A Shakti Vehicle at Koteshwar to assist Border Security Force Soldier(BSF)‘s patrolling in Sir Creek Border in Kutch in Kutch district of Gujarat. File. | Photo Credit: PTI
The dispute over this space dates again to the British interval. During the time, all the area was a part of the Bombay Presidency, which included the present-day Maharashtra, Gujarat and Sindh. After Partition in 1947, Sindh grew to become a part of Pakistan whereas Kutch remained with India. The core of the dispute is about the place to attract the boundary.
Pakistan claims all the creek, citing a 1914 Bombay Government Resolution that established the boundary alongside the japanese financial institution — the so-called Green Line — successfully putting the creek in Sindh. India argues for the mid-channel precept, backed by a 1925 map and the internationally accepted Thalweg precept, which says that the border between two nations sharing a navigable waterway ought to run alongside the deepest channel. India maintains that Sir Creek turns into navigable throughout excessive tide, and so the boundary ought to run by means of the center. Pakistan disputes this, insisting that the creek will not be navigable.
Economical worth
Though the creek itself has little army worth, it’s of huge financial significance. The definition of the International Boundary at Sir Creek has a direct impression on the delimitation of each nations’ Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) within the Arabian Sea. The EEZs lengthen as much as 200 nautical miles (370.4 km) past a nation’s territorial waters, inside which it has jurisdiction over dwelling and non-living sources.
Apart from the EEZs, management over the Creek would affect the delimitation of maritime boundaries, together with continental cabinets, that are essential for oil and fuel exploration. The area is believed to have reserves of each, and fishing rights are additionally a delicate challenge. Fishermen from each nations typically cross the unmarked maritime boundary by mistake and find yourself being arrested.
The Gulf of Kutch homes two of India’s main ports, Mundra and Kandla, which add to the strategic weight. In addition, Chinese-backed mining and energy tasks on the Pakistani aspect of the Rann of Kutch have raised considerations in India that civilian tasks might flip into strategic or army belongings.
Recent months have seen the difficulty flaring up once more. Between May 8 and 9, Pakistan violated Indian airspace by trying to focus on army installations with as much as 400 drones throughout 36 places, together with the Sir Creek area. Intelligence reviews have highlighted heavy Pakistani army exercise close to the creek. At the identical time, Pakistan’s Army chief Asim Munir has threatened strikes in opposition to an oil refinery in Jamnagar, not removed from the world.
Against this backdrop, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh, throughout a go to on October 2, warned Pakistan that “a path to Karachi passes by means of Sir Creek”, reminding Islamabad of India’s 1965 advance near Lahore. He harassed that whereas India had tried to resolve the dispute by means of dialogue, Pakistan’s intentions remained doubtful. Any act of aggression, he mentioned, would invite a robust response that would “change each historical past and geography”.
Security officers conversant in the terrain of Sir Creek say large-scale floor offensives are practically not possible on this marshy, roadless and uninhabited zone. Infiltrators have been caught previously, however the larger problem as we speak comes from UAVs and drones, which might goal important infrastructure corresponding to ports and refineries positioned within the EEZ. The Sir Creek dispute is not solely about boundary traces but additionally about power safety, maritime rights, and the chance of mixed strategic stress from Pakistan and China.
The boundary in Sir Creek and the maritime line between India and Pakistan stay unresolved. A joint hydrographic survey in January 2007 was adopted by talks in May 2007 in Islamabad, the place either side exchanged maps and agreed to proceed talks. The information didn’t resolve the core disagreement over the boundary’s location. After the 1972 Simla Agreement, it’s not attainable for a 3rd get together to intervene both.
Published – October 05, 2025 01:30 am IST
Leave a Comment