Again, Desperate Times

Re : Ras Siddiqui # 107

yes .. the demons of the past have eerily raised their heads. Since you were a ZA Bhutto fan ( so was I) you might recall that the bullets and the FSF gun presented as evidence against Bhutto didn`t forensically match each other, still ZAB was hanged. And mind you that was a regular court.

Here, we are dealing with a summary trial special court. If the junta can have it`s way, the courts will change the definition of Hijacking as being possible with the hijacker on the ground; and eliminate Nawaz.

Actually, if you look at the facts, it appears that Musharraf was the hijacker according to the legal definition of the offense. He took physical control in the cockpit, prevented the plane to be diverted to Nawabshah as per instructions received from lawful authority, and forced the Captain to continue circling over Karachi precariously.

Sometimes the obvious is so simple that it evades us.

I have a few questions :

1)Are we a nation of Tamashbeens ? I remember the public lashings of Zia where crowds used to gather cheering for more. I also remember a public hanging outside Camp Jail in Lahore where people were shuffling for space. There must have been a few hundred thousand there. Has nothing changed since then ?

You must have read that little piece in The News a few days ago about a woman executed publicly in Kabul for murdering her husband. Another woman was pushing her little son forward to see the spectacle saying this can`t be missed because she hadn`t seen a woman executed publicly before. Not to be missed.

Is that the sadistic joy I see in your article ?

2) The Saigol family are the captains of industry since independance. The mere taxes and excise duties they pay every year surpass any alleged defaults. They are certainly not wilful defaulters. Mian Nasim Saigol sold his Union bank cheaply to pay off his dues. The remaining was settled by surrendering more than three hundred canals of prime residential land in Faisalabad. 5 bank chiefs stated Nasim Saigol didn`t owe anything yet the military doesn`t let him go ? It`s between the banks and him so what has the army got to do with it ? In the meantime a person like Nasim Saigol has to sleep on the floor in Sarwar Road Thana. Do you think he will invest anything in this country again ?

The Saigol family founded the whole textile industry in this country. Kiohinoor Textiles with 32000 spindles was the beginning. Rest is history. I was in PIA when Mian Rafiq Saigol had turned PIA around after the fall of Dacca with half of PIA`s assets gone. Yet he didn`t lay off anyone. I remember his speech where he had said that anyone of our staff who can come back from East Pakistan will be accomodated. He said we will find more routes and more ways to make money, but we won`t lay off any of our people. And he didn`t. He opened the Pearl Route to Tokyo via Bangkok and revenues began to flow.

These are not robber barons. Neither are Choudhery`s of Gujraat who are astute businessmen. The Korean connection is the Chaudherys` who brought in Daewoo and Hyundai on a BOT/BLT/BOO basis to build vital infrastructure in this country when there were no foreigners willling to even cast a glance here. Where`s our sense of justice ?

3) Musharraf had claimed ``Everyone was on board``. If Nawaz had been on board in the Kargil aggression, how is it that Vajpayee is asking for world intervention to prevent Nawaz`s execution ? He should have been his enemy if Nawaz had stabbed Vajpayee in the back when he was visiting Minar-e-Pakistan as an acceptance of the State of Pakistan for the first time in history.

4)Where do you see the economy heading ? There`s a $ 150 million Eurobond maturity coming up in December to Bear Stearns. Quarterly instalments on forex debt altogether including commercial and multilateral donor debts will amount to more than $ 300 million in end December. Where`s the money coming from ? I have heard of a contemplated 30 % devaluation on IMF`s directives. Are we heading in the way of Indonesia ? I would hate to see Camdessous standing with his arms crossed over musharraf signining away this nation`s destiny ..

anaryan: ``Methinks you have picked a leaf from UR`s book and neatly side-stepped the main issue with lenghty explanations on something else.``

Could you let me know which issue I have sidestepped? I have no reason to believe any bodies were mutilated. Do you have any thing from international sources that indicates that the bodies were mutilated? I would encourage you not to rely on Indian or Pakistani press regarding issues between India and Pakistan. You seem so sure that the bodies were mutilated. Neither one of us saw anyone mutilating the bodies. I am basing my answers on military traditions I am aware of. What exactly are you basing your conclusions on? Is there a history of the Pakistan army mutilating bodies? I do not think so.

