declared the disputed region a Peace Park and let ecologists and scientists deal with the consequences of the military presence and with the impact of their activities in the region. Both countries must abide by the Principle 19 of the June 1992 Rio de Janiero Declaration and address threats to the survival of lower riparian such as Maldives and Bangladesh. The said principle commits member states to provide prior and timely notification and relevant information to potentially affected States on activities that may have a significant adverse trans-boundary environmental effect and shall consult with those States at an early stage and in good faith.[8] Moreover, in order to guarantee the reliable monitoring at the glacier and prevent any further militarization, both India and Pakistan can resort to an already existing mechanism i.e. United Nations Military Observers Group for India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP). UNMOGIP is already successfully monitoring the military activities of both the states across the LOC.
Despite potential opposition from hardliners within the military establishments and adverse reactions by conservative and ultra-nationalist political grous, the civil society and the media need to take lead on this issue.. Media can, and should, vociferously highlight the ecological, economic and humanitarian dimensions of the conflict for creating awareness among the masses while the civil society must follow it up through social media and organizational networking on this particular issue. Former military and civilian bureaucracy officials in both states, who have been part of the past negotiations and military planning, can also play a crucial role in educating the public about the cost and benefit of this protracted conflict. Thus, this taxing and futile conflict can be brought to an end and huge losses of human lives, and precious economic and environmental resources can be saved and diverted towards much needed service delivery in both the states.
Although pressed hard and stretched by religious and nationalist militant challenges from the north to the southwest, Pakistani government and the military can take bold steps for resolving this unnecessary bloody conflict by declaring its readiness for turning the Siachen Glacier region into a neutral Peace Park. It needs to shun the arguments that are embedded in legal jargon and seek to question the rationale of demilitarization by raising the issue legitimacy. While this argument could, theoretically, could carry weight for important economic lifelines and densely inhabited regions, India and Pakistan should not apply this to the forbidding and uninhabitable Siachen. European nations have removed borders but here two South Asian countries are locked in a very expensive and atrocious conflict over a useless piece of land ´resulting in deaths and invalidities through frost-bite. Should the current and future generations of Pakistan continue remaining hostage to the history and principled positions, while its adversaries continue to march on the road to prosperity? Wise nations led by leaders committed to a better future for their peoples often take tough decisions. Agreeing to demilitarizing Siachen may be a tough decision from a nationalistic point of view but it certainly will not be bad for the dominant majority of over 1.5 billion inhabitants of South Asia. It will save the environment from further erosion.
(Imdadulla and Imtiaz Gul,CRSS ) Endnotes
[1] Asad Hakeem, Gurmeet Kanwal, Michael Vannoni (et.al), ‘Demilitirzation of the Siachen Conflict Zone: Concepts for Implementation and Monitoring’, SANDIA Report, 2007, p. 14, available at http://www.cmc.sandia.gov/cmc-papers/sand20075670.pdf
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Amir Mir, ‘Over 8,000 Indo-Pak soldiers killed in Siachen’, The News, Monday, April 09, 2012.
[6] Aruni Mukherjee, ‘Siachen: Prospects for a Mutually Agreeable Settlement’, available at http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/SRR/Volume14/aruni.html.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Rio Declaration on Environment and Development made at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, 3-14 June, 1992.