Open Letter to General Musharraf

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

In responce to all...

Just wanted to say that few people here think that if they are paying taxes which obviously they are not they are doing favour to army.... Just wanted to tell u that many of u won`t have the guts to enroll in the army and lay ur life in the harms way. It was the jawan of this country which on many occasions saved you. When you sleep at night just remember that someone is standing in the cold just for you. You wear his blanket of safety and walk around and than you say it is useless. Well let me tell you friend about Kargil. No post was vacated there, few taken when every one inside was martered but none vacated. Not enough, how about that the dead bodies which came down when biopysied showed grass in the stomach, well ofcourse you paid for the grass in there stomach so why care. If for fifty years the economy of this country was sleeping it was not the responciblity of army. They did their job, all the Jawans and Junior Officers kept the integrity of this country. Yes I agree that it was ill planned or may be not even planned but don`t blame Jawans and Junior Officers who fought there. They also had a family like you do and just because after giving heavy casualties they returned doesn`t we should not respect them. Now you want to blame Generals for this yes I am with you. But first those who died for there country and weren`t given a military burial should be respected. You have no right to humilate them.

This letter is specialy to Mr. Qadeer...

I commend Dr.Faruqui for a very thoughtful letter

to the Genral.The real spoilers are those generals

who grab the powers under pretext of setting the

house in order as they say the previous civilion

government had destroyed nearly every thing and

their continuation was not in the interest of

the country. And they declare that they would not

stay a minute longer once they set the house in

order, and that they would go back to their barracks. But they never set the country right,

and so they never leave, unless forced to.In

every civilian government, the ministries of

Foreign Affairs and Defence are controlled by the

top generals.They dont allow the civilian governments to normalize relations with India, as the army would be cut to the size and this will reduce their traditional importance and that they

will have to work under a civilian goverment, to which they not accostomed to now.

After having said this, I must confess the even

so called elected civilian governments equally proved disastrous. Each government destroyed the

fragile institutions, pludered the wealth and

promoted corruption, and misuse their powers. As

per Nixon`s defination of leader, they were those

who thought what power would do to them, and not

what they will do the power. They were not men of

history. In fact they proved third rated leaders.

What we now need are honest and dedicated leaders

who care more about poor families, rather than their own, who restore and consolidate the institutions and provide basic amenities like job,

health and education to the masses.Difficult task

though considering mutiple problems and meager

resources at hands

Sadhna!

Again you went back on Pakistan bashimg.

You have not given any point on Kashmir.

And your breaking up and skipping parts of my post is priestly. Taking what is in your interest and skipping rest.

Friend!

So why you are so much worried about Pakistan`s support of Kashmir.

If Patel and India are ``Dada`` and hegemonist, it is important to put them in their correct place. Have you heard ``Allah Ganje Ko Nakhun Na De``. ``May God not give nails to Bald``

krashid #116

``Stick to Kashmir issue.``

I was replying to your mention of Hyderabad, Junagadh and Goa and I have been curious to know why Pakistanis think more of those issues than for eg how to fairly resolve armed violence between ethnic groups in Karachi, another legacy of Partition.

``Indian logic is criticized``

Which logic? The existence of the Indian state in its current form inspite of `principled` and delibrately nurtured Pakistani opposition to the concept?

``The only thing which was holding India was democracy and secularism which is fast disappearing. Considering the centrifugal tendencies in India throughout history proclaimed by Indian historians themselves, it is bound to happen. Peoples desire or verdict is never wrong.``

You seem to contradict yourself here. You somehow say both that India is disintegrating and that only economics is holding it together?

Wheres the peoples verdict in Pakistan? Where are the economic reasons? Wheres the principle of equality of all citizens even accepted in principle by the Pakistani polity?

One major justification for a nation to exist is how successfully it meets the different needs of its citizens. Is Pakistan really better off than India in that respect?

Sadhana

krashid#: 116

``Stick to Kashmir issue.``

Yes, Let us stick to the Kashmir issue. Read ``Defence Journal of Pakistan``. April issue gives a complete chronology of Kashmir issue. You will also find an article in an old issue from the first commandant of Pakistan Military Academy.

Also check the dates when various princely states were merged with Pakistan or India.

Attacks started in Kahsmir first. Pakistani army officers, may be against the directive of civilian leaders, lead the attackers. Only after attackers where at the outskirts of Srinagar, raping and looting kashmiris, that Patel dispatched Indian Army. It was at that juncture that Patel decided to act in Hyderabad and Junagadh also. Once Pakistan decided to resolve Kashmir issue by force, how could you expect Patel not to pay you back in same currency.

Check your history once again.

Regards

Re: Shankar # 97

Interesting counter-points! Just a few additional questions, and then I will answer your questions.

Granted Kargil brought about a level of patriotism (you should know by now how I feel about patriotism in general) in India not seen in a generation or more and Kargil, ironically, politically unified India more than ever, because it was due to Kargil that BJP won the election and you folks should thank Pakistan form saving you from all the constant elections and coalition governments, which were dominating the Indian political scene! You mentioned that the masses did not object to the most recent Indian defense hike, and my question is; when were the masses consulted about this? Did your politicians inform them where the money was going and what social programs would be suffering as consequence of this “patriotism”?

Shankar, the masses are never consulted in either India or Pakistan and they are merely told that they would have to suffer a little more in the name of the nation and for the love of the nation, that “p”word again, they should be proud to support the nation in its hour of peril! The word “masses” in India and Pakistan means a faceless, hopeless, deprived anguish of a humanity, whose raison d’vie is in the paraphrased words of Lord Alfred Tennyson and that is not to question why, but to suffer and die and silently lest they offend anyone with their foolish prayers of hope. My friend, the masses in the sub-continent have been brutalized by indifference and have been a victim of official apathy for too long and if given the opportunity, I am sure that their immediate concern would be more akin to a betterment in the eternal grind of their daily miseries than in equipping India and Pakistan with the ability to cremate and bury what ever may be left of their miserable existence in this world.

Getting to the crux of your question, Pakistan would have never have opted for a Geneva style declaration of war, because it would have been aborted under pressure from its international creditors. Even if we had managed to pull the operation off, there is a slim chance that it could have ended up radically altering the reality of LoC or for that matter, deciding the fate of Kashmir. No; we could have not won the war, because Pakistan’s economy would not have been able to withstand the strains of a wartime economy (even for 20 days) and this is especially true when you consider the non-existence amount of foreign exchange Pakistan has and its inability to exist without the financing of foreign loans, as a life supporting mechanism, for continually floating its aid dependent economy.

Shankar, I agree with you on the score that Pakistan is, presently, in a position where, as Clinton rightly told the Pakistanis, it is no longer in a position to influence events outside of a diplomatic venue. War is no longer an option for Pakistan to settle its outstanding questions with India and it hoped that India does not harbor the same illusions as well, because from reading and listening to the Indian leaders, it seems that the A-bomb is another bomb to them, but only a little bit bigger with a bigger bang!!! We know, at least the sane half of us, that we cannot defeat India militarily, but do people on your end of the fence realize that too? Do they also know they cannot defeat Pakistan militarily without irradiating a large part of Mother India?

Next time we will not invite your Prime Minister to Lahore, because we really do not want to hear him recite his “kavitias” anymore; the halwa-puri was for Nawaz Sharif, not for your esteemed leader! J

Yes; you’re correct that there is an impression in Pakistan, which seems to reinforce the perception that Pakistan is “bleeding” India in Kashmir. The problem is, in Pakistani political calculations, that Kashmir is a sacrosanct cause for Pakistan and its dilution will be met with a determined political reaction and no government in Pakistan, civilian or otherwise, can risk, nor it wants to hazard, its political fortunes arguing a justification for amending its position on Kashmir, as the economic realities of Pakistan are increasingly demanding that Pakistani position on Kashmir be reexamined. The perceptional problem, which is lending credence to these Pakistani assumptions, is that Pakistan thinks that it can afford to “bleed” India, but what it does not seem to realize, or in reality is not willing to admit, because of the vocal response it might get from certain quarters, is that Pakistani policy on Kashmir, in an economic sense, has entered a realm of diminishing returns and though we can, at an extremely prohibitive cost, continue with this policy, it will only compound our problems economically in the long term.

Hence, in a strategic sense, if this policy is followed and not amended, there is a possibility that the Pakistani economic situation, internally, will start to undermine Islamabad’s external policies, because the greatest threat to Pakistan’s security (my sarcastic posts to Satish, not withstanding) are from within the myriad contradictions of its own civilian society, which is in a state of institutional disintegration. Basically, you are right though your comments were understated on the dilemma of Pakistan’s Kashmiri policy; though we may be bleeding India, we are ourselves hemorrhaging internally, because of our Kashmiri policy and unless we stop this policy, Pakistan will eventually die from its own massive internal bleeding, which the trauma of Kashmir would have caused on our body politic !

