The writer is a senior journalist and has held several editorial positions including most recently at The Friday Times. He is currently senior adviser, outreach, at the Sustainable Development Policy Institute
Former Lt Gen (retd) Shahid Aziz’s upcoming book has already raked up the Kargil episode and the book is not even about Kargil! From what has so far appeared, there’s nothing he has said that is not already known.
Yet, there’s back and forth between Aziz and Musharraf. This is the problem with avoiding closures. It is somewhat ironic that any mention of Kargil, the operation Musharraf defends with such vehemence, upsets him greatly. It’s almost like he knows that operation is unlikely to place him in the hall of fame. Infamy is, of course, another matter.
Consider.
The first and the most important issue is whether the civilian government gave a nod to the operation. Musharraf says then-prime minister (PM) Nawaz Sharif was in the know of it. Perhaps, but the question is: when was the PM told about it; or, to what extent? It is one thing for a civilian government to order the army to start a conflict and quite another for a cabal of generals to initiate hostilities and then inform the PM and other services that the bow is bent and drawn.
Available evidence points to the fact that Sharif was given fait accompli and thus placed in a terribly unenviable position — especially if we note that Sharif was already committed to a process of rapprochement with New Delhi and had hosted the Indian PM, oblivious to what the generals had pulled.
Musharraf’s assertion becomes doubtful also because the operation was kept hush-hush to the point where even chiefs of air force and navy were not informed until the Northern Light Infantry — then a paramilitary force — troops and other support elements had occupied some 500 square miles of the area. In fact, the DGMO, Lt Gen Tauqir Zia (retd), was ordered, ex post facto, to come up with a rationale to justify the operation.
If there ever was a classic example of situating the appreciation rather than appreciating the situation, this was it.
If truth be told, they had no plan, neither strategic nor tactical. No thought was given to whether the environment at the regional and global levels was conducive for such an operation. There was no proper assessment of the Indian response and it was assumed, arbitrarily, that India would resign to the occupation instead of mounting a maximum effort to evict our troops. Or what options, if any, Pakistan could exercise in case the Indians decided, which sure as hell they would have and did, to sacrifice any number of men to regain lost positions. How would our troops survive beyond a certain point in the absence of a secure line of communication; what will happen when they run out of rations and ammunition and when casualties begin to mount and the men left to fend for themselves?
Did the plan cater to that? Were we prepared to open another front across the LoC to force the Indians to reorganise and thereby ensure that the mounting pressure on the men we had left trapped on those heights was released? And if that scenario was indeed war-gamed, did the game factor in the Indian response if we chose to expand the zone of conflict? From the conversation between Musharraf and then-CGS Aziz Khan, which was intercepted, it doesn’t seem to me that any of these scenarios were war-gamed. Oh, and that conversation not only gives the lie to Musharraf’s Sharif-knew-it position but also makes a mockery of his great insistence on secrecy, exchange notes as he did on a top secret operational matter on an open, unsecure line. And CGS Aziz’ boasts show how poorly they had assessed India’s response and their own perceived advantage.
Secrecy has levels and Musharraf was not mounting a Special Forces operation which required going in, executing a mission and getting out. Even such an operation would have required political consent.
At some point the Indians would have known about the occupation. If Musharraf and his lieutenants had worked out the scenarios, they would have known that they could not finger India without the other two services onboard and, in the worst-case scenario, preparing the nation for a possible broader conflict.
In his book, in the chapter on Kargil, Musharraf keeps talking about deploying troops to cover gaps along the LoC, why others outside the FCNA and 10 Corps were not informed, why India was in no position to opt for an all-out war and in the same breath talks about India’s use of air force, its disproportionate response and the war hysteria that had gripped India and which necessitated pulling in the CAS and the CNS. The chapter is remarkable for its disingenuousness and inconsistencies.
Brig Shaukat Qadir (retd) in his article for the RUSI (Royal United Services Institute) journal argues that the operation began with limited objectives but acquired a bigger momentum. That is possible, though I can’t see how it could have expanded so much on the spur of the moment. But if it indeed did, that still reflects poorly on the commanders who turned salami slicing into a huge embarrassment for the Indian Army which it just could not swallow.
At the politico-strategic level, Musharraf made no serious attempt to understand the impact of diplomacy being conducted between Islamabad and Delhi. Nor does it seem that he realised how effectively India would combine its local military response with its diplomatic offensive.
His assertion that Sharif lost the war on the political front which he (Musharraf) was winning on the ground is nothing if not dishonest, the bravery of the men on the ground notwithstanding. US General Anthony Zinni, a Musharraf friend, has a different account and informal talks with a number of officers over the years corroborate that account.
Some former officers on internet discussion forums fault Shahid Aziz for not taking to the grave service matters. That’s poppycock. Kargil requires closure not just because we need to honour those who fought like dickens and fell to a harebrained plan as much as enemy fire, but also because we need to identify the structural flaws in decision-making that now threaten to unravel us.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 6th, 2013.
