|
|
|
|
|
Demilitarising Siachen
This above all |
|
|
|
fifty fifty
On record
PROFILE: Sudarshan Pattnaik
|
Demilitarising Siachen
THE defence secretaries of India and Pakistan are going to meet in Islamabad on June 11-12, trying yet again to chart out a solution to the issue of Siachen glacier, festering since 1984, when it turned into the world’s “highest battlefield” as troops of the two countries clashed at heights above 16,000 ft. Thus far, both India and Pakistan have stuck to their respective positions. However, this time Pakistan has injected a sense of urgency into the dialogue, having suffered more than 140 soldiers in an avalanche on the glacier. The Pakistani establishment has upped the ante on the demilitarisation of the entire 72 sq km glacier, the largest outside the Arctic and Antarctic circles. India, however, wants Pakistan to delineate the Actual Ground Position Line (AGPL), and authenticate it both on the map and the ground, as has been done for the 742-km long Line of Control (LoC) that divides Jammu and Kashmir between India and Pakistan. Pakistan is refusing to do that, making India doubt its intentions. With the Kargil War in the backdrop, India’s distrust has only deepened. In 1999, Pakistani soldiers occupied the trans-Himalayan heights overlooking Drass and Kargil in the Ladakh region of Jammu and Kashmir, violating an unspoken agreement that the icy heights would be vacated by both sides during winters to avoid the cost of maintaining troops in the freezing temperature. The intruders bombarded the Srinagar-Leh highway to cut supplies to the border area, hoping to be able to force India to vacate Siachen. As Pakistan is unwilling to authenticate the 110-km AGPL, India suspects Pakistan would occupy the strategically important heights on the glacier that are currently held by the Indian army. The Army feels it would then be next to impossible to reclaim the glacier. At the same time, India has the desire to resolve the issue, as was evident from the much-publicised statement of the Prime Minister on making the glacier “a mountain of peace”. That was an echo of the Indian efforts made during late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and P.V. Narsimha Rao’s time, when resolution of the issue was almost clinched, but for Pakistan’s reluctance to authenticate the AGPL. This authentication is important because without it Pakistan can re-occupy the glacier, and claim control. That would be unacceptable to India. Although Defence Minister A.K. Antony has warned against expecting any “dramatic outcome” of the 13th round of defence secretary-level talks, yet there are expectations of some movement forward. The war theatre that the glacier was for almost 19 years — 1984 to 2003 — took a huge toll on troops, killed not only by bullets and artillery shells but also the hostile weather. There has been no exchange of fire on the glacier since the November 2003 ceasefire, yet the casualties continue with the temperature dipping to minus 40 degree Celsius.
28 years of freeze The conflict started in 1984 with India’s successful operation “Meghdoot”, during which it wrested control of the glacier from Pakistan and forced its troops to retreat to the west of the Saltoro Ridge. India established control over the entire Siachen glacier, all of its tributary glaciers, as well as the three main strategic passes of the Saltoro Ridge immediately west of the glacier — Sia La, Bilafond and Gyong La. Pakistan controls the glacial valleys west of the Saltoro Ridge. With Indian and Pakistani armies deployed heavily on the two sides, the chances of converting the AGPL into an LoC are near zero, especially when India holds sway over two-thirds of the area in the region. Thus, the hype over the meeting in Islamabad notwithstanding, India is wary of compromising its stand. It is also keeping in mind the recurring ceasefire violations and the heavy deployment of Pakistani war machinery along the LoC. The tone for the dialogue was set at the meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) on June 7, where it was clearly stated that India would not give up its tactical advantage in the glacier area at the cost of national security. In India-Pakistan relations, strategic assets count more than diplomatic breakthroughs. As with the previous rounds of defence secretary-level talks on Siachen, this time, too, India seems to be in no mood to relinquish its strategic command in the region.
