Thursday, March 28, 2024
07:31 PM (GMT +5)

Go Back   CSS Forums > CSS Compulsory Subjects > Current Affairs

Reply Share Thread: Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook     Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter     Submit Thread to Google+ Google+    
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Lahore
Posts: 38
Thanks: 34
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Faheem Ahmed Akhtar is on a distinguished road
Post Sir Creek issue with possibilities

Sir Creek issue - way out?


Of all bilateral disputes between Pakistan and India, Sir Creek has the simplest solution and can be resolved as a confidence building measure (CBM), paving the way to settle the more complex ones. The issue like many others is a legacy of the undemarcated tracts at the partition of the Indian subcontinent in 1947. Sir Creek is a 96 km marshy strip in the Rann of Kutch area lying between the southern tips of Pakistan’s Sindh province and Indian state of Gujarat, opening in the Arabian Sea. The dispute is related to the Rann of Kutch. During independence, Pakistan inherited the control of the whole of northern Rann of Kutch, but India occupied a part of it in 1956 to promote its grandiose plan of establishing a major naval base at Kandla in the Gulf of Kutch, linking it with Rajasthan and adjacent states via an array of rail and roads, backed by military garrisons contiguous to the Pakistani border.
Pakistan’s concerns led to ministerial-level talks that only recognised the dispute, but brought no solution, resulting in a skirmish in April-May 1965. The threat of a wider conflict was thwarted by the then British Prime Minister, Harold Wilson, who arbitrated a ceasefire from July 01, 1965.
The dispute, referred to the India-Pakistan Western Boundary Case Tribunal, presided by Swedish Judge Gunnar Lagergren, awarded a solution in February 1968 that was accepted by both contestants. The adjudicated boundary stopped short of Sir Creek because neither had requested for the demarcation of this tract. Pakistan believed it had inherited the solution provided in the Bombay Resolution of 1914 when Sindh was a part of the Bombay Presidency of British India and Kutch was ruled by Rao Maharaj.
The 1914 resolution that awarded the whole of Sir Creek to Sindh, which in 1947 joined Pakistan while Gujarat opted for India, should have been respected. The matter would have been amicably resolved, but two developments changed the Indian stance: firstly, the prospect of oil and gas being found in the Sir Creek area and secondly, the advent of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of Seas (UNCLOS) to which both Pakistan and India became signatories. The consequent Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) granted Pakistan and India rights under the convention over the sea resources up to 200 nautical miles in the water column and up to 300 nautical miles in the land beneath the column. Resultantly, the position of both the countries hardened, since the EEZ congruent to Sir Creek is not only rich in marine life, but may also contain sub-surface energy deposits and comprises rich nourishment resources at the sea bottom.
The solution to the Sir Creek issue 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.
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. India claims it to be navigable, while in reality, the creek itself is located in the uninhabited marshlands that get flooded during the monsoon season, making it partially navigable then. If the boundary line is demarcated, according to the Thalweg principle, Pakistan stands to lose a considerable portion of the territory that was historically part of the province of Sindh. Acceding to India’s stance would also result in the shifting of the land/sea terminus point several kilometres to the detriment of Pakistan, leading, in turn, to a loss of several thousand square kilometres of its EEZ.
Another factor is that the position of the water body is shifting and hydrographers by both sides confirmed that the latest position favoured Pakistan. Maritime and international boundaries once fixed, cannot be repositioned on the basis of shifting ground positions of water bodies. India insists that the maritime boundary be determined first, which is illogical until the Sir Creek issue is resolved. India should be urged to accept the readymade solution on the basis of the Bombay Resolution of 1914 or seek third party arbitration, as it did in the case of Indus Water Treaty of 1960 or the 1968 Rann of Kutch Commission. However, there has to be an honest intent to seek a solution that is viable for Pakistan and India.
__________________
[Successful are the believers]…who are faithful to their trusts and to their promises.’
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Faheem Ahmed Akhtar For This Useful Post:
Pakistaniguy (Wednesday, June 27, 2012), sarang ali shaikh (Wednesday, June 27, 2012)
  #2  
Old Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Pakistaniguy's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Karachi
Posts: 233
Thanks: 385
Thanked 146 Times in 101 Posts
Pakistaniguy will become famous soon enoughPakistaniguy will become famous soon enough
Default

Kindly mention source.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old Sunday, July 01, 2012
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Lahore
Posts: 38
Thanks: 34
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Faheem Ahmed Akhtar is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pakistaniguy View Post
Kindly mention source.
the news or daily nation
__________________
[Successful are the believers]…who are faithful to their trusts and to their promises.’
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CE 2011 Interviews bilaljadoon CSS 2011 Exam 255 Thursday, August 02, 2012 12:56 PM
Interview Questions from Islamabad & Lahore Phase-1 MehrozM Interview 39 Monday, June 04, 2012 09:18 PM
Pak-india relations Mao Zedong Current Affairs 0 Thursday, October 21, 2010 02:56 PM
indo-pak relations atifch Current Affairs 0 Monday, December 11, 2006 09:01 PM


CSS Forum on Facebook Follow CSS Forum on Twitter

Disclaimer: All messages made available as part of this discussion group (including any bulletin boards and chat rooms) and any opinions, advice, statements or other information contained in any messages posted or transmitted by any third party are the responsibility of the author of that message and not of CSSForum.com.pk (unless CSSForum.com.pk is specifically identified as the author of the message). The fact that a particular message is posted on or transmitted using this web site does not mean that CSSForum has endorsed that message in any way or verified the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message. We encourage visitors to the forum to report any objectionable message in site feedback. This forum is not monitored 24/7.

Sponsors: ArgusVision   vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.