Home Contact Us
Search :

Indo-Pak - Articles

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
#210, 23 June 1999
Kargil, LoC and the Simla Agreement
PR Chari
Director, IPCS

The intercepted telephonic conversation between General Pervez Musharraf, Chief of the Army Staff, Pakistan and his Chief of General Staff, Lt. Gen. Mohd. Aziz, is disconcerting. It states in one place; " Hint, is that, given that the LoC has many areas where the interpretation of either side is not what the other side believes. So, comprehensive deliberation is required". The LoC (line of control) was created by the Simla Agreement (July 2, 1972) and replaced the cease-fire line established by the Karachi Agreement (1948). India sought this terminological change as part of its negotiating strategy in Simla. The intention was to deny the United Nations Military Observers Group for India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) any future role by urging that the new line of control was distinct from the old cease-fire line which UNMOGIP was charged with monitoring.



Clause IV (ii) of the Simla Agreement states that:



In Jammu and Kashmir , the line of control resulting from the ceasefire of December 17, 1971 shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognized position of either side. Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations. Both sides further undertake to refrain from the threat or use of force in violation of the line.



Pakistan has steadily eroded these provisions over the years. It has promoted militancy in Punjab and Kashmir , and it would require a willing suspension of disbelief to conclude that the " violation of the line" in Kargil has been effected by "freedom fighters". Anyway, Pakistan had now admitted to its regular troops being involved in the fighting.



Returning to the Simla Agreement the two Army Headquarters were given the responsibility for delineating the LoC as envisaged by it. Their representatives (Lt. Gen. P.S.Bhagat for India and Lt. Gen. Abdul Hamid Khan for Pakistan ) met on August 10, 1972. An agreement was quickly reached that it need only be re-demarcated in stretches where the old cease-fire line was disturbed following the hostilities, and to demarcate by recognizing the physical occupation of territory by both sides on the date when hostilities ended viz. 17 December 1971. Several problems the arose.



·                     First, India linked its withdrawal of forces from across the international border to delineation of the LoC in Jammu and Kashmir . This was unacceptable to Pakistan , which argued that the Simla Agreement had separate clauses governing these distinct segments of the Indo-Pak border. However, on India 's persistence, Pakistan finally conceded this demand.


·                     Second, identification of the LoC became problematical in places like the Lippa valley in Tithwal sector where some posts changed hands after the ceasefire came into force.


·                     Third, a breakdown of talks occurred on the Thako Chak issue. Pakistan captured this salient in the Jammu sector; a part lay across the international border and another across the ceasefire line. The Simla Agreement required this minor salient to be divided between India and Pakistan ; this seemed pointless to India , but became a matter of principle for Pakistan . Talks dragged on endlessly. Ultimately India resolved this problem by compensating Pakistan elsewhere along the line of control.




The line of control resulting from these negotiations was inscribed on 19 maps and verbally described. It was signed by military officials of the two countries, and formally exchanged on 11 December 1972. The decision not to exchange captured territory and revert to the status quo ante (as occurred under the Tashkent Agreement) had important military implications for both sides. India lost the Chamb area across the Munnawar Tawi river, which provides Pakistan with a formidable obstacle to defend it. India gained strategic territory across the ceasefire line in Kargil to defend its communications between Srinagar and Leh, which is the scene of Pakistan 's present aggression.



Both sides therefore accepted the LoC with its military advantages and disadvantages. The LoC's precise location is well recognized by usage. Sector commanders have resolved disputes regarding the LoC through flag meetings over the years. Pakistan 's Army Headquarters knows all this. Hence, its assertion that " the LoC has many areas where the interpretation of either side is not what the other side believes" reveals an easy propensity to verisimilitude that will make future negotiations with Pakistan very difficult. This specious logic could obviously apply to other segments of the LoC and convert it into a live and unstable border.