Paying in blood Since the launch of Operation Meghdoot on April 23, 1984, when the Indian Army led by the Kumaon Regiment moved into the region to occupy strategic heights with tactical support from the Indian Air Force, the country has incurred an expenditure of $50 billion to maintain 150 posts, war equipment, and more than a brigade strength of troops throughout the year. Till date, an estimated 4,000 officers and jawans have lost their lives. Gen V.K. Singh (retd), the last Army chief, had rightly commented that when Pakistan is not prominently placed in the region, then how does it make any difference in Islamabad whether the glacier is demilitarised or not. Another question that has India concerned is that why is Pakistan — so keen to demilitarise the region after losing more than 140 soldiers — dragging its feet on the demand for authentication of the 110-km AGPL, if it has no ulterior motives. There are three phases involved in the whole process: delineation and demarcation on the map, then on the ground, and thereafter authentication of the AGPL. While consistently refusing to authenticate the AGPL, Pakistan wants India to make the first move because “India is the bigger country and it must show magnanimity”, a theory propounded by former defence minister of Pakistan Ahmed Mukhtiar. The philosophy would have been fine in normal circumstances, but not in the current atmosphere of distrust. The dominant view in the Indian Army is that demilitarisation of the glacier offers no guarantee that Pakistan will not play games again. If Pakistan does not accept the AGPL, then there is no point drawing lines on the map. A ceasefire agreement would also have no meaning.
China factor The diplomacy over Siachen spreads beyond the glacier. Pakistan has been trying to get Chinese intervention in the region to combine the glacier with the Korokorum ranges bordering Siachen. If that happens, the security of Ladakh would become a concern for India, along with the question of where would the boundary line be drawn, LoC or the International Border at Sonamarg or Zojila. In May 2011, during the 12th round of defence secretary-level talks, Pakistan had submitted India a ‘non paper’, wherein it had proposed that since Pakistan had ceded the Shakshgan valley, originally part of J&K, to China in 1963, China should be included in future talks pertaining to Siachen. The suggestion was rejected by India as absurd. The Northern Army Commander, Lt Gen K.T. Parnaik, says: “The China-Pakistan nexus is a cause of worry and caution. Indian security analysts should not fall into the diplomatic trap of Pakistan. The Chinese already have a presence in Gilgit, Baltistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.” Moreover, Pakistan has never stood by ceasefire agreements on the LoC. It has neither stopped ceasefire violations, nor infiltration. The Pakistani army and its Inter-Services Intelligence continue to harbour militants with anti-India designs. Param Vir Chakra Capt Bana Singh, who captured Pakistan’s Quaid Post on the glacier, which was later named Bana Post, also rubbishes any opinion in favour of withdrawing from the glacier. Speaking to The Tribune, he said: “Once we withdraw and Pakistan takes over the heights, it will be next to impossible to capture those again. How can we sacrifice the glacier, for which thousands of our soldiers have made the supreme sacrifice? Our strength on ground should not be sacrificed at the diplomatic table, whether in New Delhi or Islamabad.” From India’s standpoint, thus, the issue needs to be resolved, but without sacrificing either short or long-term strategic interests.
GLACIAL
Movement 1949: Karachi Agreement, followed by the Simla Agreement (1972), in which both sides decide that the glacial heights are unfit for human habitation, and maintaining forces would be unfeasible. 1978: Col N. Kumar of India mounts an Army expedition to the Teram Kangri peaks as part of an exercise to defuse Pakistan plans of occupying the hills. Pakistan had started issuing passes for the area to trekkers. April 13, 1984: Operation Meghdoot launched by India to make way for military occupation of the heights in Siachen. The Kumaon Regiment moves in with air force support. Captures the heights a week before Pakistanis reach the area. November 23, 2003: Ceasefire agreement. Hot line established between the Directors General of military operations, Lt Gen B.S. Thakar (in India) and Maj Gen Mohammad Yosuf (in Pakistan). April 7, 2012: Avalanche hits Pakistani posts at Gayari Battalion headquarters, killing 150 men. The Pakistan army chief, General Kayani, visits the region and hints at a desire to demilitarise the region with Indian support. June 11, 2012: India and Pakistan to hold the 13th round of defence secretary-level talks over the Siachen issue. (Compiled by Malvika Sharma)
|
|
This above all