COMMENTS (84)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@ Pakisatn first "Kargil was planned well, executed well but failed because our then PM could not sustain pressure. Had he sustained pressure for another one month”
This is exactly the problem that leads to complete miscalculation of underestimating the enemy when facts are hidden by the army/government to its peoplesince 1965/71/and latest 1999 kargil : Understand how infactual is that statement from following facts hiddent o PAK people but these facts can be verified on google and may other web links: 1) By July/4th when NS was sitting with US President; Pakistan had lost most of the mountain peaks like Tiger Hill etc.(strategic points- VERIFY KARGIL TIMELINE ON GOOGLE) 2) The supply depots of amunitions ( Muntho Dhalo and Drass) were acurately hit by several laser guided Dumb bombs which inflicted complete destruction of amunition supplies and demoralised the Pak army. In fact the laser guided bombs destroyed 300 PAK army people controlling Muntho Dhalo amunition supply depot. ( google on Muntho Dhalo and IAF role @ 18000 feet height as IAF Mirages bombed these positions from above 30000 ft height - well above the reach of Stinger Missiles which PAk army was boasting to PAK Airforce initially but the PAK airforce tried to put sense into PAK army but of no avail. 3) PAK Airforce was in no situation to face Indian MIG29/Mirages equiped with Beyond Visual Range (BVR) & hence would have lost F16s in heavy numbers and not only that; it would have exposed Pakistan as starting an all out war which would have been counterproductive. Pakistan simply had no choice and by end June/1999; had learnt after their supply lines were routed and forces demoralised that led mian NS to send his brother rushing to USA seeking help to intervene and stop war with India for if the war had continued further; PAK would have lost more territory and people. PAK had already lost the war. "IT IS EASY TO START A WAR BUT VERY DIFFICULT TO END IT".
@Lala Gee: Sir, May I know according to which “International Law”, "Direct Action" was undertaken? Especially since it was Jinnah, a lawyer who initiated it.
@Yuri Kondratyuk:
Ever heard of "International Law"? All the civilized nations of the world abide by it, accept the savages like Red Indians. Oops, sorry for the unintentional insult to Red Indians, my sincerest apologies, I meant Indians.
@Jim: Jug jug joyous mere Lal (and Lala-Ji)! You made my day, Brother Jim!
@Yuri Kondratyuk: You are right! The UN resolution of 1948 gave only two options-join India or Pakistan-probably bcz Raja Hari Singh used the third when he decided to join Indian Union. Of course, after both Bhutto & indira gandhi signed the Simla Agreement, the UN resolution became null & void! BTW, I like your name! Sounds Russian.
It is hilarious how some Pakistanis continue to believe that a civilian leader surrendered a war that the military was winning. This in a country where the military runs everything. Where the military has toppled civilian leaders with greater ease than how Americans topple foreign governments. A country where any number of civilian leaders have been assassinated, jailed, hanged, exiled, beaten up. But when a great military victory is possible, they let this powerless figurehead negotiate a withdrawl? Yeah right. I mean NS was running around like a headless chicken: first to the Saudis, then to Beijing (on that flight, the Saudi intelligence chief accompanied him and held his hand all the way. Aww), and finally to Washington, even as India was furiously pounding away and decimating the NLI. Delusion, thy name is Pakistan!
Poor @Lala Gee, clinging on to tattered old resolutions and narratives and still wet dreaming about Junagadh, Deccan Hyderabad, Bhopal etc. Sir, it is 2013. Wake up. Or maybe not. It is people like you who have stopped the subcontinent from realizing its potential. Your single-minded obsession and your itching to go to war over it, even nuclear war, has not done Pakistan good. It has destroyed your nation while enriching its military. Maybe you are part of the military-bureaucracy nexus which has benefited by it and therefore have no compunction pushing the confrontation line. How easily you talk of nuclear war and ask "will you dare"? With its No First Use policy, India is a reactive nuclear power, but you can bet your backside that Pakistan will be vaporized by the time its first weapon lands. And the world won't mind one bit given the well laid out narrative of your nuclear roguery. But it won't even come to that. Your own jihadis will eviscerate you first. And you will be the first to stand in line to seek refuge in India. Welcome.
@Lala Gee:
Logically, any law holds as long as the authority enforces it. Since the law giver had renounced the authority and responsibility, it doesn't hold after abdication. Besides if you are sure Hyderabad is yours Sir, molon labe
@Yuri Kondratyuk:
Here is the relevant part of the Indian Independence Act of 1947 dealing with the 'Indian States'. Can you show me where the words 'Must join to either Dominion' were used, or where the 'States' were explicitly forbidden to remain independent. As per the standard practice of law all over the world, until something is specifically forbidden by law, it is assumed to be allowed and legal.
"Consequences of the setting up of the new Dominions.
7.(1) As from the appointed day:
(a) .....
(b) the suzerainty of His Majesty over the Indian States lapses, and with it, all treaties and agreements in force at the date of the passing of this Act between His Majesty and the rulers of Indian States, all functions exercisable by His Majesty at that date with respect to Indian States, all obligations of His Majesty existing at that date with towards Indian States or the rulers thereof, and all powers, rights, authority or jurisdiction exercisable by His Majesty at that date in or in relation to Indian States by treaty, grant, usage, sufferance or otherwise; and
(c) .....