Shankar, the bus diplomacy, I am sorry to inform you, was a waste of breath and when it happened, Bina Shah (I think) posted a wistful article on Chowk on its hope of a new promise and in one of those posts, I had warned the would be revelers of Indo-Pak détenté that they should not hold their breaths on its success. There will be peace between India and Pakistan, but not in our life times, because the Partition generation and the next two generations after it need to die out and peace will only come to the region when partition is a historic memory and not a personal familial experience.

Like Martin Luther King, Jr. said a long time ago in his speech in Washington, D.C.:
“I have seen the Promised Land and though I may not get with you to the Promised Land, I know that we, as a people, shall one day reach the Promised Land”.

Amen!

Ciao!

Sadhna#115

Stick to Kashmir issue.

You are again diverting.

Pakistan, has always accepted the fact of Junagadh and Hyderabad.

It is the Indian logic which is critized.

When it comes to Hyderabad, and Junagadh where Rajah has joined Pakistan, although majority of population was Hindu, it has to join India by force even. There is no other consideration except the will of the people.

When it comes to Kashmir, where majority of population is Muslim and Rajah joined India, it has to remain with India. This time democratic principle is superceded by secular principle.

You probably can now see more clearly.

As far as telling you that throughout history India has been divided into principilaties rather than one sub-continent, it has nothing to be ashamed of or getting irritated. This is the fact.

The only thing which was holding India was democracy and secularism which is fast disappearing. Considering the centrifugal tendencies in India throughout history proclaimed by Indian historians themselves, it is bound to happen.

Peoples desire or verdict is never wrong. It is mainly related to economic interest. In the short term an economic interest is not visible, but in a long term it is. Who would have thought in 1947 that one day Tata (or Berla I forgot) will acquire Tetley tea company from England.

If you have the guts to fight against people`s will do it. But be ready to pay the price.

You cannot have your cake and eat it too.

krashid #113 #114

Are you asking me to believe you have been ignoring all those detailed posts on Partition history posted by many chowkwallahs? In India we have a saying, `Listen to the whole Ramayana and in the end ask `who`s Sita?`` :-)

Post-Independence history of Jammu and Kashmir:

The more knowledgeable can speak in more detail. And I`m trying to find a rediff.com article which listed a number of books.

Just a general question: Why are Goa and Hyderabad(among others) so strong in the Pakistani imagination? Do Pakistanis have plans for those territories? For eg, right now, how will you resolve the current hot political issue in Goa, i.e.,language, Marathi vs Konkani. Would such a debate be considered anti-national? Would the resident population, mostly Catholic and Hindu, be barred from holding political office due to being nonMuslim? Would it be considered important what they think of blasphemy laws? And those Portugese carnival traditions celebrated with gusto?

And Hyderabad/AP: How about those demands for Rs 2/kg rice, subsidized cooking fuel and subsidized electricity for farmers? Would Naidu keep his CM job, being a nonMuslim? And those Naxalites taking up arms against landowners, what if their movement spread into feudal-dominated areas of Pakistan?

Sadhana

Sadhna#111

Also your assertion that Kashmir solution should not be forced from outside.

According to Harimau in his post militant Kashmir problem basically started in 1989.

Before that there was no foreign intervention to any significant extent.

If India is such as you are trying to tell us then what prevented India for 42 years to find the just solution for Kashmiris.

Sadhna!

Where did I say Pakistan was a single entity.

When dealing with Kashmir. You don,t want to take any argument. Most important what do Kashmiris want. Then other historical, Geographical, religious aspect.

Your argument is Kashmir is part of India. Reasoning changes with time like it is a danger to secularity and now national integeration.

Consider that to your response. Why Pakistanis are so much interested in Kashmir. Why Pakistan does not take care of Jihadis. Why there is India as enemy number one in curriculum and so forth and so forth.

When you are dealing with Kashmir. Bring argument for its favor or against.

Tell me if it is India bashing to say that Kashmiris should get their rights for self determination. If it is so that India has been criminal of South Africa, Vietnam bashimg etc.

If it is wrong to point out the historical, Geographical, Religious background for Indians, then they should first cede back Hyderabad, Junagadh and Goa.

Harimau #110

The point was two nation theory (or for that matter more than two nation theory) is still valid as is amply evidenced by Massacre of Sikhs and Kashmiris.

You contended that since a Sikh General was leading against Sikhs and Golden temple etc (implying that it was a fight between Sikhs and Sikhs). No it was fight of Sikhs against Indian Union.

I think that is enough.

krashid #109

``I did not get your point. The reason is you are forcing your argument not by logic but by Pakistan bashing. India was never a single political entity.``

``If you don`t believe wait``

``We are talking about desire of Kashmiri people.``

Lets talk of India and Indians and leave Kashmir aside totally for a minute.

If you are so logical, why force your argument by bashing India? Why tell an Indian that India is/was less of a political entity than your own country? What about the desire of the Indian people about India? If your `national ideology` is your holy cow, why deny others their own holy cows?

Thats what I meant by equality.

What Kashmiris need is the most just and sustainable solution for them, the closest possible version of their own holy cow, not some half-baked fundamentalist mishmash cooked up by someone else and forced on them by lawless radicals` guns.

Sadhana

Ref krashid #: 109

``Harimau! In response to your response that a sikh general was leading the massacre in Khalistan. I don`t know how dumb or intelligent you are?

If a Bengali was fighting with Pakistan forces in Bangladesh does it negate the Bengali claim.

Or a Muslim might be fighting alongwith Indian forces in Kashmir. Does it negate their movement. Or vietnamese were fighting alongwith Americans. Does it negate their claim.

That is enough for you.``

No, that is NOT enough for me. Tell me exactly what is the status of the demand for Khalistan today? Other then Gurmikh Singh Aulak, the self-styled President of Khalistan who is sitting safely in Washington, DC, is there anyone who cares about Khalistan? There is a difference between Bangladesh and Khalistan.

Even Kashmir was quiet till 1989 and will become quiet again when the Hurriat decides to contest the elections and when they win a substantial number of seats in the J&K legislature. Stop exporting terrorism. Even Bangladesh officially admitted supporting ISI activities in the Northeastern states of India. So stop believing the propaganda that all these people are spontaneously rising up against India.

Harimau! In response to your response that a sikh general was leading the massacre in Khalistan. I don`t know how dumb or intelligent you are?

If a Bengali was fighting with Pakistan forces in Bangladesh does it negate the Bengali claim.

Or a Muslim might be fighting alongwith Indian forces in Kashmir. Does it negate their movement. Or vietnamese were fighting alongwith Americans. Does it negate their claim.

That is enough for you.

Sadhna!

I did not get your point. The reason is you are forcing your argument not by logic but by Pakistan bashing.

India was never a single political entity. Only in English rule it became. Still at that time there were semi autonomous state like Kashmir. So how come it has to go with India.

Politically, geographically, historically, religiously, ethnically it should go with Pakistan at the time of independence (with the instrument of accesion! compare Junagadh, Hyderabad etc)

The people of Kashmir should be a deciding authority regarding their future. But plebiscite will never be held by India to find that out.

So according to one friend it is realpolitik. So if you have not learned from history. Learn it now realpolitik is the people.

If you don`t believe wait.

I can very clearly see your argument.

The main argument is Kashmir should be a part of India whatever Kashmiris desire has nothing to do with it. Now for that argument reasoning has changed with time. Initially it was the Indian secularism which was in danger. Now it is the Indian union which is in danger. You are taliking about annexing Kashmir whatever the people`s desire. We are talking about desire of Kashmiri people. The main argument remains same.

India wants Kashmir to be part of it at any cost. Pakistan wants desire of Kashmiris to be the determining factor.

You are wrong on another account. Foreign aid does not lead to a very strong movement of independence, whether it be Kashmir, Afghanistan, Vietnam or any other country. Take this out of your mind.

FerozK

Re post #103.

I agree with (& applaud) your post, except for the first para.

Your definition of ``walk the walk`` is nothing but pure Pak propaganda. 2 articles on Chowk (by Profs Hoodbhoy & Nayyar) have attested to the fact that Pakistanis have been fed that drivel right from primary school.

If you guys believe that India`s goal is (a)destroy Pakistan--like a scorched earth policy or (b) annex Pakistan, then thats unfortunate. However, it certainly not the agenda of the overwhelming majority of Indians (except for a few ``patriot/idiots``).

