Let’s start with Siachen
Tuesday, December 01, 2009
Dr Saleem H Ali
No doubt both the United States and India have much to share in terms of trade ties and a mutual tradition of democratic institutions. However, despite his intellectual pedigree and celebrated reputation as a moderate on matters of war and peace, Singh has shown little leadership in resolving any territorial disputes with Pakistan. President Obama is said to have exertd some pressure on India in this regard but to no avail. The Indian-American lobby has succeeded in marginalising Pakistan and getting it lumped together with Afghanistan as an “******” phenomenon. The acronym appears to have some media appeal more for phonetic sound bites than for any real substance.
Indeed, tying the problems of Pakistan’s tribal areas with Afghanistan has created a self-fulfilling prophecy for the ****** adherents, since this conflation fuels the fire of conspiracy theorists who keep insidiously suggesting that the US has an interest in destabilising Pakistan.
Sadly, on the eastern frontier, the Mumbai attacks have served the goal of the terrorists and military hawks on either side by stalling the peace process. However, Singh could still show some mark of statesmanship and move towards a resolution of the long-standing territorial disputes between the two countries. Kashmir is certainly an intractable problem because it can lead to a slippery slope for India’s myriad other sectarian conflicts. Providing some further measure of autonomy in Kashmir could further strengthen other separatist movements that are simmering in Assam and other parts of the country. Since a comprehensive dispute settlement strategy has eluded both countries for 62 years, perhaps the best way to approach Kashmir is incrementally resolving some of the other territorial disputes. First on the list should be a resolution to the Siachen conflict.
Several pragmatic solutions have already been proposed and with very little loss in political capital both countries can make a huge cognitive jump in resolving this dispute. For the past several years, various constituencies in South Asia and beyond have been attempting to establish a jointly managed conservation area, or ‘peace park’, in the Karakoram Mountains which divide the hostile nations of India and Pakistan. Researchers, mountaineers, and conservationists have joined forces to promote their vision of using environmental cooperation to make the magnificent Siachen Glacier region — militarised since 1986 — safe for geographers, tourists, and wildlife. This is an uninhabited region which, military leaders on both sides agree, has little military importance and yet soldiers are dying of hypothermia at elevations exceeding 18,000 feet above sea level.
Peace parks are trans-boundary conservation areas that seek to mitigate conflict through environmental cooperation between neighbouring countries. The idea can be traced back to the time-tested tradition of post-war memorials aimed at healing wounds between adversaries. However, they can also be used in zones of active conflict as a conflict-resolution strategy. For example, the establishment of a peace park in the Cordillera del Condor region, mediated by the United States and Brazil, was the key to resolving the decades-long war between Ecuador and Peru; the 2004 treaty between the two nations explicitly used environmental conservation as a conflict-resolution strategy by establishing a jointly managed protected area between the two countries.
The Siachen Peace Park, while unlikely to bring peace to India and Pakistan single-handedly, may be a catalysing variable that not only hastens the peace-building process but also makes it more durable. Those of us, who have worked on this proposal for the past several years, will continue to move forward with our efforts; that is, to address all questions that may be raised by sceptics. For example, what would the role of the militaries be in the peace park? As absolute demilitarisation is unrealistic in this case, the project is considering encouraging the militaries to act as rangers and assist in managing the park, which would allay fears about security and allow the two armies to work together for a constructive purpose.
Another issue facing the project is delineating the park’s border, a task that would have to be undertaken in phases to develop trust between the countries. Visitor access, too, poses a problem: do tourists visiting the park need visas for both countries? More realistically, visitors from either India or Pakistan could be allowed to enter the peace park on their entry visas from either country — but not permitted to cross over the park’s boundary into the other country.
To begin the process, both countries must overcome their institutional inertia and sign an agreement in principle. In 2004, a unified grass-roots campaign, combined with a strategic push from influential groups, sought to usher in the 50th anniversary of the first ascent of K-2 (a mountain in the Karakoram Range that is the second-highest peak in the world) by pushing the effort forward. The Italian government, which facilitated this process, established a meteorological measurement site near K-2. The proposal was submitted to both Pakistani and Indian governments, and during his 2006 visit to Siachen, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh stated that he hoped the area would some day become a “peace mountain”. Since then, the project has focused on using science as the conduit for peace-building, as does the Antarctic Treaty. In March 2008, Indian and Pakistani glaciologists met in Kathmandu for the first time and established a detailed plan for research partnerships that might ultimately reduce tensions and pave the way for a peace park.
The framework for moving forward in this is clearly evident and this is a pragmatic proposal, rather than an idealistic one. There have even been joint reports by Indian and Pakistani brigadier-generals as well as the retired Air Marshall of the Indian armed forces, K C Cariappa, on the strategic salience of such a common-sense solution. All that remains is leadership to move forward. With the Copenhagen Summit on climate change approaching, the prospects for using the Siachen Peace Park as a measure of conflict resolution in the name of science are even stronger. Since Indian forces are in control of the glacier itself, the initiative must come from them to move ahead with this effort. Mr Singh, you have it within your power to leave a lasting legacy and resolve this senseless dispute in the name of science and environmental conservation once and for all.
The writer is associate professor of environmental planning at the University of Vermont, US.
www.saleemali.net
, thats the end of that nation by G5...
you only tell that we have nukes and we drop over you
, but nothing happens in coming years even a conflict taken place between INDIA & PAKISTAN. 
