Jammu: Rubbishing Pakistan’s claim, BSF on Tuesday asserted that India is not constructing any wall along the border in Jammu and Kashmir and that a “story” is being cooked up by the neighbouring country to create confusion.
Days after Pakistan claimed in a complaint to the UN that India is building a wall along the Working Boundary (LoC), BSF Inspector General Rakesh Sharma said it was not possible to do so keeping in view the topography of the area.
“This is a story created by Pakistan. There is no wall being constructed…,” he told reporters in Jammu.
“It is a confusion that is being created by the Pakistani side as there is no such wall being constructed on the IB in Jammu and Kashmir,” Sharma said.
Referring to the difficult terrain, he said, “How can it be constructed and the wall as you know the topographic conditions of the border? It is just not possible to construct a wall.”
Last week, Pakistan’s Ambassador to UN Maleeha Lodhi had in a letter to UNSC President Vitaly Churkin, alleged that India was planning to construct a 10-meter high and 135-feet wide embankment (wall) along the 197-km Working Boundary (LoC) between Jammu and Kashmir and Pakistan.
The wall, according to Pakistan, was to convert the LoC “into a quasi international border”.
Asked as to why Pakistan was making up the story of a wall being constructed, Sharma said, “I am also surprised about the wall theory – there is nothing on the ground and it seems to be a story only.”
The BSF IG said the fortification of the already existing fence on the IB was an ongoing process because the fence is subjected to the vagaries of nature.
“The repair and upgradation of the border fence is an ongoing process. At several places the fence gets washed away when there is a flood so we have to repair it,” he said.
When asked to comment on the recently-held Director General (DG)-level talks with Pakistan, Sharma said, “It (situation along IB) appears to be peaceful as of now and both the sides are maintaining peace on the border and let us see how things move ahead”.
Continue at source: