Recently US under Trump has accused Pak of sheltering terrorists and has withdrawn of US AID – Coalition support find
China – brics – Xiamen summit
Fear of Surgical Strikes
Is surgical strikes helping ?
Sir, preliminary results are positive
But, this is a policy we need to wait to see results
Nawaj Sharif
Issues
India
Was relatively more acceptable to India
Greater military role
May lead to a cycle of aggrandising nationalism and could increase incidences of border firing
Nawaj Sharif had ventured towards China though. This shift could be checked
Other issues
Judicial interference
Suspending a PM based on accusations
Judiciary having a pro- army leaning
Indian accused ? – Amitabh Bachchan etc
Kulbhushan Jadhav
Was he a RAW agent ?
Sir, evidences show he wasn’t
Even Iran and Germany have supported India on that point
That’s the complete answer. Don’t exceed it. But, if they ask what evidence
Say that Sir, I don’t have complete information but Indian passport was found with him. It is highly unlikely that a spy would use Passport of his/her original country. Reports even show that Civilian govt has criticised this measure by the millitary court
What is wrong in catching a spy ?
Sir, as Inidian govt has repeatedly said, he is not a spy, but a retired officer who has been abducted from Iran
India has received the backing of Iran and Germany on the cause
Secondly, if Pakistan has some doubt, then these need to be resolved in the Cilvilian court, and not in a closed Millitart court
Why not Consular access
ICJ also agrees Pak should put on hold
What should India do ?
Prisoner exchange
Argue in the Pak HC and get the case passed to Civillian Court and call for clemency
Can be done and writ jurisdiction then lies with the HC
Sir, first of all, India should take up the matter diplomatically
In case it fails, support of othe rcountries such as Iran and Germany who have supported India on the issue should be roped
If not, India should use Pressure points against Pak such as taking up the matter in UN, roping US support to restrict the Coalition Support Force Funding and possibly even through leverages such as Indus Water Treaty
Should India do a tit for tat ?
Unlike Pak, India is a vibrant democracy with full support to laws of the land. India may present its case agaist Pak spies under relavant acts. However, the final decision should be left to the courts
ICJ – No death penalty- Orders Binding – Issue – Vienna convention – requires Consular access. See ICJ
Last ICJ case
Pak took India – Over shooting of its millitary plane – ICJ said not under its jurisdiction
India has taken ICJ only once – Over the issue of International Civil Aviation Council denying India the right to block planes from Pak – And India lost the case
Since, then India modified the jurisdiction of ICJ – not to cover commonwealth and cases related to disputes or actions taken in self defence
How is it different than the last case ?
Last case – Military aircraft – Sovereign issue
But, here is a person who India argues is not a Miitary person
All that India wants is to use Civilan Judicial means to solve it so that no doubt remains
Contradiction in India’s stand – Commonwealth ?
Sir, as Indian govt has maintained, more than our precedence, it was the International Norm, namely Vienna Convention at stake, which overrode our objection
Economic
MFN
India has been granting MFN to Pak since 1996
Pak – no
Some improvements
Moved from a small positive imports list from India to a list of negative imports of about 1000 poducts
SAFTA
Cross border trade through J&K – PoK required
Employment for youths – Devil rests in an empty mind
People to People contact
General economic improvements for India
Other low hanging fruits
Formalise Ceasefire Agreement, 2003
Sign Indian – Pak border rules
The two will help minimise crossfire that can escalate into a war
APTTA
Af Pak Transit Trade Agreement
If India signs it, would be able to access Afghan easily
Better Relations?
General Bajwa – Anti terror
Anti terror operations throughout the country
Radd ul Fassad
Earlier Operation Zarb e Azb
Hafees Sayeed arrest and JuD banned
Theat of Trump
Counter
We have seen such cycle before
Spoiler Attacks
Gilgit Baltisatan
Pakistan considering making it the 5th Province of the country
Issue
Part of J&K state that was illegally handed over by a British Army officer to Pak
UN resolution of 1948 – Pakistan troops to evacuate and interim governace by local authorities and then a Plebiscite
Shimla Agreement of 1971 – Not to alter the situation
Shia dominated region which was even in the past against 2 nation theory of Jinnah
India can use only 20% of the water carried by western rivers of Indus
Eastern rivers to Indus i.e Ravi, Beas, Satluj completely for India
But Substantial quantity of water from these rivers continues to flow into Pakistan, to which Pakistan is not entitled.