Lets look at both those ridiculous scenarios. (thats providing it was realistically possible--which I doubt)

a)Destroying ANY country is morally repugnant. Whether Pakistanis want to accept it or not, we Indians do have a sense of morality.

Even from a pragmatic perspective, it is absolutely foolish. It will come at a wrenching cost of Indian lives (even in the prenuclear days) & bankrupt our economy. Not to mention, we would probably be excommunicated by the rest of the world, especially the Arabs--whose oil we cant live without.

b)Annexing Pakistan!! Are you crazy?! We have enough problems of our own, why would we want yours?! It would be analagous to eating a bad piece of meat & dying of food poisoning. The preindependance generation has either died or going senile. I dont know of any Indian born after partition who wants Pakistan back (even in the unlikely event that Pakistan wanted it).

As far as we are concerned ,Pakistan is here to stay whether we like it or not.

Have we walked the walk?-- sure we have! IMO, winning a war means achieving the final objective. In 65, our objective was to prevent Ayub Kahan`s infiltrators from capturing Kashmir. In 71,it was liberating Bangladesh. From our perspective we achieved those & hence won both wars.

So let me clarify what India`s ``resolve`` means --(in the here & now). The mujahadeen may kill a few jawans & cause trouble. But we will NEVER let them take Kashmir. Kargil`s legacy was to make India (hindus & muslims, etc alike) rally around that resolve.

The mujahadeen prevailed over the Soviet Union in Afganistan because you had ``sugar daddys`` like the US & S Arabia. They could dip into their pockets for unlimited funds & armaments. Besides the common man in the Soviet Union did`nt have his heart in the Afgan war. A fanatical zeal to die in the name of jehad by a bunch of semiliterate mercinaries wont win you an inch of territory. Ask the Palestinians if you dont believe us.

{{India is our enemy and with an enemy you certainly do not fight according the marquis of Queensberry rules! All is fair in love and war.}}

Ha Ha, good one Feroz. I KNOW you are more intelligent than that. You may not fight according to the marquis of Queensberry rules. But surely you would want to fight according to the rules of the Geneva convention --Pakistan is a signatory isnt it? Besides, the Pakistani military is the most honorable & trutworthy institution of your country ,isnt it? Even Gen Mushy didnt dare make that comment--he would have been eaten alive by the world leadership. I guess he chose the lesser of the 2 evils & said that the Pakistani military wasnt involved.

As far as the rest of your post--bravo!!

Peace.

Ref krashid #: 100

``If you don`t believe look at the massacre of Sikhs by Indian forces with the backing of whole nation. Massacre of Kashmiris by Indian forces with the backing of whole nation.``

The attack on the Golden Temple was led by a Sikh general of the Indian Army.

The Punjab Police was under K.P.S. Gill, another Sikh.

There are Sikhs with undying loyalty to India who recognize the threat to the country from terrorists trained and supplied from abroad.

If you don`t believe that the Khalistani Sikhs were funded by General Zia, you can read any history book written by a Western historian. Unless you think that Indians are writing under those names.

krashid #100

Oh, and about Sikhs. I would be interested to know why an ex-ISI chief is head of the Pakistani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee?

Sadhana

Re: 103

Feroze,

I just read your reply, and I appreciate what you write. I may write a long response to what you have written, and again I may not, because there is not much that we differ on, except the all pervasive misunderstandings that abound between Indians and Pakistanis. Unfortunate.

So, let me just reply in short to the most pertinant point in your mail. I am as strong a `hindu nationalist` as they come, and believe me, there is no `walk the walk` in our agenda. We really dont want to hurt Pakistan or anyone else, and most of us know that our long term interests lie in stability in the region and no wars. That was what Vajpayee had taken to Pakistan with him. `Zang na hone denge.` And dont worry, ndians are not planning for a war or anything like that, no matter what you think. They have much more important things to plan.

All we want is to be left alone to concentrate on our economy. The fashion in India nowadays is not war with Pakistan, but trying to be an economic superpower in the world in a realistically near future. That is what drives us at present, believe it or not.

We Indians just have had enough - enough of terrorism, enough of being badmouthed, enough of treachery. But dont think that it is going to result in aggressive militarism, a.k.a. Pakistan. More likely, as immediate South Asia goes less and less important to us, it is goint to be a sort of benign neglect, if you guys will let us.

We know about your obsession with kashmir, and maybe if you guys climb down from your shrill, violent paraniod best, something could be arranged. But NO Indian government is going to let you take Kashmir under blackmail. NEVER. And no matter what happens, you can take that as final.

And in any case, I guess no Indian government is going to allow Kashmir to go to Pakistan, even peacefully, though I am not sure of that as much as I am sure of the previous thing. A sort of quasi-independent valley, with Jammu and Ladakh going to India, is about the best I can think of.

So, please shut down your paranoia machine. There is no one out there to get you. there is no hidden agenda in India to `walk the walk`. All Indians want is to forget you exist and get on with their lives.

krashid #100

I have been observing posts on chowk for 3-4months too, and I can return the compliment.

I can see what is expected from a `well-wisher` is to `bend over`. No relationship as equals whether agreeing or disagreeing is acceptable to some mentalities.

Sadhana

Re: Satish # 95

Just one caveat to your post…..you should have finished the job when you had the chance and now, my friend, it will cost you a lot more. That is what I meant by “walk the walk”, because you Indians always left the job half done. You can do it again, no one is denying that, but are you willing to pay the asking price this time around? Given your resentment against Pakistan for what you construe as the treachery of Lahore, just remember one thing: India is our enemy and with an enemy you certainly do not fight according the marquis of Queensberry rules! All is fair in love and war.

Satish, think clearly before you decide, because there are a lot of Pakistanis who are quite prepared to die though they are, thankfully, a small minority, but thanks to your anti-Pakistani obsession their numbers are increasing daily. India can push us to the wall, but what happens then, I can not say for sure, because that would be our, both sane Pakistanis and Indians, worst nightmare! That is what I suggested to Shankar in my post to his post and that is what I am suggesting to you; beware the charms of patriotism, for all roads to glory, but lead to the grave!

Incidentally, you might be wondering so allow me to set the record straight. I detest patriotism of the variety, which is so common in our crowded, congested, and polluted homelands. Patria amor, Latin for love of country, never suggested that it should be utilized as an excuse to deny the basic necessities to a vast majority of population, whose only unforgivable sin was that they had the misfortune of being born in the sub-continent. I cry for this beautiful land, India and Pakistan, because there is so much potential in its vast reservoirs of aching humanity that it irks and angers me, when I see this God given talent being held hostage to the whims of an indifferent leadership. The only thing, which is keeping us bonded to the yoke of past is our blind devotion to the idolatry of ideology urged upon by a sense of patriotism, which is neither patriotic nor based on patriotism, but is a visionless mordant echo of our own lack of imaginations.

For the record, I am really critical of Pakistan’s policy in the whole of Kargil episode and in other things, but if anyone assumes that I will willingly condone the other sides’ arguments and logic, then they are mistaken. Just because I hold Pakistan responsible for a host of problems, which ails it presently, I am not necessarily going to offer a carté blanche to the Indian arguments either. In fact, I hold the leaderships of both the nations, not the people, as responsible for the mess, which they have bestowed upon us. I have been absent from Chowk for the last seven months and upon my return, I was horrified to discover that patriotism had reared its ugly head here too. Patriots, in my opinion, are scoundrels wrapped in piety and honor without a shred of common decency in them. Shakespeare once said, “let us kill all the lawyers” and I will rephrase that to say, “let us kill all the patriots”.

Satish, there is a perceptional misunderstanding about my posts on Chowk, because since I have been away, there is a new group of interacters, active on Chowk, who do not know my inclinations and thus, are willing to label me as just another mindless Pakistani uttering the same ill-logical rhetoric. I search for my old friends; Ras, Temporal, Bina Shah, BG, Narain, Slink, Godot, and many more, but alas, my old friends have disappeared and faded away in the mists of this virtual world, where we once engaged in this cyber tete-a-tete.

Incidentally, if anyone reading this rather long and boring post happens to know where the whereabouts of Rishi, please let me know.

Satish, my friend, my hatred for patriotism began one warm summer day in Washington, D.C. nearly sixteen years ago, when I was visiting the Vietnam Wall; another memorial to patriotism, when I saw a mother reading a letter to her son, who had been dead a long time ago, and informing him, through her letter, how she spent her year. Later, I was to learn that she would come to the Wall once a year and read a letter to her son telling him about another year without him. How many mothers in India and Pakistan have been without their sons, husbands, fathers and uncles who never came home, because of patriotism?