If you really want to discuss lack of chivalry, perhaps you should talk about the unarmed Pakistani naval recon aircraft that was shot down inside Pakistan recently. There is proof available for this. Its pieces landed inside Pakistan, which proves it was inside Pakistan. Even the BBC reported this, and showed videos of people trying to take the pieces across the border, to India. Pakistan is trying to take this case to ICJ. Do you think India will agree to this? I have only brought this up because you are bent upon creating controversy, while others are busy finding solutions.

Please stop trying to create an problems around something to which you have only second hand knowledge. These discussions based on, ``you say, I say`` never lead to anything except conflict.

Re: All

I am fine and enjoying the situation in Pakistan. Sorry, I missed the InterActs on my article, but I was real busy here and did not have time to surf. Will be busy again for a while, but this to let you all know that things are fine and I am still alive......

Ciao

Pardesi: reply 104: You stated, ``UR Sahib, what effectively you are saying is that Pakistani government (civilian or military) either does not want to or is incapable of controlling the ``Lashkar Shashkar wallahs`` due to fear of loosing their own support from the masses hard coded with Jihad oriented fundamentalism.``

This is partly correct. The question is not of the govt. losing support of the masses. These parties do not constitute the, ``masses.`` It is a question of controlling people who are willing to die for their cause. I do not know of any govt. in the world that can control people/groups who are willing to die for their cause. This is something that has to be taken into account in the Kashmir scenario. It should not be used to justify a solution. However, it is a potential problem. If you have a way of controlling people who are willing to die for their cause, please let me know.

The second part of comment is incorrect. The masses of Pakistan, have never supported fundamentalists. Please take a look at all the results of the elections of Pakistan assmeblies. The no. of members elected from the religious parties have been has always been extremely small. Some of our Indian friends refuse to believe this. I am trying to get a list of all the representatives of religious parties in Pakistan that have made it to the National Assembly, to prove it to them. It is less than 5% of the total members of the National Assembly. These kinds of criticisms are a bit odd coming from the Indian critics, since India has repeatedly elected BJP, which is widly recognized as a Hindu nationalist party. Their manifesto and philosophy at www.bjp.org clearly indicates it (I personally believe that as long as a party recognizes the rights of the minorities, it is fine, regardless of whether it is religious or non-religious). But these comments about Pakistanis always voting and supporting fundamentalists are getting a bit old. Kindly indicate the results of any recent elections in Pakistan, in which a religous party has won a majority, or even any significant no. of seats. If you cannot, then please do not portray the Pakistanis masses as being fundamentalists.

You stated, ``Would Pakistan allow Indian or UN forces to be stationed on Pakistan side to seal off all routes and pursue infiltrators right into Pakistani territory on a ``search and destroy mission`` I think the infiltrators will only enter into Kashmir, if they feel India is interfering in Kashmir, and that Kashmir is not completely independent.

There is no need for Pakistan to allow Indian forces to enter into Pakistan, or India to allow Pakistani forces to enter into India. However, if there is a problem, I definitely agree to UN forces chasing any kind of infiltrators into Pakistan or India, and to seal off all routes to either of these countries to stop any infiltrators from either country causing problems in Kashmir. I am quite sure there would be plenty of groups in both India and Pakistan who would not be too happy with a Kashmir solution. I have pointed out one in Pakistan, which I think would not be happy with any participation from India in an independent Kashmir govt. I have done this so that all issues are taken into consideration. Some of the extremist Hindu parties in India probably would not be too happy with an independent Kashmir either. Perhaps you could mention some of their names.

In response to UR (Reply # 119)

Dear UR:

Your statement: `` Neither one of us saw anyone mutilating the bodies. I am basing my answers on military traditions I am aware of. What exactly are you basing your conclusions on? Is there a history of the Pakistan army mutilating bodies? I do not think so.``

Comment: After the 1965 War, I had on one occasioned heard a non-commissioned army officer telling stories of Army`s role in Kashmir (I think he was talking about Kashmir). One of his story was fully of violations of all kinds of human and military codes. It is possible that he was just making up those stories to create sensation. However, I want to reproduce something that was published in ``Jabal`` (the English-language bulletin produced by the Baluch People`s Liberation Front) in 1977. The bulletin states:

``In contrast [to BPLF treatment of prisoners] the enemy [Pakistan Army] carried out savage tortures and summarily executes our captured compatriots. The army has captured over 5,000 men, women and children from BPLF zones. 95 per cent of these have been brutally tortured. Apart from the standard practice of severe beatings, limbs are broken or cut off; eyes gouged out; electric shocks are applied, especially to the genitals; beards and hair are torn out; finger nails ripped; water and food are withheld, which in the summer months often turns out to be fatal. Ten fighters have become permanently deranged due to electric shock and torture. Women, in addition to being subject to these tortures, are also raped. After this they invariably commit suicide they are too ashamed to return to their families. The prisoners who are released as being of no further use to the enemy all immediately return to the BPLF and insist on fighting again, although many of them are so badly cut up that they cannot hold a rifle or walk properly (Quoted in Tariq Ali, 1983, Can Pakistan Survive? The Death of a State. London: Verso, pp. 120-21).