This is because India has not completed the various planned projects on the Eastern Rivers such as the Indira Gandhi Canal, Sutlej–Yamuna Link Canal and the Thein Dam
Will have the added benefit of pressurising Pak from within its country to stop wars
Western Indus, Chenab, jhelum Pak
India though can coonstruct run of river das on these rivers
Water is a tool to which Pak has no answer unlike nuclear 😀
Con
Geneva convention
Decades to build new dams
International – PCA, west
China – Brahmaputra, Satluj, Indus
Vicious cycle of terrorism
Days before 26/11 Hafiz Sayeed talked about India waging a water war by constructing the Baglihar dam
Pak – on record saying – Kashmir issue more so because of the rivers presence
Blockade of rivers could cause flooding in J&K
Escaltion into a nuclear war
Has a potential of 20k MW. India currently -10k MW
The Tulbul project that was was shelved off after Pak objections in 1987 be restarted
Controversy
Miyar
On Chenab
India decided tp modify the design of the dam after discussion in IWT in 2017
Kishanganga
run off river project
On river Kishanganga
Tributary of Jhelum
Pakistan objects to tunneling of the river which would divert water to Wular Lake
Hague based court f arbitration said India can divert only a minimum quantity of water, rate to be decided later
Project to be completed in 2016
Baglihar project
On Chenab
500 MW
Commissioned in 2008
Run off river
Pak alleges gives India a potential to divert, block waters against the treaty
Under constructuin Ratle Dam on Chenab
Wullar Barrage/ Tulbul Navigation project
On Jhelum near Wular Lake
For navigation purpose
After controversy, India stopped construction
Also Pakal Dul and Lower Kalnai
Both on Chenab
Nimoo Bazgo
On Indus
Surgical Strike
Ministry of Home Affairs – Decline in terror, civilan and soldier casuality after Surgical Strike
Need to ratify Ceasefire Agreements of 2003
Talks
Currently Comprehensive Bilateral Dialogue (CBD)( or BCD)
Started after Sushma Swaraj visit to US
Ufa declaration
Declaration in Ufa, Russia between Modi and Sharif
Outlined area of talks
Controversially left out Kashmir
Protests in Pak and therefore proposed talks scraped
Earlier Comprehensive Dialogue
Started during 97 during Gujral’s time ( Gujral doctrine )
Ended after 26/11 Mumbai attacks
Was tried to restore by calling it the resumed doctrine
Need for talks
Terrorism
Afghan
Solvable issues of Sir Creek, MFN, Ceasefire Agreement 2003
Need to continue BACKCHANNEL talks
Steps like SAARC Court
To show that terrorism is futile
SAFTA, TAPI
Given that Manmohan- Musharraf plan was so close to completion
Even international powers doing
US- continuation of coalition support funds, more F16
China- CPEC
Russia- Defence ties
Tackling Kashmir alone can’t be a soution. The very existence of Pak is strongly focussed on Anti- India principles. We may solve Kashmir, but then it can escalate new issues – Sir Creek, Indian presence in Afghanistan and so on
Issue of Spoiler Attacks and lack of synergy between govt and millitary
Border
CIBMS – also called Border Protection Grid
Is military solution really a solution
Cold start doctrine
Offensive Defence
Quick mobiliusation of soldiers
Quick attack to achieve the desired goal ( of the type of Surgical Strike )
So that Pak does not get an execiuse or using Nuclear Weapons, nor does it get enough time to call for International support
Hence, balances Indian goal without escalatingit into a war
How ?