Does it not strike you as ironic that in India and Pakistan patriotism has its most ardent supporters in those who will never hear a shot fired in anger and those who have never served a day in the front lines are the most patriotic of them all! So, my friend, instead of hurling abuses at each other, which at the end of day though it may have made us happy, and will not change the reality of our mutual nuclear nightmares one iota, let us find a common ground and see if we can transcend the abyss of acrimony, which divides us. Let us forget the infamies of the past and start anew in the hopes that we may, for once, shall be able to leave the past behind. The future of India and Pakistan lies in its citizens taking the affairs of their future away from its leadership and engaging in peaceful endeavors on an individual basis, because our governments are not interested in peace and they are not interested in our welfare.

Ciao!

Re: Satish # 95

Just one caveat to your post…..you should have finished the job when you had the chance and now, my friend, it will cost you a lot more. That is what I meant by “walk the walk”, because you Indians always left the job half done. You can do it again, no one is denying that, but are you willing to pay the asking price this time around? Given your resentment against Pakistan for what you construe as the treachery of Lahore, just remember one thing: India is our enemy and with an enemy you certainly do not fight according the marquis of Queensberry rules! All is fair in love and war.

Satish, think clearly before you decide, because there are a lot of Pakistanis who are quite prepared to die though they are, thankfully, a small minority, but thanks to your anti-Pakistani obsession their numbers are increasing daily. India can push us to the wall, but what happens then, I can not say for sure, because that would be our, both sane Pakistanis and Indians, worst nightmare! That is what I suggested to Shankar in my post to his post and that is what I am suggesting to you; beware the charms of patriotism, for all roads to glory, but lead to the grave!

Incidentally, you might be wondering so allow me to set the record straight. I detest patriotism of the variety, which is so common in our crowded, congested, and polluted homelands. Patria amor, Latin for love of country, never suggested that it should be utilized as an excuse to deny the basic necessities to a vast majority of population, whose only unforgivable sin was that they had the misfortune of being born in the sub-continent. I cry for this beautiful land, India and Pakistan, because there is so much potential in its vast reservoirs of aching humanity that it irks and angers me, when I see this God given talent being held hostage to the whims of an indifferent leadership. The only thing, which is keeping us bonded to the yoke of past is our blind devotion to the idolatry of ideology urged upon by a sense of patriotism, which is neither patriotic nor based on patriotism, but is a visionless mordant echo of our own lack of imaginations.

For the record, I am really critical of Pakistan’s policy in the whole of Kargil episode and in other things, but if anyone assumes that I will willingly condone the other sides’ arguments and logic, then they are mistaken. Just because I hold Pakistan responsible for a host of problems, which ails it presently, I am not necessarily going to offer a carté blanche to the Indian arguments either. In fact, I hold the leaderships of both the nations, not the people, as responsible for the mess, which they have bestowed upon us. I have been absent from Chowk for the last seven months and upon my return, I was horrified to discover that patriotism had reared its ugly head here too. Patriots, in my opinion, are scoundrels wrapped in piety and honor without a shred of common decency in them. Shakespeare once said, “let us kill all the lawyers” and I will rephrase that to say, “let us kill all the patriots”.

Satish, there is a perceptional misunderstanding about my posts on Chowk, because since I have been away, there is a new group of interacters, active on Chowk, who do not know my inclinations and thus, are willing to label me as just another mindless Pakistani uttering the same ill-logical rhetoric. I search for my old friends; Ras, Temporal, Bina Shah, BG, Narain, Slink, Godot, and many more, but alas, my old friends have disappeared and faded away in the mists of this virtual world, where we once engaged in this cyber tete-a-tete.

Incidentally, if anyone reading this rather long and boring post happens to know where the whereabouts of Rishi, please let me know.

Satish, my friend, my hatred for patriotism began one warm summer day in Washington, D.C. nearly sixteen years ago, when I was visiting the Vietnam Wall; another memorial to patriotism, when I saw a mother reading a letter to her son, who had been dead a long time ago, and informing him, through her letter, how she spent her year. Later, I was to learn that she would come to the Wall once a year and read a letter to her son telling him about another year without him. How many mothers in India and Pakistan have been without their sons, husbands, fathers and uncles who never came home, because of patriotism?

Does it not strike you as ironic that in India and Pakistan patriotism has its most ardent supporters in those who will never hear a shot fired in anger and those who have never served a day in the front lines are the most patriotic of them all! So, my friend, instead of hurling abuses at each other, which at the end of day though it may have made us happy, and will not change the reality of our mutual nuclear nightmares one iota, let us find a common ground and see if we can transcend the abyss of acrimony, which divides us. Let us forget the infamies of the past and start anew in the hopes that we may, for once, shall be able to leave the past behind. The future of India and Pakistan lies in its citizens taking the affairs of their future away from its leadership and engaging in peaceful endeavors on an individual basis, because our governments are not interested in peace and they are not interested in our welfare.

Ciao!

Re: Concerned, Shankar....

Sorry folks, I just ended up with some paperwork that needs to be taken care of ASAP. I will, though, answer your question in detail and post it to this interact site; keep scanning and you will see it.

Shankar, I guess we agree more than we disagree! First impressions on Chowk are always one sided. I will post a reply to your post as soon as I can.

Thanks for your patience folks!

Ciao.

Siagalph!

I don`t know much about the notion of common Bengal and how valid it is.

But Bengalis have been very impressive all along my life.

In the intellectual field we have a saying for sharpness of Bengalis ``This man has drink the water of Bengal.``

They were quite good in studies even the few who were in then West Pakistan.

There is a memorabilia at Sears tower, in Chicago which is just a reflection of bright mind of Bengal. I don`t know if there is any other NOBEL laureate from this region except Salam and Tagore.

Sadhna!

Reading your and other Indian post, I think two nation theory (or for that matter more than two nation theory) was not only valid in 1947 but also to this day.

If you don`t believe look at the massacre of Sikhs by Indian forces with the backing of whole nation. Massacre of Kashmiris by Indian forces with the backing of whole nation.

And you know action speaks louder than empty words (empty words because in a course of 3-4 months on this board I have seen Indians changing their color from a great friend of Pakistan to their true mentality and are really speaking up their mind and showing their true worth)

mithuna #90

What you say makes the issue pretty clear. Also remember, there seems to be no rethinking of the ideology(TNT) which is still the instrument of choice by India`s neighbours, to carry subcontinentals on both sides of the border farther and farther away from each other even today, ideologically and politically.

If TNT is indeed junked in future by India`s neighbours(it doesnot seem so at this point in time), then not only Bangladesh, but India, too gets for itself renewed options and the benefit of retooling of nationalities and boundaries. But thats a fact that is sought to be denied recognition by loud cries of `hegemony` and victimhood.

Sadhana

ferozk,

i am afraid you have not addressed the issue that i raised in my post. i am not interested in linking siachen or the intricacies of the planning of kargil. all i wondered was how you could call kargil a `brilliant tactical operation` considering the prevailing mood between indo/pak at that time. that`s all. if you choose not to answer that, that`s fine as well. my post was #92.

FerozK

Re # 94

There is absolutely no denying that RAW failed miserably. Indians have freely admitted that in every post Kargil analysis.

RAW is a bumbling ineffective agency. Something for Pakistan to consider. I wonder why Pakistan blames RAW whenever there is a terrorist act commited in Pakistan?! They just dont have the capability to do that.

India has raised her defence spending by 28%. You are right that the money could have been better spent elsewhere. However, there was no objection to the defence hike from the Indian masses. Why?!--because Kargil made Indians resolute that Pakistan will not try that stunt again & get away with it. I`m not saying that thats good or bad. After Kargil there has been an unprecented fervor of patriotism in India, from people of diverse political opinions & religions--not seen since 71. If Pakistan wants to take credit for that, thanks a lot!

If Pakistan had declared war (as per the Geneva convention) & then pulled off a Kargil--it would have been a both, strategic & tactical victory for Pakistan. You would have won the battle. Would you have won the war?--well there`s no sense trying to debate that because neither of us will agree. So the next time Pakistan plans a Kargil, please dont invite our PM to Lahore & feed him halwa-puri.Even your allies consider that bad manners. You know you cant defeat India without the support of your allies.

Pakistan has this undying notion that ``bleeding`` India on Kashmir will ultimately prevail. It only strengtens India`s resolve. Besides, do you not agree that the Kashmir policy is bleeding Pakistan too? Even when Pakistan`s economy was strong, you could`nt budge us out of Kashmir. Right now Pakistan`s economy is precariously anemic.It wouldnt be wise to bleed anymore.

This obsession with Kashmir is sending BOTH nations spiralling down into the same sewer. As an Indian I freely admit that we are not without fault. In fact, I would really like Kashmir to be an independant neutral state. I was hoping that the bus diplomacy would be the first tentative step towards that goal. Unfortunately, Kargil destroyed it.