I also think such books should be marked ‘For adults only’ on their front cover. ARSH MALSIYANI When I was working in the Publication Division as Editor of Yojana, Balmukand Arsh Malsiyani (1908-1979) was editing Aaj Kal. For no rhyme or reason he stole back into my mind and I recalled a few lines of his verse titled “Haqeeqat” (Reality) which I translated into English. Here they are: Firdaus key chashmon kee ravaanee pey na ja/ Ai sheikh too jannat kee kahaanee pey na ja/ Is vahm ko chhor apney burhapey hee ko dekh/ Hooran-e-bahishtee kee javaanee pey na ja (Do not get taken in by tales of streams that flow in paradise/ Old sheikh, do not be fooled by stories of heavenly delights;/ Forget this make-believe, be your age, see your grey hair forsooth/ Don’t dream of houris in the bloom of their youth.) WASTE TO GOLD “It was an interesting experiment to fulfil the alchemist’s dream,” prosecuting counsel Robin Steer told defendant Paul Moran in Enniskillen Magistrates Court, “but it was never going to succeed. Rather bizarrely, you were attempting to make gold from your own faeces, by putting them onto an electric heater to transmute. Unfortunately, you failed to recognise that faeces naturally turn into fuel as they dry out, not into metal, and your actions created a fire that caused £3,000 worth of damage to the block of flats in Derrin Park where you reside.” “Earlier, Moran’s barrister, Des Fahy, had told the court: “Mr Moran is a man of considerable intellectual ability, but there has been a clear problem over the past year relating to drug abuse, which heightened his fascination with alchemy and with turning base matter into gold. I ask the court to note that he is now on anti-psychotic medication, and that the presentence report says that he does not pose a significant risk of serious harm to society.” (Courtesy: “Private Eye”, London) PROPERTY I wonder if you know the famous dialogue from the move “Deewar”. During a confrontation between the good and bad brother, Amitabh Bachchan says, “Mere pas car hai, bangla hai, bank balance hai, tere pas kya hai?” And Shashi Kapoor replies: “Mere pass maa hai”. Santa and Banta’s take on this is as follows: Santa: Mere kol ghar hai, kaar hai, bank balance hai, tere kol ki hai? (I have a home, a car, bank balance. What have you?) Banta: Mere kol vi ghar hai, kaar hai, bank balance hai (I have also a home, a car and a bank balance). Santa: O’teri ki, phir saadi maa kide kol hai? (Then who has our mother?) *** Santa was in a restaurant having coffee with his wife. He finished the beverage fast, while his wife was taking her time over it. Irritated, he said, “Chheti kar, tu te paise luttaan vich hi laggi raendi hai. Dekh menu which likhya hai, “Hot coffee Rs 5, cold coffee Rs 15”. (Hurry up, you are wasting my money, see the menu: Hot coffee Rs 5, and cold coffee Rs
15). (Contributed by Amrinder Bajaj, Delhi)
|
fifty fifty
These are all difficult issues, as most Asian and even African families who now live in the West are genuinely worried about their own traditions and culture being usurped by ‘western’ values. And then, of course, their own children find it difficult to understand the tradition their parents would like to uphold. The generational chasm is often much more severe within Asian families who are settled in the UK than in the home country, even India, itself; which is not to say that the same issues don’t exist in India as well — they do. But in the UK, in a liberal society where children are free to make up their own minds about their life partners from an early age, it is shocking to still find parents (albeit migrants, from the countries mentioned above) who are willing to either trick or force their daughters into marriage, or kill them if they don’t comply. Many of us would like to believe that this law banning forced marriages, which would put errant and often cruel parents in jail, is perfectly reasonable and should be acceptable. But there are, equally, a large number who feel that any step towards monitoring marriage might be mistaken as interference within the lifestyle of a community. And thus politicians should steer clear of this as a potential minefield. Even during the years of the Labour government — though it was often thought that there should be a law banning such marriages (and that stringent measures should taken against those family members who forced young girls into matrimony) — ultimately a forced marriage prevention order was passed instead. In this, the victim could only seek police protection if coerced into marriage. Perhaps earlier governments shied away from taking the final step — as it could lead to a rift in the multicultural fabric of the UK. Community relations are still fragile after years of multicultural beliefs and any Prime Minister would be careful about taking a step that could easily be misunderstood. The proposed law also has its worrying aspects. It is feared that under a Bill where parents could be jailed, victims would hesitate to come forward. Nonetheless, it is a law that will protect thousands of girls from a lifetime of abuse, and so it is definitely something to avidly support. The astonishing thing, of course, is that most of the countries from which the target communities originate do not have a similar law on their home soil. Will that, then, make this law difficult to implement? After all, it has been proven often the crime does not take place in the UK. In fact, the usual modus operandi is that the parents take the girl — who is still quite young, and sometimes just a schoolgirl — back to the home country, under a viable pretext. The unsuspecting victim then finds herself irrefutably trapped and the parents get her hastily married to a boy of their choice. After that there would be immense family pressure (and accompanying threats or actual physical violence) that she remain with him, and she usually does. Activists claim that there could be up to 8,000 such cases each year, and the victims are getting younger and younger. Recently, a five-year-old child was forced into marriage. In other cases, girls have been drugged and then pushed into marriage. However, even if the girl were to garner the courage to complain to the police or any other authority — as the new law would encourage her to do — would she be able to go through with it? Campaigners are worried that