Pakistan 's disputation of the LoC really questions the Simla Agreement. By breaching its provisions Pakistan has exhibited aberrant international conduct. But the larger problem before India is that of dealing with a failing state, which possesses discrete nuclear capabilities, and has displayed a demonstrated capacity for dangerous misconduct. This should worry India and  also the world community.






Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
IPCS Columnists
Af-Pak Diary
D Suba Chandran
The New Afghanistan: Four Major Challenges for President Ghani
Pakistan: Crouching Democrats, Hidden Khakis
Mullah Fazlullah: Challenges to the ďEliminate or ExtraditeĒ Approach
Big Picture
Prof Varun Sahni
When Xi Met Modi: Juxtaposing China and India
Pakistanís Tactical Nuclear Weapons: The Inevitability of Instability

Dateline Colombo

Asanga Abeyagoonasekera.
Stronger Democratic Values for a Better Tomorrow
Sri Lanka and China: Towards Innovation Driven Economies
India-Sri Lanka: Strengthening Regional Cooperation
Dateline Islamabad
Salma Malik
India-Pakistan: Working Boundaries and Lines of Uncontrolled Fire
Of Inquilab and the Inquilabis
Pakistan: Of Messiahs and Marches
Dateline Kabul
Mariam Safi
Can Afghanistan Become a "Perfect Place?"
Afghanistan: Political Crises After the Presidential Run-off
Talibanís Spring Offensive: Are the ANSF Prepared?
Dhaka Discourse
Prof Delwar Hossain
Bangladesh: Diplomatic Manoeuvres at the UNGA
Abeís Successful Visit to Dhaka: Two Political Challenges
Girl Summit Diplomacy and Bangladesh-UK Relations

Eagle Eye
Prof Chintamani Mahapatra
Modi-Obama Summit: Criticism for Criticismís Sake?
Changing Global Balance of Power: Obamaís Response
Obama Administration: Re-engaging India
East Asia Compass
Dr Sandip Mishra
India in East Asia: Modiís Three Summit Meets
Modi's Visit to Japan: Gauging Inter-State Relations in Asia
North Korea: Seeking New Friends?

Himalayan Frontier
Pramod Jaiswal
China in Nepal: Increasing Connectivity Via Railways
India-Nepal Hydroelectricity Deal: Making it Count
Federalism and Nepal: Internal Differences
Prof Shankari Sundararaman
The ASEAN's Centrality in the Indo-Pacific Region
Myanmar's Political Transition: Challenges of the 2015 Election
South China Sea: Intransigence Over Troubled Waters

Sushant Sareen
Pakistan: The Futility of Internationalising Kashmir
Pakistan: Why is Army against Nawaz Sharif?
Pakistan: Degraded Democracy
Maritime Matters
Vijay Sakhuja
Maritime Terrorism: Karachi as a Staging Point
Maritime Silk Road: Can India Leverage It?
BRICS: The Oceanic Connections

Middle Kingdom
DS Rajan
China in the Indian Ocean: Competing Priorities
China-Japan Friction: How can India Respond?
Nuke Street
Amb Sheelkant Sharma
India's Nuclear Capable Cruise Missile: The Nirbhay Test
India-Australia Nuclear Agreement: Bespeaking of a New Age
Remembering Hiroshima and Nagasaki: Musings on the Bomb

Red Affairs
Bibhu Prasad
Naxalites and the Might of a Fragile Revolution
Six Thousand Plus Killed: The Naxal Ideology of Violence
Anti-Naxal Operations: Seeking Refuge in Symbolism
South Asian Dialectic
PR Chari
Pakistani Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan: Implications for Asian Security
Obamaís New Strategy towards the Islamic State: Implications for India
Modiís Tryst with Abe

Spotlight West Asia
Amb Ranjit Gupta
War against the Islamic State: Political and Military Responses from the Region
The Islamic State: No Country for the Old World Order
India and the Conflict in Gaza
Strategic Space
Manpreet Sethi
Nasr: Dangers of Pakistan's Short Range Ballistic Missile
Uranium and Nuclear Power: Three Indian Stories
A Strategic Review for India

The Strategist
Vice Admiral Vijay Shankar
Strategic Estrangement: An Odd Bedfellow to Economic Engagement
The Islamic State Caliphate: A Mirage of Resurrection
A Covenant Sans Sword
Voice from America
Amit Gupta
Modiís US Visit: So Much Promise, Such Little Outcome
India and Australia: Beyond Curry, Cricket, and Commonwealth
And Then There is the Middle East: The Lack of an End-Game

Regional Economy
Amita Batra
Regional Economic Architecture: Is India Ready?