Provided that, notwithstanding anything in paragraph (b) or paragraph (c) of this subsection, effect shall, as nearly as may be continue to be given to the provisions of any such agreement as is therein referred to which relate to customs transit and communications, posts and telegraph, or other like matters, until the provisions in question are denounced by the Ruler of the Indian State or person having authority in the tribal areas on the one hand, or by the Dominion or Province or other part there of concerned on the other hand, or are superseded by subsequent agreements."
But to Kargil..........
It united the modern Indian Nation like nothing else has done before, from Nagaland to Gujarat and from Kashmir (all Pakistanis will be horrified) to Kanyakumari for the first time there were military honors to our martyrs from Nagaland and Kashmir,
thanks to that self hardy fool Mushrraf
The flawed "Structure" has not changed since Kargil. So what is the point of picking flesh of the bygones?
@Lala Gee: I am talking about the violence perpetrated by Kasim Rizvi and razakars. I do not know how the land area of the erstwhile Hyderabad state or its postal service is actually relevant here.
AFAIK, there was no provision in the Indian Independence Act for any Princly State to remain independent. please quote references if otherwise.
@Milind: According to Najam Sethi, NS was briefed at least once by Musharraf about Kargil BEFORE the Indians detected the infiltration. Perhaps not at the planning stage, but definitely once the NLI-dressed as Mujahideen were positioned. NS was deluded into thinking that this would result in him being glorified in Pak. The picture painted to him by Musharraf was certainly rosy and neither of them estimated the vehemence with which India would react.
@Yuri Kondratyuk:
"I do not know of the rest but, being a Hyderabadi(Deccan), I can tell that “upraising” was actually started by muslims with singular purpose of converting the entire Hindu population to the peaceful religion of Islam through sheer terror, murder and rape."
LOLLLLLLLLL.... Hyderabad Deccan state was the largest and the richest state of India having an area of about 220,000 square kilometers (equivalent to Sindh and KPK provinces combined). She had been an independent state for more than 300 years, even during the British rule. She had her own army, airline, railway, postal service, and even her own currency. Nizams were the rulers of the state for centuries, and they opted to stay independent as per provisions of the Indian Independence Act.
Now, the important question is, did they start "terror, murder, and rape" after 300 years of peaceful coexistence? Or, the same was happening since the beginning of their reign? Would like to know from a native.
@Lala-ji, Whatever might have happened at other places, the Bangladesh problem was a self-inflicted one! Pakistani rulers behaved like zamindars-feudal lords- with Bengalis & that led to creation of Bangladesh. India, willy-nilly, joined in that war, but creation of Bangladesh would have happened even without India's participation. Looking at the way Pakistan is treating Baloch people, it doesn't seem to have learnt much from 1971 experience & history might as well repeat there, too!
@Lala-ji, Whatever might have happened at other places, the Bangladesh problem was a self-inflicted one! Pakistani rulers behaved like zamindars-feudal lords- with Bengalis & that led to creation of Bangladesh. India, willy-nilly, joined in that war, but creation of Bangladesh would have happened even without India's participation. Looking at the way Pakistan is treating Baloch people, it doesn't seem to have learnt much from 1971 experience & history might as well repeat there, too! T
@MM - "Musharraf was pushing for taking a stand and NS ultimately caved in"
That was the most pragmatic thing your PM could do especially since he was kept in the dark before starting this adventurism. As it is China washed its hands off (stayed neutral) thereby limiting options for support. Additionally the nuclear tests by both the countries were fresh in the minds of the world leaders, setting a scare. The U.S. establishment (Bill Clinton) seemed to lean towards India (compared to other U.S. presidents), by visiting India, easing visas and signing major deals the year before. Against this backdrop, "caving in" as you call it was the wisest thing your PM did.
Frankly your army appeared irresponsible, by starting of this in isolation... None of the world's military activities are conducted without the participation of the head of state (or civilians). Take the OBL case... The U.S. President was on top of the whole exercise as the U.S. marines took OBL out in Abbottabad.
@Lala Gee:
Forget "all the way". During Kargil war, Musharraf was stunned to find out that the navigation system of Ghauri missile was so broken that once fired, nobody could guess which way it would go. In fact during some of its "successful" tests, the missile actually ended up in Iranian territory! So, he was forced to back out from his nuclear bluff.
@gp65 Hats off....well said...as usual paks always believe in conspiracies but not he truth just like they dont want to accept pre islamic culture and history of their country.
@Lala Gee:
I do not know of the rest but, being a Hyderabadi(Deccan), I can tell that "upraising" was actually started by muslims with singular purpose of converting the entire Hindu population to the peaceful religion of Islam through sheer terror, murder and rape. This led to people uniting under communist ideology (not hindutva) to fight the razakars. the so called police action came much later. The razakar party still exists albeit under a different name (there's the proof of Indian tolerance for you) and their leader Akbaruddin Owaisi recently threatened to kill entire Hindu population of India within 15 minutes only to comically chicken-out when police arrested him! Goa was a colony and colonialism ended (much similar to the caliphate) but Portuguese failed to get the message that times have moved on(just like present day Pakistanis).
@lala Gee, You conflate all kinds of unrelated issues and think that somehow that constitutes an argument. Goa and Sri Lanka had nothing to do with Indo Pakistan relations which is what was being discussed. Hyderabad and Junagadh and many other princely states within India's geographic territory were absorbed within India - no different from Balochistan in Pakistan. This was part of the unfinished business of partition and independence. This was in no way comparable to Bangladesh where India made no attempt whatsoever to take an inch of Bangladeshi soil. SInce I was responding to someone about why India was involved in Bangladesh, I stand by my response which is absolutely accurate. In fact the demography of West Bengal and Assam changed permanently as a result of the migration to India at that time.
@Pakistan First: "@gp65: This war was not being fought on plane grounds. if you see the map you will come ot know that it was not easy for indian millitary to provide logistics supports on immediate basis. We should have sustained pressure for another two months and it would have been impossible for Indian’s millitary to do anything atleast for Siachen".
India was providing logistics support by air but because Pakistan was pretending that they were not involved it could not provide logistic support to its soldiers who had run out of bullets and food and had no cover when they were bombed by Indian airforce. India joined the war in June and within a month, Pakistani soldiers position had become untenable. Holding 2 months was simply not feasible. Moreover even if they had held for 2 months, it would not have been winter it would just have been early September.
"Regarding 911, Musharaf promised to remain neutral in this war which absolutely makes sense. No muslim country even came to help us during our tough time so why to take a side when Afghanistan was in tough time?"
Actually that is just the point Gen. Ejaz was making that he promised to remain neutral in the Corp Comanders meeting but committed to the US that he would participate in it. Not just Pakistani airspace but Pakistani airbase Shamsi was made available to Americans. Any number of people were handed over to Americans and Pakistan participated in the extraordinary renditions program of Americans. Thus Musharraf did not remain neutral though he said he would.
@MM : "Mr. Ejaz Haider needs to read up on Bruce Reidel’s account of July 4th talks between Clinton and Nawaz Sharif. It was a complete surrender by NS even though Pakistan was in a very strong position as the heights were occupied by the army." I have read the Bruce Reidel account and it does say that Clinton stood strong, so Nawaz had to give in. Nowhere in the narrative does it say that Pakistani army was in a strong position (when in fact its soldiers had run out of rations and bullets) and were without cover and being pounded by Indian airforce. Have you wondered why Nawaz went to US in the first place if Pakistan was in such a strong position as Musharraf claims? In any case Musharraf is a fine one to claim that he stood up to the Americans.
@Lala Gee How many Sri Lankan refugees came to India? In thousands. When local Tamil militants killed 13 Srilankan soldiers there was a general massacre of Tamils in all over Sri Lanka. Although, Wikipedia estimates death toll anywhere between 400 and 3000 and 18,ooo houses, business installations destroyed, but, other independent agencies reported a much larger scale of death and destruction. As a result a large number of Sri Lankan Tamils were forced to take shelter in Tamil Nadu. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BlackJuly#Eyewitnessaccounts Who instigated uprisings and insurgencies in Junagadh, Hyderabad Deccan, Bhopal, and Goa, and then occupied using army, aka ‘Police Action’. What was the reason for Sikim’s annexation in 1971? India didn't occupy Junagarh by force. The local nawab was a coward. After his outrageous decision to accede, an overwhelmingly Hindu majority state, to Pakistan, the local people revolted against the nawab and law & order collapsed. Fearing for his life he fled to Karachi along with his family, leaving the administration to Diwan, the chief minister. There was a genuine concern of a large scale massacre of local Muslim population. The chief minister contacted the nawab in Karachi to explain the dangerous situation and asked his permission accede to India which was granted. The CM followed nawab's order and asked Indian govt. take over the administration. End of the story. Don't forget Pakistan too, forced the Khan of Kalat to accede to Pakistan by putting a gun on his head. No such situation existed in Bhopal, after initial resistance the local nawab signed the instrument of accession with India. Nizam of Hyderabad never acceded to Pakistan, only wanted to remain independent, ignoring the fact that 90% of local people were Hindus and wanted to be part of India. I don't want go into the atrocities committed by Muslim razakaars on Hindus, but, to put it briefly, soon Nizam and his razakaars were brought their senses, and the Nizam became a history. In contrast, Pakistan resorted to treachery in Kashmir by sending tribal brutes into the state who indulged in widespread loot, rape and plunder, leaving no other choice for Maharaja to merge his state with India. You are in illegal occupation of part of Indian territory. As for Sikkim, it always was part of India, the chogyal, who you consider as an independent ruler, was by special treaty given some privileges which were no more than that of the Jageerdars enjoyed in the British India. By an ordinance those privileges were taken back. By repeatedly mentioning Goa, in your posts you sound even more ridiculous. Goa is not on the Mars, it's part of Indian landmass. By depicting liberation of Goa from Portuguese colonial rule by India as an Indian imperialism, aren't you questioning the wisdom of our forefathers like Gandhi & Jinnah's long struggle to liberate India from the British colonial rule? If British rule in India was illegal & immoral, then how do you justify Portuguese or French rule in other parts of India?
@polwala:
"Pakistani army must not do anything as stupid as Kargil ever again unless they are prepared to go “All the Way”."
Perhaps our nation is willing to go "All the Way" to help our Kashmiri brothers because more Kashmiris live in Pakistan than the Indian Occupied part of Kashmir. The real question you should be asking is, are you? What will then happen to your dreams of taking over USA as the world's new superpower?
@Abid P. Khan:
"This comment was on @Lala Gee’s: response to @Mirza:! Nothing else."
Seems like you are answerable to someone.
General forgets the fact that during kargil the pak air force lacked any thing beyond visual range. the only time paf jet got to air was locked on by mig-29 and had to run with its tail between its legs. now the less the said the better about pak navy.
@Abid P. Khan: "When Washington makes an “offer” how dare NS not comply?"
He did not comply in May 1998 , did he?
Lesson that Pakistanis must Learn from Kargil ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ How to snatch defeat from the Jaws of Victory despite being a Nuclear Power. Losers!
@polwala: "....Sharif is a politician perfectly capable of making U-turns and appearing to be innocent and at worst seeming to get ‘fait accompli’." . When Washington makes an "offer" how dare NS not comply?
May be ejaz can help with the war-gaming next time...
@Ejaz Haider, "Available evidence points to the fact that Sharif was given fait accompli and thus placed in a terribly unenviable position ....." Not true. The PM knew enough to make a statement in the national parliment to say"India cannot hold on to Kashmir for more tha six months" well before the Kargill situation was discovered by India. Sharif is a politician perfectly capable of making U-turns and appearing to be innocent and at worst seeming to get 'fait accompli'. Ejaz is correct about the generals not seeing the true implications of their actions. Their adventure was purely under the protection of imagined immunity provided by their newly acquired nuclear capability. Those are dangerous assumptions. Let them believe what they will, even now. The fact is, India is reactive. India will not do anything to provoke Pakistan, but it will defend its territorial and all other interests and retaliate to agression with all resources at its disposal. If Pakistani generals have not learnt from 1965, 1971,Siachin and Kargil, then nothing India or the world can do to help. Soildarity with Kashmiris is just a slogan invented to get masses on the side of military. It is about acquiring additional land and control of waters. Let us be clear about that. Pakistani army must not do anything as stupid as Kargil ever again unless they are prepared to go "All the Way".
C l a r i f i c a t i o n .
@Abid P. Khan: Abid P. Khan Reply @Lala Gee: Touché! . This comment was on @Lala Gee's: response to @Mirza:! Nothing else.
@gp65:
This is in continuation to my previous comment where I was mentioning how brazenly India occupied the independent states of Hyderabad Deccan, Bhopal, and Goa, and newly joined to Pakistan the state of Junagadh using manipulations and deceit. Yesterday, I was reading the the "Instrument of Accession", executed by Maharajah Hari Singh of Jammu and Kashmir with India on October 26, 1947, and this clause came across.
"8. Nothing in this Instrument affects the continuance of my Sovereignty in and over this State, or, save as provided by or under this Instrument, the exercise of any powers, authority and rights now enjoyed by me as Ruler of this State or the validity of any law at present in force in this State.".
Does anybody know where this Maharajah lives nowadays? Perhaps in fools paradise.
@Awais: " Generals got promoted, while the families of the those who were killed were disowned and Musharraf became the President!" +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ In any functioning democracy Musharraf would have been court martialed and spent the rest of his life in a deep dungeon. Pakistan Paaendabad.
@Pakistan First: " Kargil was planned well, executed well but failed because our then PM could not sustain pressure. Had he sustained pressure for another one month" ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Sir You are completely misinformed. 1. The Kargil Plan was rejected by Zia and Benazir as being poor. The only reason Mush recycled it was cause his ego blinded him. 2. Your PM could not sustain pressure for a month cause Pakistan had fuel reserves only for 3 days. 3. The Plan's objectives of blocking Indian access roads and creating international attention on Kashmir backfired , with the entire world, including China standing with India.
In essence Kargil has left Pakistan's claim to Kashmir in total tatters. All it can now do is hold Kashmir Day for the next 1000 years.
@Lala Gee:
Touché!
@gp65:
"If your internal crisis had remained internal, India would not have been involved. But when 8 million refugees from East PAkistan came to India, there was no choice but for India to intervene."
Are you really that naive? Or, misleading is your mission? How many Sri Lankan refugees came to India? Who instigated uprisings and insurgencies in Junagadh, Hyderabad Deccan, Bhopal, and Goa, and then occupied using army, aka 'Police Action'. What was the reason for Sikim's annexation in 1971? Because no one was there to raise voice against Indian imperialism. You are not that innocent madam. Are you?
