Pakistan under its Ethnic Shadows

#112 by nakhok

++++
Altaf Gauhar was very very explicit in this article written in the aftermath of the Kargil misadventure when he wrote, ``..... all these operations were conceived and launched on the basis of one assumption: that the Indians are too cowardly and ill-organised to offer any effective military response which could pose a threat to Pakistan.``
++++

Firstly, this is not a reflection of martial race theory. It is a reflection of Pakistan`s accurate assessment of India`s military preparedness in 1999. The fact is that India was ill-organised and unprepared for Kargil. (The cowardly part is pure exaggeration; Armies plan operations for geo-strategic reasons, not to prove their bravery)

Secondly, Altaf Gauhar`s article ignores the primary assumptions of Kargil, which had nothing to do with race, bravery, Red Fort, etc. These real assumptions of Kargil were:

(a) China will support Pakistan.

This assumption was proven wrong when Zhu Rhongji and Chief of PLA asked Musharraf to withdraw NLI/Jehadi elements and instead pursue the diplomatic route. This was the biggest shock to Musharraf.

(b) U.S. will stay neutral.

Since Clinton had described Kashmir as a nuclear flashpoint, the assumption was that U.S. will immediately press for summit level talks between India and Pakistan to resolve this dispute. Instead, Clinton refused to discuss Kashmir will Nawaz Sharif until Pakistan withdrew the NLI/Jehadis.

(c) Pakistan`s political leadership will mobilize public support for the intrusion

Musharraf had assumed that since Nawaz had already okayed the Kargil plan months ago, the entire political leadership will stand by the operation. This didn`t happen. Deprived of political support within Pakistan, Kargil became Musharraf`s personal project.

(d) India will not expand the theater of conflict due to fear of nuclear escalation

India instead threatened to blockade Karachi and attack across international border.
Between June 6 and July 9, both countries traded nuclear threats a dozen times.

Unless you are wedded to the defunct `martial race theory`, I suggest you expand your list of favorite Pakistani analysts... to get a richer, more complete understanding. The `martial race theory` was applicable in an era when soldiers fought on horseback with bayonets, swords and rifles. In modern wars, we don`t have horse-mounted cavalries and swordsmen. Howitzers, fighter jets, submarines, missiles and tanks are the new `martial races`.

#113 by His Excellency

++++
The cowardly part is pure exaggeration; Armies plan operations for geo-strategic reasons, not to prove their bravery
++++

The ``cowardly part`` is the result of an inane belief and child-like trust in the martial-races theory. In this respect, Pakistan`s army has chosen to remain stuck in the era of cavalray warfare. It was so in all the four wars of 1948, 1965, 1971 and 1999. Altaf Gauhar made that clear very very explicitly in his ``Four Wars, One Assumption`` when he wrote:

``..... all these operations were conceived and launched on the basis of one assumption: that the Indians are too cowardly and ill-organised to offer any effective military response which could pose a threat to Pakistan.``

Mercifully, General Pervez Musharraf has been jolted, first by the Kargil fiasco, and then by the American ultimatum after 9/11. And that is why he is now perturbed enough to publicly admonish those that continue to dream of unfurling the Pakistan flag atop the Red Fort.

It is important for General Pervez Musharraf to strive to transport the military mentally forward from the age of cavalry to the age of modern wars - otherwise its inane trust in the martial-race theory and in the vulnerability of the ``cowardly and ill-organized`` enemy can accidentally trigger a nuclear war in which no tactical finesse will prevail to prevent a catastrophe for Pakistan and India alike.

113, 114: My reading of the situation finesse`s the difference between both the responses:

``Firstly, this is not a reflection of martial race theory. It is a reflection of Pakistan`s accurate assessment of India`s military preparedness in 1999. The fact is that India was ill-organised and unprepared for Kargil.``

Well this assesment wasnt so accurate wasnt it? Indian Army showed an ability (after the initial misreading of the situation) to move a very large amount of troops and artillery rapidly into the region (we could have moved an entire corps if we wanted). It is this tremendous increase in logistical capability that took the Pak army by surprise. To bring the Air Force into play early also showed ability in the higher command to take a combined arms approach. These are the responses that Pak`s were ``ill-prepapred`` for.