Ref Ferozk #: 94

You ask {Firstly, India was mislead and there was a definate Indian intelligence failure, but even more crucial than that, the question which still remains unanswered is what was the reason accounting for the delay in the Indian response to the incursions. Why was there no effective C3I between New Delhi and the troops in the region? Which link, in the Indian Army`s chain of command, was the weakest? Why didn`t the Indian forces pick up the tell-tale signs of activity in the region? How come the much vaunted RAW failed in assessing Pakistani intentions? Why were Indian troops in Kashmir, who are used to urban/counter-insurgency operations, were given the task of clearing the heights, a mission they were not trained for, when India had a mountain brigade in the region, which could easily have done the job. Why did New Delhi tried to minimize the importance of the infilterations and did not react and seemed keen to ignore the warnings of its field commanders who had been warning it? Why was India forced to buy Bofors 155mm shells from South Africa, during the height of active combat operations, to sustain its artillery units in the region? Why was the much celebrated Indian industrial defense complex so inadequate in supplying the combat needs of the Indians that India had to find and buy mountain warfare kits internationally to equip its forces with?}

STUPIDITY.

Re: 94

The sheer shamelessness of some Pakistanis blows me away! Do you think that all the things that happened so far, including ninety thousand prisoners of war in 71, and your prime minister running to US, cap in hand, begging for the war to finish, was not `walk the walk`? What bravado!

As far as your admiration of treachery and perfidy shown by you people in Lahore, well, it fits your personality.

Re: Shankar # 84

First of all, starting, with Nawaz Sharif running off to Washington was simply humilating for Pakistan and it was the final coup d`grace as far as Pakistan was concerned internationally. Kargil was, strategically, a defeat for Pakistan, but it was Phyrric in the sense that it forced the Indians to increase their defense expenditures over 28 percent. India, you are free to disagree with me on this, could have spent that money in better ways and on projects vital to India`s long term interests; education, poverty reduction etc. Due to Kargil, India has embarked on a military spending spree and military spending does, regardless of what anyone thinks, put pressure on the economy to continually justify the military`s share of resources.

As to the involvement of the Pakistan Army, rest assured that it was fighting on the hills in Kargil despite whatever you may have heard. Since you seem to be a patriotic Indian who also seems to have a thin skin when it comes Indian flaws and you get a wee bit too defensive and shrill, not to mention a little anxious, I would encourage you to call Pakistan all the names in all the books in the world if that makes you happy, but please do so in the understanding that it will not alter the basic facts of the Kargil operation.

Firstly, India was mislead and there was a definate Indian intelligence failure, but even more crucial than that, the question which still remains unanswered is what was the reason accounting for the delay in the Indian response to the incursions. Why was there no effective C3I between New Delhi and the troops in the region? Which link, in the Indian Army`s chain of command, was the weakest? Why didn`t the Indian forces pick up the tell-tale signs of activity in the region? How come the much vaunted RAW failed in assessing Pakistani intentions? Why were Indian troops in Kashmir, who are used to urban/counter-insurgency operations, were given the task of clearing the heights, a mission they were not trained for, when India had a mountain brigade in the region, which could easily have done the job. Why did New Delhi tried to minimize the importance of the infilterations and did not react and seemed keen to ignore the warnings of its field commanders who had been warning it? Why was India forced to buy Bofors 155mm shells from South Africa, during the height of active combat operations, to sustain its artillery units in the region? Why was the much celebrated Indian industrial defense complex so inadequate in supplying the combat needs of the Indians that India had to find and buy mountain warfare kits internationally to equip its forces with?

Shankar, next time you mimic empty rhetoric at me, please make sure you have your facts right, as I am not intimidated by patriotic Indian nonsense. You can blame Pakistan all you like and I have nothing against that either, but you should be able to admit your mistakes instead of blaming it on Pakistan, as is the raison d`etre of every Indian. In fact, to be honest with you, I am still waiting for an offical Indian white or saffron paper/report on the Orissa Cyclone and how it was masterminded by the evil ISI! :)

You are absolutely right that trust is earned and not demanded. In case of India and Pakistan, there is and can be no trust, because like you, we do not always trust India and just like you said, our trust can also not be demanded by the Indians either!

Admiral Yamamato not withstanding, please do not raise the spectre of Indian resolve. You know perfectly where we are located and you are more than welcome to acquint us with your dreaded resolve. We have been waiting 53 plus years to see what the Indian resolve is, so we would be greatful to you if you could show it. You folks really know how to talk the talk, but when are you going to walk the walk? :)

A general note to all Indians and Pakistanis: Please stop being so patriotic that it lessens and blinds your ability to see the truth, because it is due to the ``patriots`` in India and Pakistan that there has been no meaningful attempts to normalize the relations and when we all are incinerated in flash of patriotism we would have belately realized that, in order to be a patriot, to have to be alive! Dead patriots do not help anyones` cause de celebre!

Re: concerned (sorry I forgot your post #)

Right you are sir!!!!

Kargil has definately conceptulized a conventional war scenrio within the rubric of a nuclear stand-off and that my friend, is highly dangerous. I think you have hit the nail right on the head, because that is what is scaring the Americans the most since no one, not even V.P. Malik, knows where or how a conventional war is going to end!!!

Concerned, you`re on the right track, bud, just keep following your instincts. Kargil was about Siachen and Pakistan`s attempts to cut the Indian road link to their troops there. If the war had lasted 14-21 days more, India would have had a difficult time in replenishing its troops there for the winter and they would have been forced to withdraw to a lower alititude. I wrote about the op in an article, on Chowk. Just type in my name, f r khan in the search engine and you will find it: if not, let me know and I will track it down and post the link for you! That article will tell you the reasons for Kargil, as seen from the Pakistani military`s perspective.

Ciao!

Re: Shammi #86

Thanks for the advice. Actually, I read it when it first came out although I lent my copy of it to a friend a while ago and have never gotten it back! If you had read some of my other posts, you`d see that I`ve mentioned it more than once.

Zabed #89

Niazi was one of the worst possible choices to command E. Pakistan. No one is quite sure why he was chosen. There was/is some speculation that he was chosen because he was a fairly junior major general and none of the senior officers wanted what was sure to be a disaster of a posting. However, there were other, more competent, junior major generals available even if no lieutenant general wanted the signal honor of being GOC Eastern Command. On the other hand, Niazi did talk a great fight--its only when the crunch came that he showed how worthless he was.

While no one would ever accuse Tikka Khan of being an intellectual general, he was certainly a competent one in that, given a battle plan, he knew how to carry it out. Niazi, from what I`ve been able to gather, fancied himself the bluff and hearty commander type that leads from the front, shabash jawan bahut acha, and planning is for wimps. While ``l`audace, l`audace, toujours l`audace!`` sounds great, it didn`t work in Napoleonic times and it won`t work now. Tikka Khan`s plan for dealing with an Indian invasion of E. Pakistan was for most of the Army to retreat to Burma while the rest defended Dacca--plans for which were put up to Niazi by the G1 Ops Eastern Command several times but he brushed them off saying that an attacking army needed no defensive planning!

Tikka Khan was a realist and had contingency plans based on his assessment that E. Pakistan could not be held against the Indians. Any competent general, not just Tikka Khan, would have done a better job than Niazi. As far as Niazi`s book is concerned, it is self-serving tripe although his basic point that E. Pakistan was lost in the West is a valid one. As for the rest of it, one gets the impression of a victorious attacking army that suddenly surrenders!

Ferozk,

Thank you for the response. I have read various articles (pakistani and otherwise) on the intent of kargil and as far as I understand, none of those are able to figure out what the real intent was. Establishing a new loc/internationalization of the issue are commonly cited as the motivators. Some also point out that the very purpose was to derail the peace overtures by nawaj and to show who the real bosses are. Anyway, that was not my point.

You said that military tactics are about ensuring surprise . I would agree with that – but that is only if there is some sort of declared war /intention of war , e.g. during desert storm/fox or 1971 or the WWs. What appalls me are the accolades like `brilliant tactical operation`, with respect to the environment at that time. I mean if you hit a person when he thinks you might be a friend, it can not be called a brilliant tactic, or can it? It should really be called cowardice. You can of course differ with this view.

I would have also thought that a pause to the indian bravados after the may tests, was given by the chagai tests. On the other hand, kargil exposed that a limited conventional war could be fought despite the nuclear presence on both sides.