apart from the public dishonour of her parents, there might even be a severe community backlash. But the hope is that if a stringent law is passed, where culprits are likely to be punished, that might itself become a deterrent. It would then become increasingly impossible for misguided parents to force the entire community into silence. Yet, it is obvious that a law like this is required. At present, the ‘forced marriage prevention orders’ prevalent require the young girl to go to the police or court for protection. But, it is has been found that often threats from the disgruntled family members are so grim that preventing them from harming her is essential. After all, honour killings within this community are also not unknown. The government is also putting aside a special fund which will educate schools and other agencies about how to spot the circumstances behind these forced marriages, and to reach out to the vulnerable children as well as the communities. There will also be an advertisement campaign which will inform the target group about their ‘right to choose’. This is a difficult law for the government to pass, but right now it is being championed by two women, Theresa May, the tough-talking Home Secretary, and Baroness Warsi, Chair of the ruling Conservative party and a Muslim woman of Pakistani origin who often refers to forced marriages as slavery. Though the latter is right now under investigation for supposedly having fiddled with her expenses claims in Parliament, one hopes that will not derail the new law.
|
|
On record What is the concept behind UNITAID? In today’s world of competing interests and limited finances, we need innovative mechanisms to fight global health challenges and ensure access to medicines for the poorest. It was with this idea that in 2006, Brazil, Chile, France, UK and Norway created an international UN drug purchase facility financed with resources that would be sustainable. ‘Air ticket tax’ was chosen as the most sustainable means. Since 2006, the agency has raised $1.3 billion from the model, 65 per cent of the entire money raised. How does UNITAID ensure low-cost drug delivery? We invest in WHO’s Prequalification Programme and help process rapidly pharmaceutical company applications for the prequalification of more effective new medicines against HIV/AIDS, malaria and TB. This enables quick drug supply where needed, by helping drug makers through tedious regulatory regimes. HIV/AIDS, malaria and TB kill 4.4 million people annually, mainly because people can’t afford the testing and treatment. Our funding enables the purchase of existing medicines and encourages the industry to invest in research and development relevant to diseases that disproportionately affect people in developing countries. Being a global mechanism, we can better negotiate with drug suppliers in ways that reduce costs. What’s do you expect from India? We hope to raise $10-20 million annually from India, which will see enormous air traffic growth in the future. I have met the Secretary, Civil Aviation, and he is positive. We will return to India with a formal proposal. Currently, India is the fourth largest beneficiary of our financing. About 35,000 children here are on treatment with the paediatric HIV drugs we finance. UNITAID is procuring bulk drugs from India. Besides, we are exploring the possibilities of financial support with China and Russia within BRICS. India should now see itself as a donor. India’s aviation sector is not particularly robust at the moment. Don’t you see a problem? There will never be a good time. Besides, market surveys have shown there is no decline in air traffic or loss of revenue in countries that have imposed a levy. Air France was resistant initially, but the Director General, Civil Aviation, France, now says competition hasn’t been affected at all and the levy has actually proved a successful public health financing model. In another survey we found 90 per cent passengers didn’t even know they were paying. When they found out, they felt happy. See it like this — one extra dollar makes little difference to an airline passenger, but to a child with malaria, it can mean the difference between life and death. What is the levy you are negotiating with India? It is early days, but we are hoping for Rs 10-20 per air ticket. Every partner country works out its own contribution model. Chile charges $1 a ticket, Brazil $2. France imposes one euro on domestic and four euros on international flights. We get $8,00,000 a year from Air China HAN. With air ticket levies, we raise $200 million a year, which helps us deliver public health goods to people across the world. Currently, 10 nations levy the tax. Our membership has grown from five in 2006 to 29 today. India is contributing to the world by manufacturing cheap antiretroviral drugs and our domestic public spending on health is already low. Is a levy practical then? UNITAID’s role is much more critical today than ever because traditional sources of funding are drying up. The world needs to collaborate to save lives and meet the Millennium Development Goals on HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria. Globally, 5.5 lakh children are born with HIV every year, but only 4 lakh are on treatment with drugs we supply. In five years, we created a market for child-friendly HIV medicines where none existed. We brought the prices down by 80 per cent. We tested over 8 million pregnant women for HIV and funded labs to detect multi-drug-resistant TB in eight high-burden countries, including India. We have a solution and hope India will partner with us.
