Operation Searchlight

fountainheader # ``romair:

The human rights organizations and international press were banned in early 90s (by George Fernandes).

Ehhhh? To the best of my knowledge, Fernandes became Defence Minister only in 1998. He was the Railway Minister for some months in 1989. Either you are mistaken or the source you quote is mistaken.``

Either there are two George Fernandeses or he was involved in Kashmir. Following is his involvment:

``The government of New Delhi took some remedial steps to control the effects of the repression by appointing George Fernandes as minister for Kashmir who was well known both in India and in the rest of the world for his concern for human rights.`` (Kashmir in Conflict, Victoria Schofield, p. 151).

Following is the origination of the current Kashmiri movement:

``His (Jagmohan) return to full control of events in Kashmiron 19 January 1990 marked the begining of a new intensity both in New Delhi`s dealings with the Kashmiris and their response...His government depended heavily on the extremist BJP whose supporters wanted to abrogate article 370 and integrate Kashmir within the Indian Union. The attempt to find a political solution to Kashmir`s problem was put aside in favour of a policy of repression.

On the night of 19 January an intensive hous-to-house search was carried out in an area where millions of militants were believed to be hiding. Three hundred people were arrested, most of whom were later released...The reaction from the people was unprecendented. ``The whole city was out. I was sleeping - it was midnight. I heard pople on the road shouting pro-Pakistan slogans and Islamic slogans -- ``Allah o Akbar``, ``What do we want? We want freedom!`` recalls Haseeb, a Kashmiri medical student.

The next day, as Jagmohan was sworn in as governor....a large demonstration assembled in the streets of Srinigar to protest against the search the night before. In response, paramalitary troops gathered on either side of the Gawakadal bridge over the Jehlum river. When the unarmed crowd reached the bridge it was fired on from both sides of the river. The shooting has been called the worst massacre in Kashmiri history. over a hundred people died, some from gunshot wounds, others, because, in fear, they jumped into the river and drowned.....

Whereas the Indian press played the incident down, the foreign press reported the massacre and its reprecussion to the world. ``Thousands of Muslims chanting ``Indian dogs go home,`` ``We want freedom`` and ``Long live Islam`` marched through Srinigar and other towns, despite police ``shoot-on-sight`` orders,`` reported the Daily Telegraph. As a result foreign correspondents were banned from the valley......``

However, even as the insurgency was gaining in intensity in Kashmir, Indian television ``went overboard with live coverage of the mass movements against authoritarianism in East Europe and Central Asia, inanely oblivious of the tremendous impact each visual of a woman kissing the Quran and taunting a soldier was having in Kashmir,`` writes M. J. Akbar (Schofield, p. 148).

Pakistan seemed to be taken unawares by events in teh valley. ``Islamabad was as surprised as New Delhi by the sudden, dramatic outburst of sentiment for azadi,`` writes Edward Desmond, the Time magazine correspondent`` (Schofield p. 149)

``At the end of February an estimated 400,000 Kashmiris marched on the offices of the United Nations Military Observors Group to hand in petitions demanding the implementation of the UN resolutions. It was reported as the largest demonstration the Kashmir Valley has seen......

On 1 March more than forty people were killed in police firing when a massive crowd, estimated at one million took to the streets....The hospitals were becoming so full of the victims of the insurgency that the name of the Bone and Joint hospital in Srinigar ws changed to the Hospital for Bullet and Bomb Blast injuries.`` (Schofield, p. 150)

So, in fairness to Fernandes, Jagmohan`s reign is when the problem really got big. Fernandes was handed a mess in the central govt.. He did not do much to solve the mess, and it has only increased since then. Eventually Amnesty International was banned also. This is why we can see all the violence carried out by Israel (since Red Cross, international press etc.) are not banned by Israelis. Yet we only get the Indian govt. info from Kashmir.

I have looked long and hard to find objective info in the Indian media, press etc. on Kashmir. To see if they report on how the insurgency started? What the Indian military and forces have done and are doing. Yet I have found nothing, except propoganda. Day in and day out, channels like Zee TV and Indian newspapers (and now movies) hide the above facts. I assume no Indian school teaches the above information I have provided to its students. Due to this, I think everyone in India, and on this site, is convinced that Kashmir is nothing but terrorism.