To assume that Indian troops are demoralized, ill-prepared, disorganized and that the Indian army will immidiately run to the political leadership and sue for peace, is but another form of delusion similar to the ``martial race theory``. This argument is similar to the Pakistani teenagers on the net who insist that PAF due to its ``superior`` training/jazba is more than a match for the IAF.

``(d) India will not expand the theater of conflict due to fear of nuclear escalation``

Fact is that India did not escale anywhere along the international border. But between the two extremes of all-out war and right away sueing for peace there were a wide range of options available to the Indians which the Paks didnt think through clearly.

HE, Nakhok:

You people are having a very foolish argument. Bbesides, when did Altaf Gauhar become the know all judge of the Pakistan Army? His opinion is just that, an opinion. I would say that the only time the 1 Pakistani = 10 Indian statement was actually spoken on record was 1965 by Ayub. Niazi too made some equally idiotic statements like his ambition to overrun India to connect West and East Pakistan, but his statements were not ethnocentric.

There can be no military solution to differences between Pakistan and India. Pakistan`s military must cease to see itself as the Prussians of the subcontinent. General Pervez Musharraf had done a disservice to the subcontinent by planning a military solution via Kargil even as the civilian leaders of Pakistan and India were talking peace in Lahore. It was as wrong as it was imprudent.

Altaf Gauhar was, by no means, the only writer to blame Pakistan`s military for its Prussian complex in the aftermath of the Kargil fiasco. Here`s one from the doyen of Pakistani journalists, Ardeshir Cowasjee:

---

DAWN, Karachi, Pakistan
18 July, 1999

End Game?
Ardeshir Cowasjee

..... As for our war-mongers and zealots, the uneducated and ignorant majority,
they should be informed by the government in power that India makes a formidable foe.
Its armed forces are twice the size of ours, making it impossible for us to sustain a military conflict. Economically, if reserves are anything to go by, India is forty times our size. It is of no use us propagating the myth that one Pakistani soldier is equal in strength and courage to five Indian soldiers. Our retired generals, colonels, air marshals, wing commanders, admirals and commodores do us a disservice when they air their views on the national media and relate how, whenever Muslims have gone to war, it has been against a foe far superior in number but their spirit of sacrifice and their valour have always made them victors. Wars now cannot be won without global sympathy and support. Propaganda must have credibility behind it. .....

---

The four wars mentioned by Altaf Gauhar (1948, 1965, 1971, 1999) were all wars of the post cavalry warfare era. But so brainwashed were the Pakistani military by its belief in the ``one Pakistani soldier = ten ``Hindu`` soldier`` theory, that they leaped before looking into everyone of the four wars.

I am not sure if martial-races theory had any validity even in the heydays of cavalry warfare. And in the modern era, it is simply an overt symptom of racist bigotry.

#114 by nakhok

+++
The ``cowardly part`` is the result of an inane belief and child-like trust in the martial-races theory. In this respect, Pakistan`s army has chosen to remain stuck in the era of cavalray warfare. It was so in all the four wars of 1948, 1965, 1971 and 1999.
+++

This inane beliefs and child-like trust seems to be emanating from your mind alone. Do you really think an army that has been sending its generals regularly to attend US military courses for the last 30-40 years can be that ``child-like``? Do you really think chowkies here are going to accept your ludicrious assertions like ``Pakistan`s army has chosen to remain stuck in the era of cavalray warfare``. I mean c`mon... Your hatred of Pak Army is understandable. This is exactly what makes Pakistanis proud of the Army.

#117 His Excellency

``Do you really think an army that has been sending its generals regularly to attend US military courses for the last 30-40 years can be that ``child-like``?``

Well, let`s take ``Field Marshal`` Ayub Khan. He was a Sandhurst graduate. But nonetheless, Pakistani journalists have written of his child-like trust in martial-races theory. In fact, even his ghost written autobiography (Friends Not Masters) reeks of racist bigotry against the majority of his compatriots!