@Pakistan First: All indo-pak wars have not lasted even 2 weeks. by then, both countries are exhausted, have no ammunications, and have no fuel either. In this age, pakistan will not last even 7 days, and will run out of its foreign reseves. Also, every day of war, means set back of 1 year for the economy. Now you know, why in 65 years pakistan is still on the brink of an economic collapse. Musharaff was a illiterate fool, and cared two hoots for his men. He shoulod have know that being 15% of India's size, india would have outgunned pakistan , militarily, economically and diplomatically. He was a very poor thinker.
@MM: Possibly the only comment so far anchored in reality.
@gp65: This war was not being fought on plane grounds. if you see the map you will come ot know that it was not easy for indian millitary to provide logistics supports on immediate basis. We should have sustained pressure for another two months and it would have been impossible for Indian's millitary to do anything atleast for Siachen. Regarding 911, Musharaf promised to remain neutral in this war which absolutely makes sense. No muslim country even came to help us during our tough time so why to take a side when Afghanistan was in tough time? Futhermore, it makes a very weak case if our soil is used by terrorist and that too who do not even belong to Pakitan. What justifcation will you use if Uzbek/Tajiks come, stay and use our territory for their own motives
@Manju: This adventure on Kargil started with the confidence that Pakistan had Nuclear arms and India would be very careful not to try harder to push Pakistan back as Pakistan can retaliate with nuclear arms if India goes for an all out war. Of course the generals were completely wrong with their assumptions. It is surprising some of those generals(Pakistan media included) after the avalanche incident on Pakistani side kept pushing India to pull back from Siachen. Average pakistani should understand that India is not going let go Siachen given the history of misadventures from Pakistani side.
@Mirza:
"Why only Kargil requires closure? Why not the atrocities and surrender in E. Pakistan? Why not OBL’s presence in an army base and the list goes on and on?"
Sure, the list goes on. Why not from the real beginning? Why not from Mugals? Why not from Afghans? Why not from Arabs? Ask any Hindutva disciple. They want closure on these too.
@Pakistan First: "Success has many fathers while failure is an orphan. Kargil was planned well, executed well but failed because our then PM could not sustain pressure".
You mean like Musharraf sustained pressure in the wake of 9/11?
"Had he sustained pressure for another one month, it would have created more panic in indian millitary because winter was fast approaching and they did not have supply line to Siachen. "
Buddy the unilateral ceasefire was declared on July 4. IT was peak summer. Winter was not approaching in the next month as you seem to think.
@Shah: "There is no point of trust in this, we remember how you attacked East Pakistan in 1971 taking advantage from Pakistan’s internal political crisis. You will get a Kargil, so dont cry.."
If your internal crisis had remained internal, India would not have been involved. But when 8 million refugees from East PAkistan came to India, there was no choice but for India to intervene. When you say you will get Kargill, unsure what you mean. You do realize that Pakistan was not successful in Kargill? Also there is an issue of trust because just 2 months prior, Nawaz had hosted Vajpayee for a path breaking peace initiative.
@Shah: "Kargil Operation was indeed a great military success because the Indians were gripped by their throat through this strategy. Every war has to come to end some day and so did this conflict and the main point still remains that the Indians were given an extremely tough time in this conflict."
Your people had occupied heights when the LOC had been vacated in winter. That takes very little courage. Due to the advantageous position of Pakistani soldiers, initial losses of Indians were indeed high. However Indian army responded with passion and courage and forced Pakistan to seek a unilateral ceasefire (unlike Tashkent where both countries ageed to a ceasefire).
Musharraf can claim that Pakistanis were in a strong position. If that were indeed the case, why would Nawaz feel compelled to rush to Washington and agree to a unilateral ceasefire? Anyway it is interesting that the General that capitulated on one phone call from the US, talks about the need to be able to take pressure from US.
When you start the war, the advantage always is with you but it did not remain with you for very long at all.
@Shah: 'There is no point of trust in this, we remember how you attacked East Pakistan in 1971 taking advantage from Pakistan’s internal political crisis.'
What have you learned from the past? Nothing. Today, Pakistan is in a political crisis as well. Wonder what will go this time.
@David_Smith: No I do not think so. What he is telling us that like the rest of the people, he too has been brainwashed by whatever the establishment says.
Success has many fathers while failure is an orphan. Kargil was planned well, executed well but failed because our then PM could not sustain pressure. Had he sustained pressure for another one month, it would have created more panic in indian millitary because winter was fast approaching and they did not have supply line to Siachen. We could have pressurized them to vacate Siachen which they are occupying illegally. Did war break when Indians held Siachen. Offcourse not. Talking and analyzing incidents with hindsight is easy because all the details about what happened are known but when you are going to plan something as big as Kargil then there are always few assumptions.
@ ethicalman,
There is no point of trust in this, we remember how you attacked East Pakistan in 1971 taking advantage from Pakistan's internal political crisis.
You will get a Kargil, so dont cry..