There is a big (and correct, in my opinion) complaint made by Indian interactors that Pakistanis are taught false history regarding Ghaznavi etc. However, I have never seen any complaints from Indian interactors on this site, about Indian students being taught incorrect current affairs, about what their own govt. in doing in Kashmir. Current affairs have a lot more impact than things that happened centuries ago.

This is why I am always amazed at how little Indians, themselves, know about their own govts.` history and actions in Kashmir. The only objective resources I have found on Kashmir are internatinal resources.

I think we should all try to search for and accept the truth. We should all try to expose the truth of all repressions in South Asia, be it Bangladesh, Kashmir, Sri Lanka or anywhere else, in an objective manner. At the very least, we should not try to hide them and assist in presenting false propoganda. The country in South Asia which reaches the highest level of introspection, in my opinion, will be the strongest in the long run. Not the country that reaches the highest no. of textile exports or IT exports.

I can provide you with much more information, if you would like.

ali #117 welcome back to chowk. i see you are off to a great start. i beg to differ with both you and NHK - but will say this that you have a great sense of humor and God knows we need more of that on chowk. (please try though not to insult our dearly departed panjabi female ancestors).

as for bengalis cleaning streets - they are a notch above the karachiites who make the mess in the first place; and two notches above the world reknowned car-theives of karachi; and three notches above altaf bhai and his gang of MQM thugs; and four notches above the arab terrorists. after all, they earn an honest living and dont hurt anyone - which is more than can be said for the rest of the hoodlums in karachi.

to be fair, i also dont buy Nazar`s romanticized vision of the gentle bengalis. there are no doubt many very nice and gentle bengalis that i have known. and some very very smart bengalis. but no community is without its rotten apples and i could go into the gory details but i wont.

hope you stick around a while on chowk this time and puncture some hot air balloons we have (present company excepted of course).

The story of east pakistan was possibly the biggest cover up in the history of pakistan. Nazar Hayat Khan spoke about the Brainwashing in the Airforce about the Bengalis being traitors, Kamila Shamsie Novel Kartography was based on a similiar notion of the east pakistanis being traitors. Yet its only now that we are beggning to utter these words or some acceptance. About the role of our Jawans in becoming an Occuping army pillaging its way through the civlian populations of East Pakistan. I recently read about one of the Nishan-e-Haider Martyrs giving up his life to to protect the western front from the advances of the Indian Army. Such duplicity of Values, the Army Leadership was corrupt, it was based on racist conception of the East Pakistanis being somehow inferior. Why has the army played such a negative role throughout the political history of pakistan. What is it that is being bred at the Leadership level in the Pak Army?

Recently Mr. Romair asked me question and gave following response
Bangla desh was worst thing happened to Pakistan but best thing to B. Desh.
It was demoralising to say the least. This demolished all innocence about two nation theory and led to Sindhi ( jiye sindh) and baloach problems. The baloach insurgency which needed to be put down Ruthlessly by Bhutto was direct outcome of bangladesh. This lead to reinforcement of resentment of minorities provinces and hatred of Punjab in general. This was most devastating blow to indian muslins psuche. All hypocracy, bigorty, racial animosity, ruthless killing by army was exposed. Till now Pakistani army was victorious by their own standards and in people mind and imaginations. The total uncompetitant conduct of war exposed myth and nation changed for ever. The last Cherished Institution lost all respect nor for defeat but also for nonfightening and immoral practices .
One othe worst thing happened to pakistan was one of educated, thinking,literary (excuseme to say) MORE CULTURED people and their ethos was gone. Bengalis love poetry, music, literature they are not people just with agriculture as culture, they are soft people with great appreciation. (I am Punjabi nominally but sindhi really as lived all life in Karchi). What Punjabis lack is selfrespect. Language is culture, they stood up to Quaid and did not accept crappy idea of urdu when you have great language as mother tongue. They stood and faught and delivered themselves for better.
It is fashion to say good damn we got rid of bloody bengalies but inside we all know its not true. If bengal was part of Pakistan today we would be doing better.