I really don`t know how true is this story. But if it is true, I should definitely curse the culprits in the Pakistani army. Pakistani army needs to look into such matters and take serious action. This is a topic that needs our attention, at least in the long-run.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

P.S. I encourage you to read Tariq Ali`s book, particularly the section on ``The War in Baluchistan`` (see pages 115-123). For a biographical sketch of Tariq Ali, see ``Zameen`` on the internet.

Re: #118 UR

I know a little bit about military-would`nt consider myself an expert.

In mountainous terrain numerical superiority is nullified and there are severe restrictions on movement. You can`t rely on armour or air-support(IAF learnt it the hard way) and its not easy to get accurate op to provide artillery cover-The advantage lies in occupying the high ground (as you mentioned) and ofcourse the morale and resilience of the troops.

If you follow the statements coming from the Indian High Command to the press from the very beginning of the conflict-it seems that they totally underestimated the level of intrusion.

First they said that,these were just a few terrorists/mujahideen who were causing minor problems in certain sector of J&K-Then the terrorists were elevated to infiltrators to Taliban and finally to Pak Army regulars-I am sure that they must have learnt all this the hard way too-Because if they had know initially the strength of infiltrators they would not have launched full-fledge assaults in the beginning-the Indian Army is as experienced in mountain warfare as we are.

If you are well dug-in, with supply-routes open and if you intend to make a stand-you don`t need to be an Army regular-even any irregular militia will be almost impossible to dislodge.

The ludicurous reoprts in the Indian media such as

finding letters & military identification papers on the infiltrators (guerillas don`t carry IDs with them), taped conversation between COAS and CGS (these type of officials don`t use AT&T to discuss military matters), mistreatment of prisoners, mutilation of bodies, to me only suggested their desparation-and which was confirmed when they started mobilizing on a full-scale.

I don`t think if we`ll ever know how close we came to a Nuclear Holocaust this summer-I am glad that Mr. Clinton blinked-it seemed to me that both our Armies were intent on playing bluff.

With that in perspective, atleast I am appreciating efforts by you, Bilal, Amit, Sameer and concerned, etc. for a useful dialogue on Kashmir.

Re: #117 anarayan

Sir, you are entitled to your opinion-I was merely suggesting that when countries go on a war-footing they usually potray each other as evil monsters (pick up a Time magazine right around when Iraq invaded Kuwait and read the description of the average Iraqi soldier and what he did to the Kuwait citizens-I did`nt believe it then-Did you?).

You have to remember that there was a large number of irregulars also fighting-and from whom these sorts of despicable acts might be expected-Since, we lack info-its not proper for you to accuse the Pakistani soldier for doing something that is completely against his code of honor and conduct.

Lt. Saurav Kalia will be remembered with honor by his regiment and his country for making the supreme sacrifice-You are trivializing his courageous deed by your statements.

Regards,

Amir

RE: Maj. Gen. Akhtar Hussain Malik and Maj. Gen. Eftikhar

In the 1965 War, Operation Grand Slam was meant to capture Akhnur and thus sever the main (only?) road link between IOK and India proper. Gen. Malik was GOC 12 Div and his formation was to launch the attack, cross the Munawwar Tawi river, establish a bridgehead on the other side, dig in and consolidate and allow 7 Div (the ``Golden Arrow`` of WWII fame) to pass through them and capture Akhnur. Maj. Gen. Yahya Khan was GOC 7 Div. and was to have the honor of capturing Akhnur. The advantages of isolating the Indian troops in IOK are of course self-obvious but there were still two other problems: could we hold Akhnur against the Indian counterattack? And what exactly were we going to do to the Indian troops in IOK since we did not have the resources to destroy them there.