@Shah: Kargil Operation was indeed a great military success because the Indians were gripped by their throat through this strategy. You mean it was as big a success for Pakistanis as was formation of Bangladesh?? Come on brother Bangladesh was a much bigger success for Pakistanis... Its not so easy to get half of your population to revolt against your own self, then get independence then allow it to be more prosperous than your own self! Only Pakistan can do it..... Tremendous achievement indeed...
@Usman786: @John B: Pakistan may consider if a tradition is set by USA and UK for killing innocents across the globe. and all looted wealth is returned to former colonies With what is visible in Baluchistan & NWFP, Pakistan cannot guarantee the rights and safety of its own people.... Why is it busy trying to take up the issue of the entire world onto its head?? Is it not pertinent to first clean up your own house and then go around cleaning up filth else where?? USA & UK!!! Brother these are the nations which are traditional colonizers of the world over the past 400 to 500 years... There is a saying in Hindi - "Jiski laati uski bains..." - means the cattle belongs to the one who holds the stick... USA & UK are the one holding the sticks right now and it would be an achievement for any nation if it avoids becoming the cattle. Pakistan offered itself as a GOAT that is sacrificed in BAKRID by playing on behalf of US in the Aghan war between the Soviets and US. Don't tell me you did it for the 'Ummah'.. The actual reason is simple - DOLLAR POWER....
Kargil is one more case why we Indians don't trust Pakistanis..
Kargil Operation was indeed a great military success because the Indians were gripped by their throat through this strategy.
Every war has to come to end some day and so did this conflict and the main point still remains that the Indians were given an extremely tough time in this conflict.
From indian prespective, Kargil was Back stabbing by pakistan as a country, when its civilians were trying to show that they want improved relations with India.
We indians should always keep our ears to ground, as Pakistan has the habit of playing double game.
@John B: Pakistan may consider if a tradition is set by USA and UK for killing innocents across the globe. and all looted wealth is returned to former colonies
The first and the most important issue is whether the civilian government gave a nod to the operation. Some simple questions & answers i have here - 1. Is it sane to invite a neighboring state for a war when you are very well aware than both the states involved are Nuclear even if it is approved by the PM? - NO 2. Knowing this if Pakistan does get involved in war - Does it stand for peace? - NO 3. Does Pakistan as a nation have any control over the Pakistani state? - NO
Normally I find mr Ejaz making all kinds of excuses for the same army that has reduced Pakistan to what it is today. Considering that, this piece is balanced.
India should demand damages from Pakistan for the 4 wars it started with India. All pakistanis and the Pakistani nation should be held accountable.
@dasmir: "We need scholar soldiers of the metal of Noor Khan.Only then we have achance." Well said. I don't know who Noor Khan is but from your expression it seems, with such people at the helm, there will be no wars to be fought.
" From what has so far appeared, there’s nothing he has said that is not already known." +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ If that is the case why was Pakistani Media and the current author silent on Musharraf's role and bvlame ? Like Gen Aziz were they also waiting for retirement benefits?:)
Blaming Musharraf for Kargil is too convenient ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ What is missing is an analysis that what is in Pakistani society, polity and culture that permits such misadventures and what is required ( apart from a crushing defeat) to avoid repetitions?
@mahmood: " Yes, we do need an independent, credible, comprehensive inquiry/report for the sorry Kargil affair." ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The Kargil War is fully covered in the pag no 78 of the Abbottabad Report. :)
It is not Kargil war alone that requires closure. Right from 1948 invasion of Kashmir by the pathan irregulars (who ended up looting and raping kashmiris), Ayub's adventure in 1965, Bangladesh liberation in 1971 till BB's death require investigation, prosecution and punishment of the guilty before closure of Kargil. These are the crimes committed by pak army/establishment in their own country, As to the crimes committed by them outside pakistan viz in India and Afganistan, the list is endless
Mr. Ejaz Haider needs to read up on Bruce Reidel's account of July 4th talks between Clinton and Nawaz Sharif. It was a complete surrender by NS even though Pakistan was in a very strong position as the heights were occupied by the army. Musharraf was pushing for taking a stand and NS ultimately caved in.
@John B: Except perhaps that it is a billion dollar question. I doubt that any war can be fought in a million dollars.
So here is a million $ question:
Will PAK now apologize to India for causing unwanted death and destruction and pay reparation
@Ejaz Why Pakistani media is silent over the number of casualties?. Musharraf says it was not war but localized operation with 400 Pakistani solders out of which he claimed 325(80%) are died in the battle. But, how many mujahideens? are these figure includes them also? if not then what is their number? One side Pakistan celebrates 'Kashmir solidarity day' another side it dont have a count of Mujahideens who fought war with Pakistan against India and died in the battle.
It is infuriating to see Musharraf shamelessly continue to peddle his lies on TV. The man is a habitual liar and a dimwit. In a gallery of rogue military leaders he is one of the most dishonorable people imaginable. He sent soldiers under him to die needlessly and then not only did he do nothing to honor their sacrifice he even refused to accept their bodies. Now, instead of showing some shame or remorse he appears on TV and loudly justifies his cowardice. The man should be tried for treason.