One of worst thing happened the army learnt bad things to go away with crime. The shameless killers and cowards like tikka, Farman Ali .... were never prosecuted. They learnt once any crime will be done and nothing happens. What army and rangers did to Mohajirs in 80/90s was same as killing of wholesale Bengalies. I do not like mohajirs in general due to aggressive and clanish attitude but there men were brutally murdered by army. Only person who has lived in Krachi through that time can understand anguish of Altaf Bhai.
I honestly feel loss of bangla desh was very bad thing happened to Pakistan.
If you have good friend and gentkleman and you are bad man and he decides to part you company. Is it good for him but bad for you. It is perverse pleasure to celebrate onces bad behavious.
I am aware almost all pakistani feel it was good that we broke, but really differ inthis matter.

#123 by stuka
//...The real battle India lost in 1971 was the Simla conference...//

A lot of people say this - but I think such assertions are not entirely valid. May be India was a little more magnanimous in victory than it had to be. But I don`t think it would have really mattered much in the long run even if Indira would have rode rough-shod over Butto`s sorry-a$!$. I mean - do you think Paki Army wouldn`t send Jihadis across just because Bhutto signed on dotted line declaring the LoC as the border( this is the main gripe of people who assert than we gave away at negotiating table what we won in war - that Indira should have forced Bhutto do declare LoC as the border)?

What would have really mattered - if Indira would have taken the war to West Pak and defeated and defanged Paki Army (Something like what Americans did in Japan). Leaving offensive capabilities of Paki Army in tact was a mistake.

Whether India was capable of doing that is another question and is speculative at this point (even though I personally think it could have been done, probably at a higher cost). Any case American actions ruled out any such adventure. But I think Indira was tempted to do that - she was one bal!sy lady.

Fuzair:

``So, who would have won? Probably, eventually, the Indians but they would have paid a very heavy price for it and Generals like Manekshaw weren`t sure it was possible, even without the US intervening to ``save`` Pakistan. ``

I don`t think so. Like you said, the casualty figures appear to be lopsided on the west because Pakistan was making offensive moves while India was fighting a holding action, concentrating on the east. Besides, in the west, the PA would have fought on homeground with a supportive local populace. Winning west Pakistan is a pipe dream unless one is talking of grabbing portions to be used as bargaining chips. The real battle India lost in 1971 was the Simla conference.

#116 - fuzair

The problem with `neutralizing` the Eastern Threat is that Bangladesh is now far stronger and a far greater military threat to India than East Pakistan ever was.

Ehhhhhhhhhhhh????

The threat to India on the Eastern theatre was not that Pakistan maintained a huge army presence there........the threat was in the fact that the Eastern neighbour was also Pakistan.

And while the Bangladeshi army may be stronger than what the erstwhile Pakistanis maintained,it is not too much of a threat. A pain in the wrong places at times, perhaps, like a couple of years back when they got into a tiff with the BSF.

Now since what we have there is a small country, we can afford to just station a few companies there and turn our attention westwards. Earlier our doing this would have been conditional to the troop presence in EP.

Personally I feel Indira Gandhi made a wise move by leaving West Pakistan alone. But I do feel she could have extracted more out of the Shimla Conference than she managed.

#117

Only one word - Disgusting

re ali 117

``They end up mostly sweeping the floors and cleaning the sewers in Karachi. But hey! its their choice. ``

Can`t help it bhai, how else are they going to support the 3 lakh Pakistanis in our refugee camps for 32 years?

``I wonder if they can ``smell`` their ``jute`` when they are down cleaning the gutters beneath MA Jinnah Road, like Mujibur Rehman smelt it while walking besides MA Jinnah Road.``

No, but they can certainly smell the blood of Mohajirs spilt in Karachi everyday by the agencies since the mid-`80s.

Nazar sahib

Your soliloquy in # 107 makes me feel guilty about often forgetting the culture, the heritage, and yes, Tagore. Like Rozaiba # 114 said, I wasn`t born then either but we all lost something. Above all the ease of being with families and friends. I know it all too deeply with a family that is split between, what is now, two countries separated by 1600 miles. The human cost of the War was more than the dead, wounded, and missing. It was also the living.

As an aside, did you know or serve with the late Mitty Masud who just passed away?

Mr Ali, # 117, Saminshah was absolutely correct, till people like NHK are around Pakistan will InshAllah survive. And survive will it InshAllah do.