Contrary to some people`s belief, this plan was formulated well before the attack took place and the decision to have 7 Div. capture Akhnur was not a last minute one. 12 Div did its task admirably and took the Indians completely by surprise. The problems arose out of the fact that 7 Div was not ready to move. It took 24 hours for 7 Div to reach its positions and attack. By this time, the Indians had recovered and rushed in reinforcements and it was too late.

Probably we were expecting the Indians to put up heavier resistance and we did not expect to establish the bridgehead that easily. I do not know if the story that Gen. Yahya Khan had a hangover and refused to move his HQ until he felt better are true or not. Probably not since he was actually a pretty decent soldier and personally brave enough and I do not think he was as heavy a drinker then.

The real question is why wasn`t 12 Div supposed to push on through and have 7 Div consolidate the bridgehead and hold the rear areas? Maybe because it was felt that 12 Div would be too badly mauled in the crossing and not have the resources needed to launch a full attack on Akhnur? Or was it because FM Ayub Khan wanted the honour of capturing Akhnur to go to a fellow Pathan (not that Ayub was actually a Pathan)? Maybe he did not want Malik (who I believe was an Ahmadi) to be too successful?

I do not know what the truth is but I suspect that it was poor military planning and not ludicrous political or religous reasons. 12 Div was also slow in the advance since Indian oppposition was expected to be heavy and no one was expecting an Indian collapse (which is basically what happened to the Indian brigades opposing 12 Div).

Following standard British WWII operational planning guidelines, I suspect that moving slowly and ponderously, with massive artillery support, was the SOP. We simply did not know a full blown opportunity when one came up and slapped us in the face. A Patton or a Rommel (or virtually any other German general of WWII, actually) would have seized the opportunity to push on and capture Akhnur and told 7 Div that there had been a change in plans.

(Aside: Some idiots on some other threads have been sneering at Gen. Pervez Musharraf for being a gunner--a ``support arm`` and not a ``fighting arm.`` The ability and professionalism of the Pakistani Artillery has always been superb and our gunners have always outfought and outsmarted the Indians--which is more than can be said for our ``fighthing arms.``)

I know much less about Gen. Eftikhar but I`ll see if I can get more details. This message is long enough as it is.

Regards.

RE: Reply #: 118 UR

- Whoever gets the heights first in Kashmir basically wins the battle. This was one of the biggest advantages Pakistan was able to achieve.

That the Indian army was caught napping is plain for all to see. However did your army friend tell you what the exit strategy was? Did somebody tell him that India would take it lying down? How difficult would it have been for India to open up other fronts to ease the pressure on Kashmir?

This plan was put forward during Benazir Bhutto`s tenure and she categorically turned it down since she was able to see clearly beyond the initial euphoria of sticking it in the Indians` eyes. Either Nawaz Sharif did not comprehend the complete consequence of the action when the plan was put forth or the army finessed the issue to him (ala the Bay of Pigs invasion). Who knows.

- Pakistan had relied on some of its friends (China etc.) to support Pakistan. The fact that they did not proved to be a big drawback for Pakistan.

This seems to have been the biggest and most naive miscalculation. Even in the height of the Cold War in 1971, all that the United States and China, Pakistan`s staunchest allies, did was to mouth a few sympathetic words. In this day and age when the whole civilized world is war-weary what with Iraq, Yugoslavia, Russian Repulics et. al, for the Pakistani defence planners to think that anyone would stick up for blatant aggression, they must have been smoking something really strong, far beyond the usual strength which instigated the misadventures in 1965 and 1971.

To: UR

I was in Gilgit and Skardu for several months and my family called in a favor or two for me. Hence my extended sojourn in BOQs. BTW, what was your arm and when were you at PMA? We might have some friends in common.

Regards.