OTHER REGULAR contributors
Gurmeet Kanwal
Harun ur Rashid
N Manoharan
Wasbir Hussain
Rana Banerji
N Manoharan

Ruhee Neog
Teshu Singh
Aparupa Bhattacherjee
Roomana Hukil
Aparupa Bhattacherjee


Browse by Publications

Issue Briefs 
Special Reports 
Research Papers 
Seminar Reports 
Conference Reports 

Browse by Region/Countries

East Asia 
South Asia 
Southeast Asia 
US & South Asia 

Browse by Issues

India & the world  
Naxalite Violence 
Suicide Terrorism 
Peace & Conflict Database 
Article by same Author
Defence Management in India: An Agenda for Parrikar

Pakistani Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan: Implications for Asian Security

Obamaís New Strategy towards the Islamic State: Implications for India

Modiís Tryst with Abe

Thinking the Unthinkable: Promoting Nuclear Disarmament

The Enigmatic Case of Bowe Bergdahl

India-Pakistan Relations: Modiís Options

India and No First Use: The Doctrinal Conundrum

The Hague Nuclear Security Summit: Evaluating Major Achievements

India and Nuclear Terrorism: Meeting the Threat

Federalism: Centre as Coordinator and Adjudicator

The Yasukini Controversy: Global Implications

Can India be Cunning?

Limits of Federalism

Ten Years of Ceasefire along the LoC: An Evaluation

Technological Change and Security: Implications for India

India and the Failed States Index

India, Sri Lanka and the IPKF Debacle: Remembering 29 July 1987

Why Berlin is not Prague-II

Carnegie Nuclear Policy Conference 2013: Deterrence and Disarmament

Pakistan Elections 2013: Will things change?

India, Pakistan and the Nuclear Race: The Strategic Entanglement

India and Pakistan: The Kargil Redux

India and Pakistan: Political Fallouts and Larger Questions of the LoC Violations

Book Review: Implications of Asia's Rising Powers for the US

Y! MyWeb
Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
Year 2014
 January  February  March  April  May  June  July  August  September  October  November
 2013  2012  2011  2010  2009  2008  2007  2006
 2005  2004  2003  2002  2001  2000  1999  1998

The Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS) is the premier South Asian think tank which conducts independent research on and provides an in depth analysis of conventional and non-conventional issues related to national and South Asian security including nuclear issues, disarmament, non-proliferation, weapons of mass destruction, the war on terrorism, counter terrorism , strategies security sector reforms, and armed conflict and peace processes in the region.

For those in South Asia and elsewhere, the IPCS website provides a comprehensive analysis of the happenings within India with a special focus on Jammu and Kashmir and Naxalite Violence. Our research promotes greater understanding of India's foreign policy especially India-China relations, India's relations with SAARC countries and South East Asia.

Through close interaction with leading strategic thinkers, former members of the Indian Administrative Service, the Foreign Service and the three wings of the Armed Forces - the Indian Army, Indian Navy, and Indian Air Force, - the academic community as well as the media, the IPCS has contributed considerably to the strategic discourse in India.

Subscribe to Newswire | Site Map | IPCS Email
B 7/3 Lower Ground Floor, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi 110029, INDIA.
Tel: 91-11-4100 1900, 4165 2556, 4165 2557, 4165 2558, 4165 2559 Fax: (91-11) 41652560
© Copyright 2014, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.
        Web Design by http://www.indiainternets.com