^^ I second that.
A variety of foreign intelligence sources, Pakistani-based journalists and Pakistani human rights workers reveal two important new developments in Gilgit-Baltistan: 1)
a simmering rebellion against Pakistani rule and 2) the influx of an estimated 7,000 to 11,000 soldiers of the People's Liberation Army." (S. Harrison)
The benefits are as much economic as they are strategic-military: when, in the distant future, high-speed rail links are completed in Gilgit and Baltistan, China will be able to transport cargo from Eastern China to the new Chinese-built sea-ports at Gwadar, Pasni and Ormara, east of the Gulf, within 48 hours. The solution seems to be getting these ports not to work: we've done that with Gwadar, with the Singapore-based company that has ensured the delay runs for years, but I'm not so sure about the other two. All three of these ports are in Balochistan, and an insurgency there and attacks on the ports would ensure they are put out of action.
There is also some very disconcerting news about "22 secret tunnels being constructed by PLA soldiers", where Pakisthanies are barred. Tunnels would be necessary for a projected gas pipeline from Iran to China that would cross the Himalayas through Gilgit. But they could also be used as missile silos. Our job would be to ensure that these sites never come to fruition.
Now would be a good time to rake up the Kashmir issue. I see now why the PM wanted a resolution to the Kashmir dispute under Musharraf. But raking up the simmering discontent, that is brewing in PoK and using it to our advantage, while simultaneously mounting strikes on the trans-Karakoram Highway, being built to link China's Sinkiang Province with Pakistan, would serve to delay the work and impose additional costs on China. Similarly, a project through Burma into the Gulf of Thailand should be investigated.
What we should understand is, that Chinese companies taking up infrastructure projects within PoK is an indication, despite the rhetoric of its being 'disputed', of a tacit acknowledgment of PoK being Pakistani. There are legal foreign policy ramifications for this- for it represents a deviation from a stance of an official foreign policy statement from officialdom- to one of real-world realpolitik, that does not bare well for the region. India should adopt a similar stance and renew its policy on Tibet. Quid pro quo, and it's some time for some quo'ing baby.
The problem's also compounded by Pakistan issuing visas-on-arrival to tourists from China at the Taxkurgan border outpost in Xingjian. Most tourists then are free to move within their 'country', including Pakistani-Occupied-Kashmir and the border areas along the L-O-C. One immediate solution would be to impose upon their foreign office not to issue visas upon arrival, and to get rid of Shah Mehmood Qureshi. That would be done by making it a focal point of all talks, and exacting that as a concession.
We've dug ourselves into a deep hole by allowing the freedom of press in Kashmir. Meanwhile, the world's attention remains unfocused on the simmering discontent within P-o-K.
Nepal is also a quagmire we should quickly resolve- ruthless suppression of the Maoists by an India-backed government and the construction of road and rail links right up to Tibet. Meanwhile, a few soldiers manning the border in Nepal under an agreement.
India is a case of opium or sub-opium restraint. And we cannot allow our foolhardi-ness to get the better of us a second time.