#117 by His Excellency

++++
Do you really think chowkies here are going to accept your ludicrious assertions.....
++++

The ``ludicrous assertions`` are by well known Pakistani journalists. I have quoted Altaf Gauhar and Ardeshir Cowasjee. And I can quote more. If Dawnites and Newsites can accept these ``ludicrous assertions``, I don`t see why chowkies won`t.

++++
This is exactly what makes Pakistanis proud of the Army.
++++

Well, even General Pervez Musharraf seems to be apprehensive that Pakistanis are not proud of the Army and understandably so:

---

http://jang.com.pk/thenews/aug2003-daily/09-08-2003/oped/o4.htm

The News, Karachi, Pakistan
Saturday August 09, 2003-- Jamadi-us-Sani 10, 1424 A.H

A candid talk
by Mir Jamilur Rahman
mirjrahman@hotmail.com

..... President Musharraf expressed his deep concern over the anti-armed forces propaganda in the national media. He detailed the misperceptions created by the negative reporting. President Musharraf should not get unduly perturbed on this trend. It is the natural and logical outcome of overexposure of the armed forces in the public affairs. Never before in the history of Pakistan the military personnel have occupied so many public offices. Its omnipresence in every sphere of public life and its omniscient attitude has not endeared it to the people. It has replaced the bureaucrat as the perennial target of public scorn. It has forgotten the old adage that familiarity breeds contempt. It is now the armed forces personnel who run the public utilities, supervise the sports, regulate the utility tariffs, and catch the thieves under NAB, head the postal department, the universities and research institutes. With a public exposure of this magnitude the criticism would not only continue to flow but become intense too.

---

Pakistan`s army is not a national one, it is one of ``martial-races``. In practical terms, it means that 80% of Pakistan`s army is from only five districts: Attock, Rawalpindi, Chakwal, Jhelum and Gujrat in Punjab; and three districts of NWFP: Mardan, Peshawar and Kohat.

Sindhis, like the East pakistanis in pre-1971 Pakistan, have negligible representation in the military. And this creates the same type of alienation. Most of the land allotted in Sindh, for example, is owned by an officer from the recruitment area between the Indus and the Jhelum. When an absentee landlord from a different area controls a large tract of land in another province, complications are bound to arise.

And even within Punjab, there is scope for resentment. Dr. Hamid Hussain has written extensively on the fauji-feudal synergy in Defense Journal (Karachi) and Covert Action Quarterly (Washington DC). He was most perspicacious when he wrote:

``The system of allotting agricultural land to serving and retired military officers have ..... contributed to the wedding of senior army officers to landed interests and corresponding class commitment.``

In fact, as Dr. Hamid Hussain has pointed out, it is Pak military that now epitomizes the worst of feudalism:

``In Pakistan, preferential patronage and threat of coercion are the two principle instruments through which work is accomplished. This means that local government will provide prompt services to the lands of the Army officers. In the case of irrigation and
water supply, paved roads and timely provision of seeds, fertilizers and pesticides, preference is given to army officers` properties.``

And recent articles (by Pervez Hodobhoy, for example) on the Okara Military Farm has shown that the military is as determined as the ``best`` of the hereditary feudal lords to retain its feudal privileges even in Punjab.

How coercive the military can be to protect its corporate and feudal interests was amply illustrated in recent articles on the Okara Military Farm. Here`s something to mull over by anyone who might have have the illusion that the military feudals are more benign than the heriditary feudals:

---

The Friday Times, Lahore, Pakistan
August 15-21, 2003

EDITORIAL
Okara peasants, military and national interest
by Najam Sethi

``..... the arrogance of the OMF (Okara Military Farms) can be gauged from the text of some letters written by senior officials to relatives of the allegedly offending tenants threatening them in clearly unlawful terms. We are in possession of two letters sent to the OMF ``employees``, dated Aug 26, 2002, and Jan 24, 2003, by the farm officer, a major. These show the mindset of the military authorities towards the Okara tenancy issue in particular and civil-military relations in general. In one of the letters, the major writes in English: ``It has come to our notice that your parents/relatives living in chaks of Mil Farms are involved in anti-state activities. You are directed to motivate your parents/relatives to desist from anti-state activities and to co-op with the Pakistan Army and Pakistan Rangers. If you will not do this for the state, appropriate disciplinary action will be taken against you.`` .....``

---

No one teaches any Martial race theory in Pakistan. I went through years of training and do not recall any classes or refernces to Martial race. Karachi, theoratically a non-Martial race area, has produced the most Chiefs in the Pakistan military, of any city in Pakistan.