There is a coup d`etat in progress in Fiji. A ``failed businessman`` and the son of a former PM, with the help of a few armed men, is holding the entire cabinet and parliament members hostage, has declared the constitution dead and a friend, the new PM. This is what happened in Pakistan on a larger scale. The apparent legitimacy (with rags like the Dawn deferential to the ``CE``)there comes from having more fire power on your side. Thuggery is thuggery despite the scale.

Re: West Bengal and Greater Bangla.

Let us see the pros and cons of the deal for West Bengalis. Here`s my understanding of the conflicting ``pulls`` and ``pushes`` many West Bengalis may feel with respect to India and Bangladesh.

West Bengal w.r.t. India:

Push factors : ethnic/cultural dominance {or fear of dominance} by the ``Hindi-ans``

Pull factors : economy, religious affinity

West Bengal w.r.t. Bangladesh:

Push factors : Religious Persecution, {or fear of persecution}, Economy.

Pull factors : ethnic/cultural proximity.

If the ( push-from-India + pull-from-Bangladesh ) becomes greater than the (pull-from-India + push-from-Bangladesh), one could imagine that West Bengal will also aspire towards the goal of Greater Bangla. (Yes, I know the ``Math`` is simplistic, but you get the idea.)

As things stand today, I believe Indian federalism has evolved to a point where the Bengali identity is in no threat within the Indian union. The economy is doing better than Bangladesh`s. And with the new emphasis on people-to-people contacts, (E.g. bus service, easing of visa procedures etc) West Bengal can reap the benefits of cultural interaction with Bangladesh too.

In this situation, anyone who wants to work towards Greater Bangla, should concentrate on improving the ``pull factors`` and reducing the ``push factors``. I.e. As Sadhana pointed out, improve the economy and reduce communal intimidation/violence.

-Mithuna

Fuzair #71

How did Gen. Tikka become better than Niazi to u???? In 1965, it was Gen. Abrar who commanded the 6th armor division and fought the battle for sialkot and according to Niazi`s book Tikka did nothing special at that time!! Using 3 divisions to crush baluch doesn`t make him a good general. But he was good in PR I must say...

FerozK

Re #84

You said

{{If the bus diplmacy was a ruse, then it worked and credit must be given to the Pakistanis for fooling Indians. The fact that the Indians needed a shepard to tell them about the Pakistani troops in the Dras-Kargil region does not detract anything from the Pakistanis. Despite the end result, the Kargil operation was a piece of brilliant tactical application and it caught the Indians off guard.}}

You are absolutely right!

However, its like Pakistan losing a tennis match & patting herself on the back & saying `` Wow!did you see that fantastic ace I served?!; it blew the other person away!``

That phyrric victory showed India (& the rest of the world) that Pakistan is a backstabbing nation & should not be trusted. Even your die hard ally like China abandoned you.

Yes, Indian intelligence was humiliated as it was caught off guard. How do you compare that with NS running to Washington, hat in hand, telling Clinton that the right hand did`nt know what the left hand was doing?

The mastermind, Gen Musharraf, publicly stated that the Pakistan military was not involved. That just proved that he is a duplitious bold faced liar. To say that being the COAS at that time, he was ``just doing his job`` is a lousy excuse, IMO.

Now he`s whinning that India doesnt want to talk --well, General sahib, trust is something one EARNS, not demands.

In the movie ``Tora Tora Tora``, Admn Yamamato said ``I`m afraid all we have done is awaken a sleeping giant & given him a terrible resolve``. India may not be a giant, but dont underestimate her resolve.

Well-written, spot-on and an eye-opener. In my view, most of the Pakistanis living abroad do not have a comprehensive understanding of the ground realities in Pakistan, specially those who are away for a long time. However, your understanding and intellect truly reflects your academic qualifications.

I`ll just add a few points:

First of all, there is no such thing as ``achieving one`s objectives without setting any time limit for it``. Even if the timeframe is a vague one, it has to be there. Is there any project, in any field, that does not have scheduling at its inception? For those, that dont have any, the results have been catastrophic. So an objective is merely a desire, if not defined concretely in terms of time.

Such vagueness and absence of concreteness is evident from the so called ``seven-point agenda``. Afterall, what do you exactly mean by improving economy and removing inter-provincial harmony? Can you stand up one day and say, hey, I have acheived inter-provincial harmony? The entire footing of this regime is week, very week and faulty, the stalwarts of the government are uninspiring and passive.

Pervez Musharraf has stated much and contradicted it even more. First press conference (Nov 1, 1999) and he said ``I`ll be the only political person from army, rest of army will be apolitical`` Today what we have is everything but what he stated. Corps Commanders are calling the shots and even the influential non-army people are retired army officers.

I totally agree with the author when he says that how can such an unhealthy environment, where power is so much concentrated in one person and there is an absolute lack of checks and balances, can yield a healthy atmosphere?

And lastly, why should we trust a person with our fate, who was promoted out-of-turn and out-of-merit by an autocratic ruler as COAS, and he did not hesitate to supercede his seniors who had far better careers than his? A person whose incompetence at the top level was exposed so early by his planning and handling of Kargil, a person whose appointment as Chairman Joint Chief of Staff Committee was controversial, forcing a senior force chief to resign, and he grabbed the Chief Executive seat by brute force? Why should I trust my destiny with such a person?

I believe that before all `experts` on 1971 affairs in this forum should read

War and Secession : Pakistan, India, and the Creation of Bangladesh

by Richard Sisson, Leo E. Rose. Paperback (August 1991) available from Amazon.com before commenting further on India, Pakistan, & Bangladesh issues.

This is a well-written book by dispassionate historians, not by emotional and biased `sub-continentals`

sigalph

All semantics and polite talk cannot hide the plain fact: TwoNationTheory and Greater Bangla are mutually exclusive. It is either one or the other. Cannot have one and then clamour to negate it with the other, like every fifty years blood-enemies turn into blood-brothers and vice versa. All those hundreds of thousands dead during Partition and `lesser` Banglas still getting short shrift these days.

`Sweeping the streets`

krashid wouldnot mind this type of arrogance, I`m sure, its the homegrown variety.

Sadhana

Re: concerned # 77

The reason, as you pointed out, about Kargil being a brilliant tactical plan was because the Indian intelligence did not pick up the Pakistani trends and intentions. If the bus diplmacy was a ruse, then it worked and credit must be given to the Pakistanis for fooling Indians. The fact that the Indians needed a shepard to tell them about the Pakistani troops in the Dras-Kargil region does not detract anything from the Pakistanis. Despite the end result, the Kargil operation was a piece of brilliant tactical application and it caught the Indians off guard.

Military tactics are about ensuring suprise and not allowing the enemy to discern ones` intentions and in this scope, the Pakistani plan worked and what doomed the plan, was the Pakistani failures to institute an effective logistical support to the initial suprise.

Concerned, just look at the plan without any national bias and seek to understand what it was trying to do and whether you disagree or not with its intentions is your prilivilge. There was nothing wrong in the plan`s tactical aspirations, but it was the execution of that plan by Pakistan, which left a lot to be desired. However, it was a Phyrric victory for Pakistan. It confirmed to the Indians that though they could not conventionally defeat Pakistan without bloodying their own noses and gave pause to the Indian bravados after the May 13, 1998 tests.

Re: zz #

To find that information, please go to the offical websites of the German Army and its alpine/mountain training school located just outside of of Munchen/Munich. Go to the West Point`s official web site and the site of the American War College and scan through their course requirements/class descriptions. Also, please try the American mountain warfare school`s web page. The American armed forces have a huge training facility in Colorado for training their troops in mountain warfare/tactics.

The info is out there, but it is not available in your local newspapers and also, if you have the time, please surf through the specialized defense articles, like Jane`s, which cover such topics. The reason that I came to know about this info, was because some of my friends are in the American special forces and they told me they were being taught to ``avoid the mistakes made by the Pakistanis`` by their instructors.

Also, read the report presented by General Antony Zinni, the commander of the American Central Command, to the congress just prior to Clinton`s visit to the sub-continent. In that Zinni urged that Pentagon would like to keep its ``contacts`` open with Pakistan for the reasons of ``interoperability`` of their forces.

Why?

Despite Pakistan internal mess and externally bad image, Pakistan`s geo-strategic location at the enterance of the Persian Gulf and its avenues of access to the Central Asian Republics, especially in light of the CARs oil and gas desposits and their access to the outside world, can not be ignored by the Americans, no matter how much India seeks to convince the Americans otherwise.

ZZ, just for your info, given the fact that the Iraqi air force was neutered by the Americans within 24hrs of the Desert Storm, did you know that the Iraqi air forces` attacks on the Iranian oil platform, near Bandar Abbas as instructed by their French inteructors, were studied by the American air force as a classic example on how to conduct attacks on oil platforms in the congested airspace of the Persian Gulf.