Re: Fuzair #126 RE: Gens. A. Malik and Eftikhar

Thanks for shedding some additional light on this. Consistent with what you say, I understand that the goal of the 1965 Chhamb-Jaurian operations was Akhnur which was strategically located to control the main supply road from India to Kashmir. The reasons we did not continue the pursuit seem to be (a) The mid-attack switchover of command from Akhtar Malik to Yahya: I understand the front-line Pakistani commanders had to actually plead to be allowed to cross even the river Tawi with tanks, rather than waiting for engineers to build them a bridge, on the basis that tanks could in fact cross the river from shallow areas - which they successfully did once permission was granted - and keep the Indians running ahead of them. The same conservative thinking among high-ups may have prevailed when it came to continuing to chase the Indians all the way out of Akhnur; (b) The Indian counterattack on Pakistan proper which required a redeployment of troops; (c) Good tactical planning (which secured initial breakthroughs in Chhamb-Jaurian) but weak strategic planning (that is, answering the qeustion: what next, once we succeed in our initial objectives?). Perhaps all of the above, but I dont know enough and would be interested in any history books one could look this up. I do find your faith in WWII German generals and in the US general Patton quite interesting. Those grand German generals also lost WWII, you may recall, just 30 years after having lost WWI (and many of them proved better at fighting women and children in places like Warsaw and the villages than in fighting armed forces). When the Allies landed in Normandy, Rommel was back home with his wife celebrating his birthday rather than with his troops on the Normandy beaches. Patton`s claim to fame was more style (wearing cowboy six-shooters, slapping one of his men) than substance, as I see it. In any case, I think it is time to stop venerating these grand warriors (whatever nationality they may be) and let them rest in peace. Let us start thinking instead of the real warriors of fight for peace and well-being of everyone and of giving a better world to future generations. And learn to live in peace with the Indians too. That, imho, is the very best strategy there is.

Re: Tahmed321#127

German general didn`t lose the WWII by themselves. There were many factors behind that. I personally believe Gen. Manstein was the greatest of all german general and I personally don`t hold Marshall Zhukov in high esteem.

Sincerely, Zabed

P.S: Can anyone tell meabout Maj.Gen. Iftikhar?

- The bottom line is that we can no longer afford the defence budget we have been running. Our economy is virtually collapsed and he has further damaged it by creating the kind of business environment that exists at this point.

- More insidious is that assault that has been launched by the IMF. Their principal objective has already been achieved. The have had Pakistani laws changed and the process of engineered default commenced. The heroes of Kargil seem to be collaborating. The rumour is that the old goat Yaqub of the State Bank put them on this track.

- There is very little chance that these guys can do anything concrete to fix the economy and get it to generate resources to finance military set up even at present levels. The team being put together is fundamentally mediocre and more interested in supporting the IMF program which infact includes reduction of the defence budget.

- Coming back to the point they are better off redesigning and reinventing the armed forces in a lower budget. They can do it and come up with some formulation that will provide the present level of security. If they want to play the role of a nuclear armed NGO and get into collection services

we may be in trouble in the long run. Well, this guy may have picked up some ideas from China and Thailand but it will not work.

- Any comments...

ur:

`If you really want to discuss lack of chivalry, perhaps you should talk about the unarmed Pakistani naval recon aircraft that was shot down inside Pakistan recently. There is proof available for this. Its pieces landed inside Pakistan, which proves it was inside Pakistan`

how does the landing of the pieces in a particular area conclusively prove where the aircraft, unarmed or otherwise, was flying when it was shot?

``Financial Warfare``

The Worldwide scramble to appropriate wealth through ``financial manipulation`` is the driving force behind this

crisis. It is also the source of economic turmoil and social devastation. In the words of renowned currency

speculator and billionaire George Soros (who made 1.6 billion dollars of speculative gains in the dramatic crash of

the British pound in 1992) ``extending the market mechanism to all domains has the potential of destroying

society``.4 This manipulation of market forces by powerful actors constitutes a form of financial and economic

warfare. No need to recolonise lost territory or send in invading armies. In the late twentieth century, the outright

``conquest of nations`` meaning the control over productive assets, labour, natural resources and institutions can be

carried out in an impersonal fashion from the corporate boardroom: commands are dispatched from a computer

terminal, or a cell phone. The relevant data are instantly relayed to major financial markets -- often resulting in

immediate disruptions in the functioning of national economies. ``Financial warfare`` also applies complex

speculative instruments including the gamut of derivative trade, forward foreign exchange transactions, currency

options, hedge funds, index funds, etc. Speculative instruments have been used with the ultimate purpose of

capturing financial wealth and acquiring control over productive assets.

This is an excerpt from one article about the IMF

that provides the possible IMF gameplan directed at Pakistan. This article is available on the net along with other materials. I suggest you attend to this rather than ruminate about past battles that cannot be unlost.

nashat:

`The ludicurous reoprts in the Indian media such as finding letters & military identification papers on the infiltrators (guerillas don`t carry IDs with them)`

maybe they weren`t guerillas. :|

`taped conversation between COAS and CGS`

the last i read about this was in a pakistani newspaper that the general was planning to find out if those were released to india by nawaj. :(