Sir Creek: A marshy dispute
( Q and A.Factfile)
Factfile on the India-Pakistan dispute on the Sir Creek marshlands on which the two countries concluded two days of talks in New Delhi without making much headway:
* Where is Sir Creek?
The Sir Creek is a 96-km strip of water body that stretches from the marshes at the edge of the Rann of Kutch to the Arabian Sea. The creek divides the Kutch region of Gujarat in India and Pakistan’s Sindh province. Locally called “Baan Ganga”, it is named after the British representative of the region in undivided India.
* Why is the Creek so important?
The creek is widely seen to have little military or strategic value, but has immense potential economic benefits as the marshalnds are estimated to be rich in hydrocarbons and shale gas. The boundary agreed to at the Creek will determine the sea boundary and the exclusive economic zone of either country extending to 200 nautical miles. A concession of a single nautical mile in the channel will have enormous consequences as are subject to commercial exploitation.
* What is the dispute about?
The primary dispute is about where the mouth of the creek is. India and Pakistan continue to differ on this crucial point which could help determine the land and maritime boundary in this sector, which is blocking attempts at resolution. India cites the Thalweg Doctrine in international law which envisages that river boundaries between two states may be, if the two states agree, divided by the mid-channel. Pakistan says that the doctrine applies only to bodies of water that are navigable whereas India maintains that the creek is navigable. In 2007, naval hydrography units from India and Pakistan together conducted a survey and found that the creek was navigable for most of the year.
* How did the dispute start?
The marshlands became disputed in 1913 and contested between the Rao Saheb of Kutch, the then Indian princely state, and the Chief Commissioner of Sindh, the British-ruled province, with sharply varying perceptions of boundaries. The marshland was mostly uninhabited, but the dispute arose after locals from both sides began to scour the creek area for firewood.
* What was the 1914 verdict all about?
The dispute was referred to the then government of Bombay, which conducted a survey and offered its verdict in 1914. The verdict is at the heart of the current dispute between India and Pakistan as it contains two contradictory paragraphs which both sides have drummed up to bolster their case about the location of the boundary. According to Paragraph 9, the boundary between Kutch and Sindh lies “to the east of the Creek,” which effectively implied that the creek belonged to Sindh and, therefore, to Pakistan. Paragraph 10 says Sir Creek is navigable most of the year and quotes the chief commissioner of Sindh to buttress the point. According to international law, a boundary can only be fixed in the middle of the navigable channel, which meant that it has be divided between Sindh and Kutch, and thereby India and Pakistan. India has used this para to consistently argue that the boundary needs to be fixed in the middle of the creek.
In 1925, a map of the region was chalked out and showed a “green riband to the east of the Creek”. Pakistan leveraged this “Green Line” to claim that it marked the boundary between Sindh and Kutch, and argued that the Creek belonged to Sindh. India countered, saying the depiction was part of “normal cartographic practice” and should not be used to make any territorial claims.