[bigdamo]

[bigdamo]

[ghostofcarl]

[bigdamo]

[johnnyrocketship]

I don't know much about the conflict, but I wonder if ultimately they're fighting over this "inhospitable rock and ice" for water rights? He who controls the glaciers holds control over the water, which will become an increasingly valuable resource as time goes on.

Perhaps there's less logic in this conflict than that though
_________________
Have you seen my skin bag?

[robrox]

If you can stand it, watch the film "Vertical Limit". Some of the segments involve one of the high bases in the area.
_________________
"Moderate is not the new Low" - Chris Joosen, USFS Lead Snow Ranger (Tuckerman Ravine, White Mountains National Forest)

[southerntele]

I currently live in India and ski in Kashmir and although I can't comment on the Pakistani's, I can comment on the Indian Army. In a previous life I was in the military any worked with the Indian Army in 95 on the Milam Glacier on the border with China. Some observations:

a. Siachen Glacier is part of the broader dispute over Kashmir which was briefly an independent princely state post the creation of India and Pakistan (East and West) on partition of British India. When the Sikh price waivered on becoming part of Pakistan, Kashmir was invaded by Pakistan from and the prince requested assistance from India. India would only provide assistance if Kashmir became part of India. The origins of the conflict have nothing to do with water and everything to do with religion and a 1000 years of history.

b. It would be very wrong to assume that those working at altitude are poor lowlanders. There are a number of military and para-military groups on the various borders. For example, the Indo-Tibetan Border Police recruit from the mountains and have a significant number of exiled Tibetans. They make people born in Summit County look like lowlanders and are machines at altitude. The same can be said of the Indian Army Dogra Regiment which recruit many of their soldiers from the various hill stations.

c. It would be wrong to assume that they are incompetent. The Indian Army have highly evolved procedures regarding acclimatization due to there experience in the conflict with China on the Milam Glacier in 1962. Their avalanche training is far less advanced due to a lower level of risk with some justification as fatalities from altitude sickness historically far outweigh avalanches. The Indian's have a very well established mountain warfare school.

d. Without wanting to sound callous, you need to apply sub-continental risk management when considering the consequences. Ten people die every day on the Mumbai suburban train network so this is the equivalent to a "bad week and a half" on the Mumbai trains.

e. The last time the ski area in Kashmir was closed by the military was because the Indian Army would not supply explosive due to a dispute with the ski patrol. If I understand it correctly the ski patrol had bee working to train the Indian Army but the Indian Army expected the ski patrol to be responsible for the out of bounds areas above the an adjacent Army barracks. To the best of my knowledge, the second stage has not been impacted by the militancy since it opened.

I hope this provides some perspective.

[robrox]

Thanks! I expect that we would hear fairly similar remarks about the other army having procedures for high altitude assignments, etc. Pretty interesting about risk...seems like the concepts are contexturally sound, even if contrary to my way of looking at things here in New England.
_________________
"Moderate is not the new Low" - Chris Joosen, USFS Lead Snow Ranger (Tuckerman Ravine, White Mountains National Forest)

[SteveH]

[SteveH]

[SteveH]

[Nick (AT)]

[granpa]

^^^^^ That said I'm sure Colorado DOT has learned some hard lessons over the period of the past 50 years
_________________
.....clueless....

[robrox]

[ghostofcarl]