Just because a side loses, does not mean it can not teach you a few new tricks! :)

Re: Fuzair # 71

Yeah, like I said before, it is the ability of the Pak Army to follow through and implement that is always lacking!

I think that you have covered the major points well. Et tu Fuzair? I am a military history buff myself, with my area of interest being the WWI and WWII and in WWII, I am obsessed with June 6,1944 - D-Day. If you have time, read my article, ``Remembering Private Ryan`` on Chowk. German Panzers tactics, from the Maginot to Krusk, are favorite of mine and since you know about der Reichwehr, some of the best German Panzer minds came out of it; Guderian, Rommel, Meyer, Speidel (Rommel`s chief of staff in Normandy and later NATO`s SACEUR`s deupty).

Ciao!

Rsaxena # 69

``Hence the drive 2 years ago in Bombay to round-up illegal Bangladeshis by the truckload and ship them back.``

Bal Thackeray might be wrong on many counts but he is absolutely right on this.This might provide some breathing space to the residents of Bombay.

re zz who said

``who were the masters of carnage in noakhali and tried to blackmail for pakistan with threat of riots. your papa did.`

Fancy that! My papa was not even two in 1947. And to imagine a toddler responsible for blackmail, carnage etc etc. No wonder Bengalis are considered supermen.

In all seriousness, earlier when I mentioned Indian ``gentlemen`` taking umbrage I was obviously wrong. The highly personal, invective filled tone of ZZ and Saxena is hardly those of gentlemen. As for you Saxena babu, ``aap seyane hain; aysi bhasha aap ko shobha nahin deti`` I say that because I see your posts often in various threads and generally they are more elevated than the ones directed my way. Calling me a communalist(when you don`t know my faith; if you`re guessing, you`re most likely wrong) or bashing Bangladesh and its inhabitants doesn`t change anything. It only makes some of you look like the Indian edition of our old pal Farangi_Kush.

One post mentioned India vis-a-vis China. No doubt that China cannot be compared; I have said it in different threads that India is a secular democracy whose record of dealing with dissent and its minorities is far superior to that of neighbours. I didn`t see any one of you remebering that.

For another bright fella who asked ``Which one is it sigalph``, let me put it in plain terms. Of course I don`t want to be politically amalgamated with India or Pakistan. And that is not mutually exclusive with wanting the intra-Bengal border to come down. At the expense of sending shivers down several spines, the idea is to have a complete Bangladesh with the ominous Radcliffe line gone. Once that is done, we will consider importing UPites, Biharis, and Punjabis to sweep the streets too.

Until we meet in another thread, best wishes, then.

PS: Sadna, thank you for the good wishes. With your singular exception I would`ve thought the rest of the pack was out to get Bengalis.

Cheraym#59

It is the intention Mr. Cheraym.

Indian attitude towards Bengladesh and Bengalis on this board is reflective of the superiority complex You are suffering.

Intention of India was only to inflame the contradiction between Bengal and West Pakistan to weaken Pakistan. They in their mind succeded.

So why do you demand respect for your doing. What you did you succeded, and it was not respectful. You seem to have more abdominal cramps for all other nations, and listen if your neighbours are calm. Wait for your seeds in Srilanka in the form of Tamil. Wait for Kashmir and Pakistan and wait for Assam and West bengal. You will very soon realize that reality exists on ground and is not greatly influenced by propaganda.

Re: Ferozk #71

I couldn`t find the Kargil article on the BBC website. Could you please send the URL?

Thanks.

Re: Ferozk #71

Aah, the famous Riposte of Aslam Beg, as exemplified in Zarg-e-Momin. If I remember correctly, the Riposte is supposed to be the ``strategic defensive but tactical offensive`` theory of warfare. For such a battle strategy to succeed, you need, as you point out, highly trained and mobile troops. Granted that the Pakistan Army is certainly more mobile now than in 1971 and better trained and led, I still have my doubts about its ability to carry out such a battle strategy.

Back when I used to be interested in such things, I remember reading about Hans von Seeckt and the interwar Reichswehr and how he and the German (no longer Imperial) General Staff analyzed WWI battle by battle to figure out how to win the next war--which they came within an inch of doing. To the best of my recollection, the E. Pakistan debacle is not studied at either the Staff College level or the War Course level. Certainly we make no attempt to ``learn`` its lessons beyond (i) blaming Yahya for being a drunk, and (ii) Niazi for being incompetent, and (iii) the Bengali traitor officers who gave away the Pakistan Army`s battle plans to the Indians. The first two may be true but are also irrelevant since the war was lost by the entire Army as a whole and not by one or two men. The vast majority of Bengali officers in W. Pakistan were loyal (with some minor exceptions) and certainly the Pakistan Army`s failures in the West were not due to our plans being betrayed to the Indians.

I am not sure how useful the Riposte strategy is given that we haven`t even analyzed why we (i) suffered the E. Pakistan debacle and (ii) why we failed so miserably in the West. The Army as an institution has learnt nothing from its past failures and that is what concerns me. Perhaps if Gen. Asif Nawaz, a blunt man not afraid to call a spade a spade, had lived, he might have instituted some institutional reform in the Army.

Thanks for the tip on the Kargil operation. I`ll check out the site. I don`t think of Kargil as a tactical defeat but a strategic one. Leaving our troops to die without any support on the Kargil heights was and is an indefensible decision. I have uncles/cousins who have served with NLI battalions and they say that these men are superb soldiers and unbeatable on a mountain. Any old Brit who served with the Gilgit or Northern Scouts would not have been surprised at this.

The only problems with the Pak Army`s NLI battalions is that they suffer from not having their own officers but merely having ones seconded to them. This makes their JCOs/NCOs far too powerful and undermines officer authority and is overall bad for discipline.

Gen. PM`s ``reward`` to the NLI for its outstanding performance in Kargil was to convert it from a CAF formation to a regular Army infantry regiment, Pakistan`s sixth, but as far as I know this hasn`t yet been implemented. The NLI still doesn`t have its own officers or independence.

Regards.

In the context of the posts on chowk from nationalities suppressed by the perfidy of India(for eg the Greater Bangla Nation) and in the context of Partition(which happened whether you want to admit it or not), I now understand what TNT stands for, so far.

It stands for a nation of Muslims, where Muslims can rule over others(in this case only other nonMuslim S.Asians are available).

What is a nation, if you cannot get the right to rule, and what is the use of getting the right to rule and a nation-state all to yourselves to do it in, if there is no one to rule over, except yourselves(who were all rulers to begin with, anyway).

TNT is a perpetual search of a nation(now two nations, in the East and West) for subjects to rule over.

Thanks for the insights, guys.

Sadhana

sigalph: Let us appreciate the best of each others cultures. I have great admiration and respect for Bengali culture, on both sides of the Radcliffe line, but lets respect the blood split on such hard-fought sovereignity of boundaries for at least a few generations. While a logical time and place may well come in future for what you dream, I think realistically this is not that logical time.

``Quite often and frequetly. Between January and April of this year alone, the Indian Border Security Force has made almost two dozen armed incursions into Bangladesh proper.``

Ah, even taking your word for it(which I donot), I didnot know BSF was composed solely of Indian Bengalis looking for employment.

I guess 1/2 million people were killed by Nehru Gandhi and Mountbatten, personally, oh no, thats not it, it was all those who wanted desperately to live together who were killing each other. Good thesis, hope to hear more on this.

Nation-state: First you must have a nation then you can have an empire. Empire-building has to succeed nation-building. First manage your affairs then look who else`s affairs to manage. One doesnot need a dead white man to tell you that, look around at your friends and neighbours.

If you think the lack of Indian Bengalis` allegiance(due to the perfidious Indian nation-stater) is what is holding back your country from its true destiny, first convince the Islamic parties in your country to cut your own resident nonMuslims some slack, else you will find it as hard to convince Indian Bengalis and the world about your case as Pakistan is finding it.

You won`t be able to similarly blame this lack of understanding on those huge markets in India, either, those guys have their eyes on your natural gas reserves and want peace and good governance more than anything and maynot want to fund Bangladeshi foreign policy with the same generosity they extended Pakistan.

The Saudis, now, what would they want with Hindus, except to convert?

Sadhana

ferozk:

the kargil report by the indian govt places a lot of blame on the intelligence units for not detecting the incursion in advance. do you think if such intelliegence were employed properly (perhaps negelected due to the potential of `bus diplomacy` or lack of capability, or both), the `brilliant tactical success` would not have materialized?