Kargil was probably planned years ago. Just like counter strategies are planned and studied in detail, even if they never get used. At the time of Kargil, the Cheif of Army Staff (Musharraf) was from a non-Martial race (assuming within Pakistan, Punjabis and Pathans are considered the Martial race). His main General Staff officers was Muhajir also.

Interestingly the Chief of Air Staff was from a Martial race (Punjab). However, the PAF was against Kargil (I know this almost from the horse`s mouth). PAF made a presentation pointing out why it should not be done. The PAF leadership is generally quite a bit more worldly-wise than the Army leadership. In fact, the PAF did not even participate in Kargil. Other than moving some aircraft close to the are.

Kargil was brilliantly carried out tactically. I know the Colonel in Engineers, whose unit was the first to reach the peaks and do the pre-planning phase, before the fighting troops moved. However, politically and probably inter-services manner also, it was terribly planned. And whomever wins the political war wins the war, even if they lose the military war. The military war was lost by India, before it even started, at the moment Pakistan occupied the peaks. The political war was lost by Pakistan, before it even moved to occupy the peaks.

Interestingly, after Kargil and the coup, Musharraf literally got rid of a big portion of the PAF high command, when the retirement time of the incumbent Air Chief arrived. Musharraf (as CMLA) appointed the new Air Chief, who was quite a bit junior, superceeding quite a few senior Air Marshalls. All of who then retiredThe general rumor was the Musharraf had gotten rid of the PAF top command, due to their lack of support in Kargil - , including the guy who was earmarked to be the next Chief, but opposed Kargil, and was thus not made the new Chief.

The guy who was appointed the new Chief, Mushaf Mir, later died in an air crash (he may have been NHK`s batchmate or close in seniority). Apparently, he himself, did not expect to be appointed the Chief, by superceding so many senior officers. Following is from his interview:

``Q: Since you were appointed CAS by superseding several senior officials, what was your response to this new challenge and whether you were expecting this decision at all?

A: While the appointment came unexpected, my response was one of thanks to the Almighty and a personal resolve to devote each moment of my tenure to transform the PAF into a more efficient and hard hitting force....`` (http://www.pakdef.info/pids/paf/interview.html)

So Musharraf, a non-martial race guy, led the Army in Kargil, while the PAF Chief (a martial race guy) did not agree to it. Then Musharraf and a core group of Muhajir generals (non-martial) carried out a coup, and got rid of a completely Punjabi (martial race) govt., and no one in Pakistan, including the martial races, complained. Then Musharraf got rid of a lot of Martial race PAF generals, and no one complained.

I never heard the word Martial race in my military career. Though I do think it did exist in the previous generation (around 71 times), specifically with respect to Bengalis. The only place I have heard of it now, is from Indians on this site.

#104 by Mantolives on November 21, 2003 5:12am PT

Sorry Manto,it is time we called a spade a spade. The secular minded have to undo the propoganda by the Islamists and hindtva elemnts in the sub-continent- of which TNT is the most sophisticated exposition which we have seen.

Musharraf as a worthy successor of Zia-

The Quranic Concept of War by Brigadier S.K. Malik, sponsored by the late General Zia-ul-Haq. It is a much more reliable guide to Pakistan`s psyche and behavior than the pronouncements of soothsayers at the Wagha border and the pontificating columnists in the English language media. It is a damning indictment of the Indian intelligentsia — dominated by the ‘Secularists’ — that there is almost no public discussion this work of great importance. Even worse, when brought to their attention, it is hastily ignored. Reasons of course are not hard to seek.