Exactly like that, Ali, till people like you are around, Pakistan will keep on facing humiliation like 71. And, unfortunately, there are too many like you around to rule out this possibility.

Yours was the most disgusting, pathetic and repugnant reply this thread has generated thus far. Yours parents should be damned proud of the creature they gave birth to.

#107 by nazarhayatkhan

[``I deeply miss them - ``]

You dont have to. The machhli walas are coming in droves, crawling on their stomachs across Thar and lining up outside the Pakistani embassy in Dhaka. They end up mostly sweeping the floors and cleaning the sewers in Karachi. But hey! its their choice.

I wonder if they can ``smell`` their ``jute`` when they are down cleaning the gutters beneath MA Jinnah Road, like Mujibur Rehman smelt it while walking besides MA Jinnah Road.

Re: Mohar11 and Fountainheader,

The problem with `neutralizing` the Eastern Threat is that Bangladesh is now far stronger and a far greater military threat to India than East Pakistan ever was. One of the reasons why the Bengalis were so upset with Pakistan was that the ``defense of the East lies in the West`` attitude of the Pakistani Army. E. Pakistan only had a token military presence until 1971, when it was more than doubled because of the insurgency.

So, unless the Indians were envisaging a client state a la Bhutan, neutralizing E. Pakistan was an incredibly stupid move. Of course, one of the reasons why the Army mutineers killed Mujib was because he was perceived as an Indian puppet and the Indians maintained a substantial military presence in Bangladesh well after 1971. Maybe that was their plan and Col. Farooq Rahman put an end to it?

As far as `neutralizing` West Pakistan goes, that is indeed one of the great `what ifs?` of history. Many Indian armchair strategists bemoan letting Pakistan live in 1971 and cry see what is happening in Punjab/Kashmir now! Would the IA have been able to militarily neutralize W. Pakistan? Maybe, maybe not.

Pros:
Badly demoralized Pakistani Army and badly shaken country.

Cons:
No overwhelming force superiority in the West.
Very difficult to move troops quickly from East to West.
Pakistani strategic reserve (one armour and two infantry divisions) uncommitted.
PAF essentially intact.

So even without the US ``saving`` Pakistan in 1971, the Pakistan Army was still a strong fighting force in the West. In fact, even Manekshaw did not foresee the magnitude of his victory in the East. The campaign was expected to takes weeks longer and cost the Indians much, much more than it did. However, the Eastern Front still cost the Indians about 5,700 casualties. The Pakistani troops in the West were not as badly demoralized, without any air support and with a commander as incompetent as Niazi. So would the West have been the cakewalk that Indian armchair strategists of the Bharat-Rakshak variety think it would have been?

Well, the IA took about 5,800 casualties in the West and claimed to have inflicted about 15,000 on the Pakistanis. Quite lopsided but possible if the Indians were defending prepared positions and the Pakistanis were charging headlong onto them. However, the acknowledged Indian casualties still indicate that the PA was not that badly demoralized and could still fight.

So, who would have won? Probably, eventually, the Indians but they would have paid a very heavy price for it and Generals like Manekshaw weren`t sure it was possible, even without the US intervening to ``save`` Pakistan.

to : #107 by nazarhayatkhan on November 22, 2003 6:08am PT

you desplay very high moral which i never think any pakistani may likely to contend.till ppl like u in pakistan,pakistan will survive.

NazarHayatKhan:

``I deeply miss them - I think Pakistan lost its softer side by losing them. ``

That was touching. You speak my heart! Though I wasn`t even born then, I say Pakistan lost it`s soul in 1971.

#109 by fountainheader

You hit the nail on the head.

//...India saw this as an excellent opportunity to neutralise one of those 3 frontiers...//

I think the plan was also to ``neutralize`` the western frontier. But for the Americans, that would have been done, and the region would have been much more peaceful by now. Pakistanis, like Bangladeshis, would have had a working democracy by now (with possible imperfections) and would have been trying to improve their economy rather wasting resources on a debilitating fight with much more powerful neighbor.

Actually, the considering the standard of Paki economy at that point time( 6% growth as compared 3% ``Hindu rate of growth`` in India ) - pakis would have been way ahead of India by now. Instead of exporting Talibans to all over the world, Pakis would have been exporting software.

One of those ``if only`` questions of history.