Ejaz Haider is among the Pakistani militarists who has to share some blame for this fiasco. In the past, he has consistently talked up Pakistani military prowess, as if its begged and borrowed U.S and Chinese armaments could have enabled the country to snatch Kashmir and browbeat India into submission or talks. War is more than just planes and tanks and guns. It requires societal heft and muscle that Pakistan lacks. Delusions that Pakistan is some kind of martial nation whose one soldier is equal to ten Indians etc need to be disabused. The harsh truth is Pakistan does not have the wherewithal to fight a three-day war. Hell, it barely has enough fuel to run its railways and airlines. Plus the international atmosphere is totally hostile to Pakistan. Even its so-called allies, U.S., China, and Saudi/Gulf did not come to its rescue in 1965, 1971, and 1999. The mood is even more sour now. Pakistan can sue for peace now and get away with a reasonable deal now (including the part of Kashmir it is holding). Or it can lose much more, including large parts of its western frontier.
EH, even if the war had strategic reasons and far reaching consequences, no general worth his salt can claim to go to war just to conquer '300 sq miles' of enemy territory and risk so many valuable lives in process. World is not living in middle ages..physical battlefield is no longer the theatre of war!!
@dasmir: " Tiger Niazi signed on the dotted lines of Gen Jacob." Factual error: Gen. Niazi surrendered to Gen. Jagjit Singh Arora.
@Awais: to Nadir "and Musharraf became the President!" Not true. Your generals are go-getters. He didn't become the President, he snatched the presidency!
@thehinduzionist:
"Mr Ejaz haider forgot to mention the shameless comment made by musharraf that more indians died than pakistanis."
Very good point. Ejaz is a closet Taliban. This was expected of him.
Pakistan Army needs to revisit its officers training curricullum and get out of comfort zone of Indians being Bania one Pak soldier is equal to ten Indian soldier.They should have learnt it in 1965,1971 and 1984! In fact in 1971 90,000 pakistani Soldier led by Tiger Niazi signed on the dotted lines of Gen Jacob.They should have dispassionately studied how Gen Manekshaw,Gen Arora and Gen Jacob planned,rehearsed,trained Muktibahini,aided by six months of intense international bad mouthing of Pakistan to the extreme annoyance of US and China and delivered Bangladesh successfully to the India. And the Officers selection needs drastic changes so that cowards and foolhardy officers like Yahya,Niazi,Zia,Beg,Gul and Mushraaf like substandard officers don't get past Le Col stage. We need scholar soldiers of the metal of Noor Khan.Only then we have achance.
You write “any mention of Kargil, the operation Musharraf defends with such vehemence, upsets him greatly.” This is a fair Op Ed and raises genuine questions about the aim and objective of a useless and embarrassing exercise and endangering the whole south Asia. In my humble opinion if NS has done anything patriotic he has saved the country from total collapse and more embarrassment by showing the courage to end the humiliation. You end with: “Kargil requires closure not just because we need to honour those who fought like dickens and fell to a harebrained plan as much as enemy fire, but also because we need to identify the structural flaws in decision-making that now threaten to unravel us.” Why only Kargil requires closure? Why not the atrocities and surrender in E. Pakistan? Why not OBL’s presence in an army base and the list goes on and on?
Much is being made about Gen. Shahid Aziz being too late. At least he has confirmed what everyone knows inside and outside Pakistan. It is good for the commoners to hear from their own Army General - not some journalist. He has also apologized - it does not make up for what was destroyed and his irresponsibility - but an apology that too by a General of Pakistan! Don't expect the same from the man who started It all and then made millions peddling lies. He fled. Now he lives in a self imposed exile - in luxury - afraid to return to Pakistan. All that bravado reduced to self serving cowardice. But other than that he was a "great" General.
@Nadir: In continuation of your remarks:
Generals got promoted, while the families of the those who were killed were disowned and Musharraf became the President!
How can anyone respect a general who disowned and left the bodies of his brave soldiers to rot in hostile territory? The brave soldiers who had left their wives and children behind and went into enemy territory in sub zero temperatures.
Closure is well and good. But how can Generals sail into the sunset when everyone else is called to be held into account? When a cabal of Generals launched this operation against the law why are they beyond account? Also, we owe an apology to the families of the NLI dead who were disowned by the military as they covered their tracks claiming the intruders were freedom fighters. Generals got promoted, while the families of the those who were killed were disowned. And Musharaf heaps blame on civilians.
Not a word here that I can disagree with . As an aside, never heard the term 'situating the appreciation'. Most people I know would have used the more familiar 'putting the cart before the horse.'
War is too sensitive an issue to be left on Generals and this is accepted by people across the world but, our Generals who have been trying to prove this wrong,And in this journey they have destroyed Pakistan.Charchal's remark has been tried and tested in Pakistan and had been proved correct at least three times.Britishers should be thankfull to generals.
Mr Ejaz haider forgot to mention the shameless comment made by musharraf that more indians died than pakistanis.