The Quranic Concept of War is required reading for Pakistani officials — both military and civilian. An Urdu booklet titled `Jihad` summarizing it is carried by Pakistani soldiers as well as so-called militants. Copies of this booklet have been recovered from the bodies of killed Pakistani fighters. Incidentally, both the Government and the media must stop using terms like ‘militants’ and ‘militancy’. These are trained Pakistani and Afghan soldiers and the so-called militancy is really an invasion. Call them invading soldiers. Also, why ‘deport’ Pakistanis caught with RDX and other deadly material instead of punishing them as mass murderers?

As far as the book is concerned, General Zia recommends it to ``both soldier and civilian alike.`` According to him, ``JIHAD FI-SABILILLAH is not the exclusive domain of the professional soldier, nor is it restricted to the application of military force alone. The book brings out with simplicity, clarity and precision the Quranic philosophy on the application of the military force, within the context of the totality that is JIHAD.`` In other words, all the resources of the state must be subordinate to the Islamic military machine in pursuit of its cause. This is the policy that successive Governments in Pakistan have been following. It has nothing to do with Kashmir and everything to do with conquest by Jihad.

The instrument of this is Jihad — ``the most glorious word in the vocabulary of Islam`` — which both the author and President Zia describe as total war. ``Jehad is a continuous and never-ending struggle waged on all fronts.`` Another point that Brigadier Malik makes is that the war should be carried out in the opponent`s territory. ``The aggressor was always met and destroyed in his own territory,`` he tells us. This of course is exactly what Pakistan is doing. But the doctrine goes further to encompass the whole world: ``It was the cause of humanity in general and not just the Muslim community in particular,`` informs Brigadier Malik. It is a universal doctrine, to be applied to all of us, and not just the believers. So India is only a stepping stone in taking its campaign to the whole world. In other words, Pakistan under its new doctrine sees itself as the instrument of Jihad as ordained by God.

Ballu Khan

I suggest you read up a little before you decide to undo anything.

At partition .. my dear friend... the Auranzeb loving, burqah-imposing, bearded Mullahs like Maulana Madni were in cahoots with the Congress Party.


Those supporting the Pakistan movement(the so called tntists) were not Islamists... but were aligarh modernists, ex-congressites, socialists like iftikharuddin, Faiz , a leading legal mindsof the muslims, barristers, and the sufies. And ofcourse they were led by the only politician in india to be called the Best Ambassador of Hindu Muslim Unity...


These are the facts of History ... denying them only strengthens those you want to defeat.

Yes Let us call a spade a spade.

#110 by tahmed32

On Nationalization:

``The nationalizations you mention were driven by his ego rather than common sense, since he wanted to become the Wadera of Pakistan, even though people had elected him on a different understanding.``

It is documented that he nationalized businesses to protect the jobs of many people, who would have lost them for businesses going bust subsequent to BD debacle. This is the best argument that has been given for his nationalization drive. Instead of nationalization, if he had opted for protectionist policy, that would have been much better. Protectionism would have first ensured that the businesses survive and then it would have led to industrial growth in Pakistan that by 1990 could have become competent to ward off any foreign threat. Indian industry thrives today because of their protectionist policy of the yore.

On Musharraf:

``More important, is there any hope that there are better days ahead for our people? You seem optimistic with musharaff, and so far he does seem to be focussing on many of the right things.``

Please read Musharraf`s noting of crime against women in the guise of honor killing today. His statements would prove to be ground-breaking. He took note of the event where a woman in Multan was killed in the name of ``Ghairat`` by of course bay-ghairat`s of our society.

