Pakistan pitches for mutual demilitarisation of Siachen after Lance Naik Koppad's death

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

No clear definition on siachen exists in Shimla agreement, Whereas clear definition on LOC of kargil existed existed in shimla agreement. Your army lost kargil in 71 and ratified it on the treaty! so it's your government's problem not ours.

The 1972 Simla Agreement did not clearly mention who controlled the glacier, merely stating that from the NJ9842 location the boundary would proceed "hence north to the glaciers."

btw North means north straiaght up not "east" as understood by pakistani estb

Your comments on the excerpts of the Simla Agreement I quoted have nothing to do with the actual content of the excerpts - try actually reading a post before replying to it. In order to assist you in comprehending the point being made, please focus on the underlined text in the excerpts in my earlier post and then get back to me with your response.

And again, the text of the agreement is 'thence north to the glaciers' - so which glaciers? To the Southern tip of the glaciers, the northern tip or the center?

And again, the current Indian deployments on the Saltoro Ridge do not meet the 'true north definition either - they align with a 'North Western' demarcation so even under India's farcical interpretation India would have to hand over control of the ridge to Pakistan and vacate her current positions.

Pakistan will be better served by dismantling half their military and investing in lawyers and advertising agencies instead.

Of course, that's why you came up with this inane response to your fellow countryman instead of offering a factual and rational rebuttal to my earlier post that demolished your argument.

 

[MilSpec]

Your comments on the excerpts of the Simla Agreement I quoted have nothing to do with the actual content of the excerpts - try actually reading a post before replying to it. In order to assist you in comprehending the point being made, please focus on the underlined text in the excerpts in my earlier post and then get back to me with your response.

And again, the text of the agreement is 'thence north to the glaciers' - so which glaciers? To the Southern tip of the glaciers, the northern tip or the center?

And again, the current Indian deployments on the Saltoro Ridge do not meet the 'true north definition either - they align with a 'North Western' demarcation so even under India's farcical interpretation India would have to hand over control of the ridge to Pakistan and vacate her current positions.

Of course, that's exact words, then let me point out

Paragraph B 2 (d) of 1949 Karachi Agreement states:

(d) From Dalunang eastwards the cease-fire line will follow the general line point 15495, Ishman, Manus, Gangam, Gunderman, Point 13620, Funkar (Point 17628), Marmak, Natsara, Shangruti (Point 1,531), Chorbat La (Point 16700), Chalunka (on the Shyok River), Khor, thence north to the glaciers. This portion of the cease- fire line shall be demarcated in detail on the basis of the factual position as of 27 July 1949, by the local commanders assisted by United Nations military observers.

Later, following the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, and the Simla Agreement in July 1972, the ceasefire line was converted into the "Line of Control" extending from the "Chhamb sector on the international border [to] the Turtok-Partapur sector in the north." The detailed description of its northern end stated that from Chimbatia in the Turtok sector "the line of control runs north-eastwards to Thang (inclusive to India), thence eastwards joining the glaciers." This vague formulation further sowed the seed for the bitter dispute to follow. The general description of CFL given in Section 1 of Karachi Agreement is further explained at Page 38 where it states:

"thence northwards along the boundary line going through Point 18402 up to NJ-9842"

The U.N. document number S/1430/Add.2.is the second addendum to the 1949 Karachi Agreement, and shows the CFL marked on the Map of the State of Jammu and Kashmir as per the explanation of CFL in paragraph 'B' 2 (d) of the Karachi Agreement.


Perception, Politics and Security in South Asia: The Compound Crisis of 1990 - P R Chari, Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema, Senior Scholar in the Foreign Policy Studies Programme Stephen P Cohen, PhD, Stephen P Cohen - Google Books

http://repository.un.org/bitstream/handle/11176/87063/S_1430_Add.2-EN.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y

 

[surya kiran]

Your comments on the excerpts of the Simla Agreement I quoted have nothing to do with the actual content of the excerpts - try actually reading a post before replying to it. In order to assist you in comprehending the point being made, please focus on the underlined text in the excerpts in my earlier post and then get back to me with your response.

And again, the text of the agreement is 'thence north to the glaciers' - so which glaciers? To the Southern tip of the glaciers, the northern tip or the center?

And again, the current Indian deployments on the Saltoro Ridge do not meet the 'true north definition either - they align with a 'North Western' demarcation so even under India's farcical interpretation India would have to hand over control of the ridge to Pakistan and vacate her current positions.


Of course, that's why you came up with this inane response to your fellow countryman instead of offering a factual and rational rebuttal to my earlier post that demolished your argument.

The reason, I stopped was because this thing keeps going on and on and on. Read the thread started by Xeric His arguements were more coherent than yours and there is no point repeating things every 6 months.