3 STRIKE CORPS batallian formed
7 holding corbs batallion
Moving the Corps closer to the border
Integrated Balltle Groups formed
Earlier we had the Sunderji Doctrine
But as the post 2001 Parliament Aatcks showed, it took weeks to mobiise the Indian troops on th eborder, by hich tume, Opak had become better prepared, and international pressure had become very high
Isssue
Pal Tactical Nuclear Weapons
Counter – New Nuclear Doctrine Reinterpretation
]Indian immediate counter attack on NSCM(k) faction after the attack on army convoy, was a befitting reply
Also, allowed to table the peace deal faster
Can India against Pak?
Sure, could use brahmos precision attacks against the laskhar camps, after discussions from the US
Ramping up of anti missile shield to check against nuclear missile attacks
Similarly, hot pursuit: occasional cross border entry by soldiers in case of attacks, needs to be taken up
Proper border protection at the same time- Use of drones, supporting village defence camps (the one that nabbed Kasb-2) , greater RAW cadets selection, more force
Individual morality behind the requirements of state
Focus on Intelligecne operations
If you do another Mumbai, you lose Baluchistan
Softening in the tone now with CBD ongoing
Baluchistan
Princely state called Kalat under British paramountcy
After British withdrawal, it wanted independence. But Pakistan used force to annex it
Revolution in 70s for independence
BLA – Baluchistan Liberation Army
Crushed by use of NAPALM in which thousands of civillian died
Sind
Sind Liberation Army
Discontent against Punjabis (Lahore, Islamabad) who are accused of discrimination
Outsiders includiing Mohajirs (Indians who migrated after partition) grab their land, govt jobs, etc
Pros of Defensive offence
Checks Pak voice on Kashmir
Human rights
India raise similar intervention in Ban, Lanka, Fiji, Maldives, Tibetians (Dalai Lama)
Lanka itself is a counter of counter 😛
Cons
Pak raising trouble in Kashmir
Escalation into nuclear war
Instability in the region – > Terrorism
International
Iran- Baloch neighbour against the nationalist movement in 70s
Indian image
Indian NAM policy –
Except Ban, India has stood away from Pak border issues
Even did not uphold Afghan objection against the Durand line
Vajpayee, Manmohan in past have come close to working with Pak to tackle Kashmir, Baloch problem
Entete Cordiale
Informal association
Engaging in practical, small steps like ( Opposite of Salami Slicing of China )
Pakistan investigators in Pathankot
Regular NSA level meetings
As in Thailand recently
Pakistan providing information on possible attacks in Gujarat
Modi visiting Lahore, inviting Sharif to swearing in
Even the catching of spy, failed to deter
Contrast to earlier big wig ideas centring around Kashmir
Spoiler attacks can’t tackle entete cordiale
India acting defensively
Pros
Has prevented another major attack
More pressure on Pak to punish the Mumbai attackers
As world more focused on IS threat, India will anyway find itself isolated complaining against Pak based terrorism
At the same time, India is engaging more with the people. Modi recently said,” we stand with the people of Pak”
Cons
Bail for Mumbai attackers
International
US – More F 16
China
45 billion dollars of CPEC
From Pok To Gwadar
Called Karamay declaration
Russia selling helicopters
Afghanistan
Af- Pak relations have become more solid under the new president, Ashraf Ghani
Recently ISI and NDF , the afghani spy agency signed an MoU
Soon after , an attack targeting the Indian ambassador
Yet, minor attacks have increased
Attacks also in Gurudaspur in Punjab
Attcks on army convoy in Jammu
Attack on Uri Indian Army base
Alternatives with India
Conventional attack against Pak border posts which are found to ease infiltrators
Using missile, bombs
Con – The resulting would be opportune moment for terrorists to enter India
As seen by relatively peaceful times after the ceasefire of 2003
Surgical strike
Using Brahmos missiles
Against known millitant camps in PoK
Con
Could relight the Kashmir issue
Intelligence lacuna
Mobilisation
Done after Parliament attacks
Prohibition on Pak planes using the airspace
Similar Pak retalliation
Pro- limited economic risk bearing capacity of our neighbour. Pulled out first
Con- Expense
Tit for tat
Covert RAW operations and attacks
Unlikely to deter Pak and will only intensify the vicious circle
Diplomatic warfare alone
Sir Creek
The resolution to the Sir Creek dispute has been considered a low-hanging fruit for sometime now. The demarcation of the 96 km strip of water in the Rann of Kutch marshlands was one of the factors that contributed to the 1965 India-Pakistan war.
