Sir Creek: A not so complicated issue

Sir Creek is approx 60 km strip of water counter-claimed between Pakistan and India in the Rann of Kutch (RoK) marshlands. The creek, which opens up into the Arabian Sea, divides the Kutch region of the Indian state of Gujarat with the Sindh province of Pakistan. History of the Sir Creek issue dates back to pre-partition (1843) between the princely state of Kutch and Government of Sindh, which was amicably resolved by the Bombay Government Resolution of 1914 in the form of Map number B44. The Rao of Kutch at that time agreed to the resolution, accordingly the Government of India approved the ratification of boundary as per the recommendation of Bombay government.
The Indo-Pakistan Western Boundary Tribunal (Rann of Kutch) between India and Pakistan was constituted pursuant to the agreement of June 30, 1965. While settling the Rann of Kutch boundary, it left the Sir Creek part of the boundary out of consideration as the Map B-44 of resolution 1914 authoritatively showed the boundary demarcation on East Bank. Since 1968, India has been trying to cast shadows on this otherwise lucid boundary demarcation.
As depicted in Map B-44, boundary from “Western Terminus” to the head of Sir Creek, which lies further to the west, was not tabled in front of the tribunal as it was felt that Resolution Map B44 clearly depicts the boundary and there lies no dispute. Moreover, as per the Article 11 of Vienna Convention on Succession of States in respect of Treaties done at Vienna on 23 August 1978, India is bound to honour the Bombay Government Resolution of 1914 and as such there is no dispute in Sir Creek but merely an issue raised by India, because inherently the creek is sovereign territory of Pakistan. Importance of the Resolution Map B44 being only authentic and authoritative map was also acknowledged by the Indo-Pakistan Western Boundary Case Tribunal. However, they were maps, and in the context of the political system in India during British times, the evidence on

record leaves no room for doubt that none of the maps produced in this case was a conclusive and authoritative source of title to territory, except the Indian Map B-44, on which the boundary determination made in the Resolution of 1914 was authoritatively depicted.
Above stated historical facts undoubtedly establish that the boundary between Sind and Kutch was clearly demarcated through 1914 Resolution on map B-44 as Green line, which lies on East Bank. It was only after the Award of Western Boundary Tribunal in 1968 that India came up with a deviating stance on Sir Creek boundary, stating that mid of the Sir Creek and not east bank is the boundary. The first round of talks between Pakistan and India was held in 1969 and ever since 12 rounds of talks have been held, without any conclusion.
Pakistan’s stance on Sir Creek is of historical and legal value whereas India has been playing around with different maritime principles and definitions to twist the facts in her favour and employ delaying tactics to avoid an obvious solution. During 12 rounds of talks on the Sir Creek issue, Indians have shown contradicting and self-opposing views on their stance either mid of navigable channel or geographical mid of creek. Pakistan’s stance on Sir Creek has always remained consistent that the boundary is East Bank of the creek on vertical segment till top of Sir Creek and from there due east following blue dotted line till it joins boundary pillar BP-1175. India, however, has shifted her stance repeatedly.
Orientation of creek over the years has changed in both east and west direction. Determination of land boundary and land terminus point as per the spirit of 1914 resolution needs to be established for onward delimitation of maritime space.
Recently Pakistan has become the first country in the region to extend its sea limits from 200 to 350 nautical miles, after years of dedicated efforts and successful technical pursuance of the case at the UN. Sea area of Pakistan has immense potential in the shape of living and non-living resources. As such it is in favour of both countries to have their maritime boundaries resolved to transfer full socio-economic benefits of sea resources to their masses. It is high time for the government of India to acknowledge the facts as no propaganda can change the history.