``He has made mistakes (most notably in suppressing the secular parties). But there is some hope here. He is certainly not a complete disaster like those before him. ``

He did not suppress the secular parties, but Nawaz and BB. He gave all the chance to PPP at least to shed off the personal worshipping of BB and to form Government. PPP squandered the opportunity and now runs the risk of getting totally marginalized in the days to come.

re: Romair`s fantasies
``The military war was lost by India, before it even started, at the moment Pakistan occupied the peaks....``
Ha, Ha, Ha!
This guy cracks me up like nobody else. We need to give our Chowk Marshal a special commendation for his `` flights of fancies``.
Sridhar

# 121 Romair

++++
No one teaches any Martial race theory in Pakistan.
++++

Perhaps it is not taught in classrooms at Kakul. But apparently the beleief survived 1971 into at least 1999. That is why Pakistani jurnalists thought it fit to bring it up afresh in the aftermath of the Kargil fiasco. I have already quoted a couple - Altaf Gauhar and Ardeshir Cowasjee.

++++
I do think it did exist in the previous generation (around 71 times), specifically with respect to Bengalis.
++++

Yes, it did exist. It was the general view of the army officers, that the people of East Pakistan were not even good Muslims and, obviously, by implication, that it was the divine-ordained duty of Pakistan`s military officers to do everything possible (including murder and rape) to turn East Pakistanis into good Muslims.

The Shah of Iran could have never used his army to perpetuate the perks and privileges of Iran`s ruling elite because ordinary Iranian soldiers were not willing to turn on the common people of Iran on the orders of the Shah. Unfortunately, in Pakistan in 1971, the situation was very different. From 1947 thru 1971, ordinary soldiers of Pakistan had been brainwashed into believing in the British propounded ``martial races`` theory, and into believing that East Pakistanis belonged to an inferior race. The ordinary soldiers had been persuaded to believe by their officers that it was their sacred duty to punish East Pakistanis because the East Pakistanis were not good Muslims!

Pakistan`s army officers had institutionalized racism to the point where the soldiers were willing to believe that they were engaged in rape and murder to save Islam in East Pakistan. Veteran Pakistani journalist Z.A. Suleri (father of writer Sarah Suleri) has written how shocked he was in 1971 to find Pakistan army officers nonchalantly joking about the on-going rapes in East Pakistan as a service to the Bengalis to improve their genes! Much the same story was confirmed in accounts of DAWN correspondent Anthony Mascarenhas.

Yahya Khan`s predecessor was no better. Altaf Gauhar, in a series of articles, had written how ``Field Marshal`` Ayub Khan had become victim of the racist view within Pakistan`s army that one [West] Pakistani soldier was more than a match for ten ``Hindu`` soldiers. Fortified by this racist belief, the ``Field Marshal`` had put into motion the ``Operation Gibralatar`` in 1965. It was a foolhardy deed that would unleash a chain of events that would ultimately lead to his own overthrow in 1969 and the surrender of the Pakistani army in Dhaka on 16th December of 1971.

#113 His Excellency

++++
Musharraf had assumed that since Nawaz had already okayed the Kargil plan months ago, the entire political leadership will stand by the operation. This didn`t happen. Deprived of political support within Pakistan, Kargil became Musharraf`s personal project.
++++

If General Musharraf were honest, he would have thanked Nawaz Sharif for extricating Pakistan`s military from the hole it had dug for itself in Kargil.

It was the military`s arrogance that led to the situation. It had purposely kept the civilian bosses in the dark about the Kargil adventure it was planning even as Nawaz Sharif and Musharraf were engaged in peace talks in Lahore:

---

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_23-11-2003_pg3_5

Daily Times, Pakistan
Sunday, November 23, 2003

``The Kargil episode is a very sad and tragic part of our history. The more you go into it, the more traumatic it is. Nawaz Sharif did not get to know about the Kargil exercise at the right time. When this whole thing was being conceived and being put into motion, the prime minister of the country did not know about it. They very consciously only provided him an outline of the exercise in which the focus was totally different. It didn’t involve the armed forces or crossing the Line of Control. When it was brought home to him in May 1999, there was not much that he could do. He was only involved in a damage control exercise, which eventually damaged him. I still recall my conversation with him where I recommended that he let those who had conceived this operation complete it and handle it militarily. But Nawaz Sharif said no. He said that it would not only harm the strategic and military interests of Pakistan, it would also damage the military might of Pakistan. So we had to forego our political egos in the interest of the country.``

---