Pertinently, it is tied to the larger issue of delineating maritime boundaries and exclusive economic zones. That the creek has changed its course significantly over the years complicates matters further.
Background:
Sir Creek is a strip of area between Pakistan and India in the Rann of Kutch marshlands. It is situated in south east of Karachi, and divides the Kutch region of the Indian state of Gujarat with Sindh province of Pakistan.
During recent past history, the question of boundary in the Sir Creek region came up first time for discussion during 1969,
The issue may not have risen, since the creek itself is located in the uninhabited marshlands, has limited military value but holds immense economic gain. The region being rich in oil and gas below the sea bed, control over the creek will add enormously to the energy potential of each nation.
How Convention of the Laws of the Sea has further increased the tension?
Initially territorial waters extended only till 12 nautical miles but since the advent of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, a coastal state can now have control over five sea zones: internal water, territorial sea area (12 nautical miles wide), contiguous zone (12 nautical miles wide), the (EEZ) Exclusive Economic Zone (200 nautical miles wide), the continental shelf (from 200 nautical miles up to maximum 350 nautical miles wide). The EEZ can thus be exploited commercially both for the undersea energy as well as nutrient sources.
The said Convention gives additional rights to both India and Pakistan over sea resources up to 200 nautical miles in the water column and up to 350 nautical miles in the land beneath the water column.
It also provides principles on the basis of which sea boundaries have to be drawn between the states adjacent to each other with a concave coastline. In short, the land boundary’s general course of direction on the land leading up to the coast can make a difference of hundreds of square nautical miles of sea when stretched into the sea as a divider between the said two states.
With the adaptation of 1982 Law of the Sea Convention by both countries, the governments have suddenly realised the enormous sea resources that can be lost or won on the basis of the land terminal point where the border between India and Pakistan ends. That is why Sir Creek has now become more contentious than ever before.
Besides, both countries are bound to protect their sea-lanes of communications and make efforts for increasing the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) area through claiming Continental Shelf by submitting claim to UN Commission on Limits of Continental Shelf (CLCS).
Pakistan’s arguments:
Pakistan claims the entire Sir Creek based on a 1914 agreement signed between the government of Sindh and rulers of Kutch.
India’s arguments:
India contests Pakistan’s claim, stating that the boundary lies mid-channel of the Creek. In its support, it cites the Thalweg Doctrine in International Maritime Law, which states that river boundaries between two states may be divided by the mid-channel if the water-body is navigable.
Who is being affected?
The biggest casualty of not delimiting the Sir Creek is the incarceration of thousands of innocent fishermen from the border region who are routinely arrested and their boats and materials confiscated under the premise of illegal intrusion, even though there is no cognisable territorial and maritime boundary delimitation in the area.
Why deadlock?
One of the chief reasons for the deadlock is that India wants the dispute resolved solely through bilateral dealings in the spirit of the Shimla Agreement of 1972, while Pakistan favours third-party involvement and wants to link the resolution of the dispute to contested territories under Indian occupation.
Options before both the countries:
Designating the non-delineated area — Sir Creek and its approaches — as a zone of disengagement or a jointly administered maritime park
both countries could designate the area amaritime sensitive zon
Another option available is the constitution of an arbitration tribunal
The solution to the Sir Creek issue also lies in the adoption of the Bombay Government Resolution of 1914, which demarcated the boundaries between the two territories, included the creek as part of Sindh, thus setting the boundary line known as the “Green Line” or the eastern flank of the creek.
Intersting facts
Most paki missiles named after invaders of india like ghajni & ghori