Fuzair, may be Siglaph was not around in 1971, but I was. I was not too young to forget all those, neither too old to forgive all those. It did not take all these years, it was within two years, that Bangladeshis changed their tune! When after liberation Indira Gandhi visited, they were hysterical with ``Indira maiki jai`` slogan, within 1974 (even before Mujib was brutally murdered, the saying was ``Indure sab gam laiya gelo`` which means, the rats are taking all the wheat, rat in this case is Indira as Indur is rat in Bengali.

We have not learned any lesson from any of our history. Thus, when one Khilji killed his uncle to become Sultan, it is that history repeats when Mujibur (you know how he was transformed!)was killed by Major Dalim et al. It is the same history about Aurangzeb killing his brothers... It is the same history that two women in Bangladesh are fighting about, it is about power!!! They do not allow anybody to work for the good of their countries (true for the Indian rulers as well), and top of it they use the religion to their advantage and make all kinds of scapegoats!

Talking about communality of educated people, a ten year old boy going to International school, getting finest of education(very bright boy as well)can recite the verses of Koran without knowing any meaning of it. While he was asked, can he explain any of those verses, he admitted that he did not know them since this is all in Arabics. Seeing him uttering those verses like parrot, I was reminded of the recently aired ABC program on Madrasha education in Pakistan.

See what communalism has done to otherwise rational person like Sigalph! He really believed Bangladeshis won the war by themselves, and he also believes India can not fight LTTE. Can any discussion continue after this? However, I am glad that he still considers bengalis of West Bengal closer to his heart and although I am grateful for that, like many other bengalis, I am more happier with my Indian passport.

Temporal...where are you?

Sigalph appears to be full of contradictions and sadly enough doesn`t seem to realize it. First he compares the interntational border to the Berlin wall and suggests that it will inevitably come down as `unnatural` borders do. Fine, he seems to be suggesting that Bangladesh becomes one with India (unless he`s harboring delusions about Indian Bengalis wanting to join Bangladesh - HAH, that`s a good laugh).

But then he loudly asserts Bangladesh`s identity and demands India and Pakistan to accept it`s existence.

So which is it Sigalph?

I`ve always been intrigued by this self-aggrendizing behavior. India wants neither Pakistan nor Bangladesh to be a part of India! Be assured that the 2 poorest nations far worse off than India are no boxes of mithai that India has designs of pocketing. We don`t need 2 more Bihars. This is a little different from China chasing the democratic and economically vibrant Taiwan.

Re: Fuzair

Thanks for the detailed info....

Yeah, I would have to agree with you on a lot of things you`ve said, but I still think that an attack into Assam, no matter how immature, could have worked only if to force the Indians to think twice before doing something. It would have given the Indians a pause and in most cases, that is all you need to stop an adversary`s momentum.

As to the lack of air support; air support is crucial, but like you said the Pakistan Army should have opted for insurgency tactics. Besides, the greatest campaign of the Wehrmacht in the Second World War was the defense of Normandy from June-August 1944 and the Germans did it without any logistical support or an effective air umbrella plus the fact that Hitler was working against the German commanders.

Again, agreed on the tactical situation, but with a caveat. Pakistani Army should have defended cities and then under pressure should have retreated into their secondary positions, but still kept a modicum of mobility in their ops.

Anyways, that campaign was nearly 30yrs ago and the good thing is that Pak army`s new operational doctrine, Riposte, is based on mobility and local counter-attacks. The problem is that our war stocks, realistically, are only for 15-20 days of sustained combat to affect a strategic ascendency over the Indians, but the question still remains; what attacker to defender ratio are the Indians comfortable with? The recent Indian wargames in the desert were to test this theory and remember, Indo-Pak wars take place on the plains and in the desert around September to October when the temperture crawls down to just insufferable levels!

BTW, if you are interested there was a really good article on the BBC on the war in Kargil and it was based on a book writen by Indian highlighting the poor logistical performance of the Indian Army in the Kargil ops. You can get on the BBC`s South Asia web page. The thing that amazes me is that if Kargil was a failure, why in the hell are its lessons being taught as a classic example of how to fight in alpine/arctic conditions and why the Pakistani Army, despite its eventual withdrawal, is winning accloades from the Germans and Americans and rest on its the skill in planning its op in Kargil?

In our army, it is always the follow through that is lacking!!!!

Ciao!

Regarding Bangladesh:

All we have to do is wait for global warming and see where the Bongs go. As it is, the Bongs are in Assam and other Northeastern states of India. One of the Bangladesh ministers has already said in a public meeting that in case of global warming, countries such as the US and England should take in tens of millions of Bongs as it is expected that Bangladesh would be under water. That would be one less country in SAARC. Maldives also would be under the sea so we Indians will be forced to exercise more of our hegemony over poor Pakistan. I mean, after all, how much hegemony could poor Nepal and Bhutan handle?

RE: Sigalph

``As for those who claim India fought our war for us...give me a break! You guys couldn`t even stand up to the Tamil Tigers and had to beat a hasty retreat; ten years and you are still bleeding in Kashmir.``

Excuse me?! Your beard shaking behind was going to repulse the Paki army without Indian help? You give ME a break! Get some weapons other than the discount price second-hand Indian guns and learn to feed your people before making such claims. You - Bangladeshi man - wants to talk about Kashmir? India does not engage in Jehadi behavior or roll-tanks-over-the-opposition-antics-a-la-China and it pays a price for restraint (in the short term at least). Of course if there were ``forgive-anything-as-long-as-it`s-from-the-Ummah`` people like you in Kashmir, India could send its Muslim soldiers to do the deed. But I think we`ll leave the Jehad antics to you folks.

``As for the transborder refugees, good for them: they are moving about what is their own homeland. West Bengal is after all the the land of the Bengalis and no Radcliff line is going to change that.``

Excuse me again! Did you just suggest that you don`t respect the international borders and sovereignty of India? And your people (who, as much as they would like to be, are NOT Indian citizens!) are free to roam about as they please? You must have just returned from a trip to Amsterdam when you wrote that, so I`ll let it slide. And by the way, the ILLEGAL refugees are not just in Bengal but as far out as Bombay. Hence the drive 2 years ago in Bombay to round-up illegal Bangladeshis by the truckload and ship them back.

Re Sadna

``Do Indian Bengalis wander freely on their own land on the `green` side of the Radcliff line?``

Actually, they do madam. Quite often and frequetly. Between January and April of this year alone, the Indian Border Security Force has made almost two dozen armed incursions into Bangladesh proper. In the one incident on Tuesday last, three indivuduals were abducted and over a hundred dwellings set ablaze in the Kurigram district. So, please save the jingoistic nonsense of holier-than-thou non-existent moralism.

Viable nationhood? Madam, it is not Bangladesh which is killing 5000 of its own citizens a year in Kashmir to keep its ``viability`` alive (or napalming Baluch villages for that matter). So preach viability after you folks have achieved it.

On the issue of building tight walls and borders, since it has been reiterated, I`ll glad issue a re-joinder. Try it and try it again. It will meet the same fate as another famous wall did eleven years ago which tried to keep a nation divided. In the immortal words of Richard Lovelace,

``Stone walls do not a prison make

Nor iron bars a cage,

Minds innocent and free,

Take that for an hermitage.``

Bengal is our hermitage, on both sides of the artificial Radcliff line.

The fundamental problem is that neither India nor Pakistan have psychologically come to terms with the fact that they cannot have ``spheres of influence`` in the sub-continent. Bangladesh is smaller than both, but it is here to stay; so, better get used to that.

You folks keep me asking what 1947 was all about? How would I know? I wasn`t around at that time. Perhaps you should direct those questions elsewhere. What I do know is that the last premier of united Bengal begged and pleaded with Nehru, Jinnah, and Lord Mountbatten to let Bengal stay together and separate; his pleas fell on deaf ears. The carnage and the rest is history.

What I also know is that we live in a nation-state system. Every nation, as far as viable, must have its state. The Bengali nation is undeniable. It has only half of its state so far. Bengalis are a nation by any strech. To paraphrase, in an ironic twist, the words of Mr Jinnah, we have our own history and heritage, culture and calendar, arts and architecture, folktales and festivals, language and literature. To say that the people of Tagore, Nazrul, and Michael Madhusudandatta are somehow different nations is absurd, to say the least.

sigalph

Do Indian Bengalis wander freely on their own land on the `green` side of the Radcliff line? What was all the fuss in 1947 all about, then? Why all those riots and killings of 1/2 a million people? Why couldn`t you (and those aspiring Greater Punjabis) remain united then? Oh, that was all Nehru and Gandhi, I get it.

I agree with cherym. And we have nothing to learn from our neighbours. They foster delusions of superpowerdom without even trying to be viable nations first and they want India to foot the bills territorially and emotionally for their own internal po