|
|
PROFILE: Sudarshan Pattnaik Sudarshan was only two when his father died, leaving behind his mother and four children in dire poverty. Sudarshan had to work as domestic help, but kept up his hobby of making sand sculptures. It was in the midst of desperation that the talent was discovered. A chance meeting with a journalist on the beach enabled him to get media attention, but no more. He applied for a scholarship for a championship in the US, but could not raise the entry fee of Rs 40,000, even though he begged in the streets. He was also denied visa. Dejected, he tried to commit suicide while on a train journey to Puri, but co-passengers stopped him. By and by, his creations started drawing attention. Awards started coming in, but the poverty remained for years. Times, fortunately, have now changed for Sudarshan. His 2.5m-high sculpture of a mermaid at Copenhagen, pleading for effort to save the oceans, was a masterpiece. Participants at the championship were free to choose their subject. Known for sculptures with a message, Sudharshan also created a piece to highlight climate change. Explaining his concept behind ‘Leonardo Smile’ that won him the gold medal in the People’s Choice Award in Moscow, Patnaik said he had tried to illustrate the smile of Leonardo Da Vinci that led to the famous Mona Lisa smile. Sudarshan nurtures a dream: To create a museum for sand sculptures on the lines of Madame Tussauds Wax Museum in London. He has suggested to Union Minister for Culture Selja that the museum be built at Delhi’s Pragti Maidan. He once also captured the ‘story’ of Osama bin Laden in a sculpture that depicted an open book with Osama on the left-hand page, and “The End” written on the right. Pictures of the sculptures created on the Puri beach reach around the world through international newspapers, magazines, and social media. Sudarshan, who now runs a sand art school in Puri, says the art deserves due recognition in India. “We need to introduce it in schools and colleges. It’s a great tool to shape young minds. The short life of sand art makes it all the more amazing.”
|
||
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Letters | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | E-mail | |
AMONG the many books I receive every week from publishers and authors, one I got last week was “Close, Too Close: The Tranquebar Book of Queer Erotica” (Tranquebar). It is a collection of erotica by different writers. I am not a prude and enjoy reading well-written erotic tales. This book does not deserve to be listed among them, because it is rotten erotica. Among the items that I found nauseating was a series of drawings of a fat, middle-aged woman stimulating herself, and then joining her husband (or maybe gentleman friend) in bed with their faces turned in opposite directions. I found those to be in bad taste. I was surprised to see it was endorsed by Tabish Khair, whose writings I admire.
ONE
debate that has been taking place in the UK for a long time is about ‘forced marriages’ among those from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, East Africa and, quite shamefully, India. The questions often asked are: Does the government have a right to intervene in something so personal? Is this a strictly ‘cultural’ issue or is it connected more deeply with human rights? And can a clear distinction be drawn between arranged marriages and forced marriages?
FOR the HIV/AIDS sector in India, Denis Broun is a familiar name. A tropical medicine specialist from France, Broun was UNAIDS Country Coordinator for India until four years ago and later Regional Director for Europe and Central Asia with UNAIDS. He was earlier chief of health for UNICEF in New York. However, none of Broun’s past assignments come close to his current role as Executive Director of UNITAID, the first ever international facility set up in 2006 to purchase drugs against HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis, using innovative financing mechanisms. The agency, which WHO hosts, is mainly funded by a “solidarity levy” on air tickets that countries impose to support global health. Recently in India to seek similar support from the government, Broun spoke about why India should join UNITAID.
AMIDST the milling tourists on the picturesque beach in Puri, a little boy created small sculptures out of sand. Few noticed his ‘work’. In course of time, the boy, Sudarshan Pattnaik, went on to become an internationally renowned sand sculptor. Last week, he won the first prize in the Copenhagen International Sand Sculptor Championship, 2012. Congratulatory messages poured in, including one from President Pratibha Patil and another from Odisha Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik.