Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

History of 4 wars of Pakistan

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    History of 4 wars of Pakistan

    As always history is distorted and truth is never presented. In all cases Pakistanis were made to believe that India started the war.

    Dawn, Opinion 23rd September , 2000 http://www.dawn.com/2000/09/23/op.htm

    How not to serve the cause of truth

    By Amjad Hussain

    There must be something very wrong with society if generations of children are taught distorted version of their country's history. Temping with history to present rogues as heroes or hide shameful national or other secrets can no longer be practised with ease in an age when information can be had at the press of a keyboard.

    Watergate in the very early seventies and the more recent Clinton-Monica affair are just two examples of failed attempts to keep the truth from people. Sooner or later the myth is shattered and heroes of bygone eras exposed for what they really were. Explosion of myths can have serious consequences for the development of a young country and erodes the credibility of the rulers.

    In preparation for the defence day, my six-year-old son was asked by his teacher to bring newspaper cuttings of soldiers who died defending their country and speak a few words about the glorious war in which the young men had laid down their lives. Had it stopped there it would have been the end of the matter but it was shocking to learn that the students are given the impression that wars fought in defence of the country were all won. Honouring men who gave their lives to make ours better is incumbent on all of us provided however, they were fought in defence of truth and justice. To convey the impression that we won the unnecessary and ill-conceived wars during which our soldiers laid down their lives is a wicked distortion of the truth.

    Wars are fought for just and defensible causes or at least they ought to be, but the four fought during the 53 years of our existence can hardly be described as such. The first was instigated by a bunch of bandits who, on their way to Srinagar, were unable to resist the temptation of loot and plunder and thereby lost the only opportunity of capturing Kashmir while the Indians were busy preparing to land their forces at Srinagar airport.

    The second was said to be the brainchild of a megalomaniac who was inspired by nothing nobler than the sickening dream of getting his hands on absolute power and in this misadventure, he was ably assisted by the army, which had usurped power in the 1958 coup. In the 1965 war, official channels kept feeding the country with exaggerated claims of success against India but the cease-fire and peace agreement signed at Tashkent without achieving the war aim of liberating Kashmir, belied all such propaganda.

    So much for the lies fed to a largely illiterate populace. The truth, however, is different. As every student of history ought to know, a leader of a victorious army is not dethroned and forgotten soon thereafter. Rather, he is bestowed with honour during his lifetime and a grateful people pay tribute to his memory long after his death. Sometimes, even monuments are erected to commemorate his memory. Leaders of the two disastrous wars of 1965 and 1971 were hounded out of office and their rule deemed a blight in the country's history.

    The third war, which ended in the break-up of the country, was the handiwork of the same megalomaniac who, together with the army, found it difficult to accept an assembly dominated by members of the Eastern Wing, not to mention his own reduced role as the leader of the opposition. The Kargil blunder is too recent an event to comment upon but it too must have a fair share of lies and controversy, as time will eventually prove.

    Of the four wars, two were launched during military dictatorship and both culminated in the ignominious ouster of the dictator of the time. That the eastern half was lost during the third war is undeniable. The lamentable fact, however, is that a vast majority of the people in the western half of the country still labour under false illusions.

    They continue to believe the lies and half-truths churned out by civil-military bureaucracy and politicians alike. It is true that India played a crucial role in dismembering the country and Mukti Bahini made life extremely difficult for the occupying force. What is hard to swallow is the oft-repeated and ever present 'conspiracy theory' involving Indians, Mukti Bahini and the civilian population.

    Not much is said of either the alienation of the civilian population of the eastern half of the country and the inept manner in which the armed forces handled the situation or the brutal disregard shown to the sensitivity and aspirations of the people there. It takes some doing to turn a whole population against the personnel of the armed forces; an entire population cannot conspire with enemy forces unless there are cogent and compelling reasons.

    Twenty-five years of brutal exploitation had consigned the people of the east wing to the status of second class citizens - sufficient reasons for people to rise up against oppression and tyranny. Publication of Hamdoor Rahman report may, to some extent, dispel the illusion among the more discerning but the uninitiated would still continue to be beguiled by the self-perpetuating myth of an invincible army - willing and able to defend the people and the frontiers of the country.

    The people of Pakistan are not only a tolerant lot; they are also very generous and they harbour no ill-will against anyone - not even against the offspring of those who have lorded it over them and have held them in bondage for over half a century. A son of the first military dictator, a mere captain in the army, went on to become the speaker of the national assembly and later, foreign minister in a civilian dispensation. Another offspring, a minor bank official, of yet another dictator held important ministerial post and is now said to have has his eyes set on becoming the prime minister when civilian rule is restored. Examples abound but why go on?

    The point about it is that Pakistanis are not only generous but also very forgiving and their generosity is not just confined to the sons of ex-generals but is also extended heartily to the political class. A living example is the twice-elected daughter of the demagogue and the only civilian martial law administrator in the country's history.

    Isn't it about time we woke up to the facts and seek the truth from the present military rulers - indeed demand it? The country has earned the right to know the truth about the people who, despite being responsible for the many national disasters, are still held in high esteem by its ever-forgiving people. An army incapable of defending the country, a job they are trained to do and for which the people of the country have sacrificed so much, cannot be expected to turn the economy around and bring meaningful democracy if they fail in their primary duty.

    It is no use blaming the politicians alone, as some generals have done, for the destruction of state institutions and, among other things, the break-up of the country. We need to ask some pertinent questions. Who was running the show when the disasters struck? Wasn't it Ayub during when the 1965 war was fought and Yahya in 1971? If, as we are made to believe, wily politicians led them into these terrible situations, then both stand condemned as weak and ineffectual leaders who should never have been there in the first place.

    And what about Zia, who in the late seventies, got the country embroiled in the Afghan war. The consequence of that disaster is evident from the gun culture of today. The army is the first to claim that as an institution it is the most stable, the most professional and the most disciplined of any in the country. But disciplined professionals do not take on tasks that they know to be beyond them and, in any case, as self-professed professionals they ought to know where their expertise lies.

    As citizens of Pakistan, it is our duty to read the Hamoodur Rahman report and ask ourselves whether we should accept and believe everything the army has told us in the past and whether we should continue to accept and believe what they now tell us. For too long have we unquestioningly accepted the halo surrounding the armed forces, holding them sacrosanct to a point where their action and inaction are automatically deemed to be in the national interest. Even the allocation for defence in the national budget is not open to scrutiny by the government, National Assembly or the people.

    To cap it all, the CE has made clear his intention to let bygones be bygones and not hold anyone accountable for the 1971 debacle. If politicians, civil servants and the public at large are all accountable for their actions, why not the people of the armed forces? To say that taking account of something which happened thirty years ago is living in history is simply not acceptable. Aren't there lessons to learn from history? What about loan defaulters who borrowed money years ago or those who received massive kickbacks? Should they not also be allowed to go scot-free?

    The minister of information has said that the leaked report is being verified for its authenticity. Verified for and with what? Verified with the original report or with the generals who played a key role in the East Pakistan debacle? The generals are hardly likely to agree with the contents of the report and a few have already made their feelings known in public. Anyone who has read the account of the army action in former East Pakistan and the circumstances leading up to it will know that the army high command was shocked with the results of the 1970 election. Indeed, one corps commander even termed it a disaster.

    The truth of the matter is that both the politicians and the civil-military establishment did not want to see the two halves of the country remain united. It was all right so long as the centre was able to control East Pakistan with an iron hand and keep the Bengali demand for provincial autonomy within check. With the surge in Bengali nationalism as a consequence of the failure of the centre to loosen its hold on the provinces, the establishment gradually began to fear loss of control not only in the east but also in the west, if the elections were to return Awami League as the majority party in the National Assembly. The feudals and the army had the most to lose and therefore the most to fear from such an outcome.

    #2
    What 4th war, was i asleep when that happened.
    Well could be as i can sleep through earthquakes - very very true!!!!

    ------------------
    CROIRE A L'INCROYABLE
    You can't fix stupid. So might as well troll them!

    Comment


      #3
      Honouring men who gave their lives to make ours better is incumbent on all of us provided however, they were fought in defence of truth and justice. To convey the impression that we won the unnecessary and ill-conceived wars during which our soldiers laid down their lives is a wicked distortion of the truth.

      It is very heartening to see the voice of sanity and honesty coming out of Pakistan. We need more people like him who can reconganize the truth and seperate it from official propoganda. Unfortunately people like him are in minority.

      Comment


        #4
        Rani Rani mon chere what is it the selective memory???
        Pakistan India 65 - Pakistan fought at a disputed area.
        Ceasefire by UN.
        Pakistan again fights at kashmir, India counters, gets close to pakistan.
        Pakistan counters in its portion of kashmir.
        INDIA CROSSES INTERNATIONAL BORDER.

        1971 - INDIA CROSSED INTERNATIONAL BORDER INTO BD!!!
        Which was an Internal Pakistan problem.
        Hey that reminds me i have to reply to that post by Dhir on this subject!!

        Lets take an incident kept out of the papers in 1995.
        15 pakistani drunk come out of the Indian embassy.
        They are later picked up by the pakistani version of teh FBI.
        They turn our to be writers for 7 pakistani newspapers.
        Found in there pockets are indian rupee notes and a list of articles to write and topics to discuss all being anti-govt.
        Pakistan does the same in India.
        So take all this with a gallon of salt.

        ------------------
        CROIRE A L'INCROYABLE
        You can't fix stupid. So might as well troll them!

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by CM:
          Rani Rani mon chere what is it the selective memory???
          Pakistan India 65 - Pakistan fought at a disputed area.
          Ceasefire by UN.
          Pakistan again fights at kashmir, India counters, gets close to pakistan.
          Pakistan counters in its portion of kashmir.
          INDIA CROSSES INTERNATIONAL BORDER.

          1971 - INDIA CROSSED INTERNATIONAL BORDER INTO BD!!!
          Which was an Internal Pakistan problem.
          Hey that reminds me i have to reply to that post by Dhir on this subject!!


          This is your official version...Pakistan started the war..it is even doing that now by sending proxy terrorist to India and supporting religious terrorist organization.. whole world reconganizes LOC by attacking it you attack India. Everytime you attack Kashmir India will retaliate. You very convienently justify attacking Kashmir.

          Lets take an incident kept out of the papers in 1995.
          15 pakistani drunk come out of the Indian embassy.
          They are later picked up by the pakistani version of teh FBI.
          They turn our to be writers for 7 pakistani newspapers.
          Found in there pockets are indian rupee notes and a list of articles to write and topics to discuss all being anti-govt.
          Pakistan does the same in India.
          So take all this with a gallon of salt.


          Please do tell us why it was kept out of the papers...when this would have made the top story in Pakistan newspapers. So you don't like the truth published in your own newspaper and you want to shove it under the carpet....drink you gallon of salt so that you can invent your version of truth...good luck.




          [This message has been edited by Rani (edited September 24, 2000).]

          Comment


            #6
            Ok thats it, i guess you seem hell bent on staying ignorant.
            Your choice.
            Kashmir is a disputed area - all powers agree, russia, the US, the US, Australia.
            EVERYBODY!!!!!!
            So we could attack as in 1965 it was disputed and india as now also heavy bombards POK.
            Just i point to clarify.
            The Britannica agrees with my so called pakistani version.
            So does the World Book - another enc.
            So does the UN.
            So i guess all of them are wrong the rani you are right.

            ------------------
            CROIRE A L'INCROYABLE
            You can't fix stupid. So might as well troll them!

            Comment


              #7
              CM,

              That is history today's reality is that all countries have asked Pakistan to honor the LOC including China.

              P.S. Your name calling is noted and ignored.

              [This message has been edited by Rani (edited September 24, 2000).]

              Comment


                #8
                One thing, Kashmir was no longer a disputed territory once Maharaja agreed for the accession, rest everything is done according to what suits the world at that time or at this time depending upon their strategic interests.

                The Britannica agrees with my so called pakistani version.

                Where?

                Comment


                  #9
                  >>>>As every student of history ought to know, a leader of a victorious army is not dethroned and forgotten soon thereafter.

                  Tell that to George Bush!!

                  >>>>The people of Pakistan are not only a tolerant lot; they are also very generous and they harbour no ill-will against anyone - not even against the offspring of those who have lorded it over them and have held them in bondage for over half a century. A son of the first military dictator, a mere captain in the army, went on to become the speaker of the national assembly and later, foreign minister in a civilian dispensation. Another offspring, a minor bank official, of yet another dictator held important ministerial post and is now said to have has his eyes set on becoming the prime minister when civilian rule is restored. Examples abound but why go on?

                  Is this guy on dope?? You think these guys advanced through their political careers on merit and integrity? Hell no!! They got where they were because their baap ya daada freakin ran the army, hence ran the country.

                  One thing is for sure, the education about our past, and especially our blunders, is disguised by the gov't. When I attended school in Pakistan, there was hardly a paragraph about the 1971 war whereas the 1965 war had chapters written on it. Both wars weakened Pakistan and its army's capability to defend the borders, the ramification of which are still being felt.

                  [This message has been edited by ghalib (edited September 26, 2000).]

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Ah Dhir good to see you back.
                    You know my links.
                    ANd you know that britannica says in 1971 that Indian crossed the international border.
                    Your reply was that it stated 1 million refugees came through to india.
                    My reply that is no reason to start a war by crossing the International war.
                    During the COlD WAR, nearly 7 million people moved from the east to the west in a space of 4 months.
                    Did you see any of the countries declare war???
                    No!!!
                    When Yugo broke up, and there was genocide it took the world 5 months to decide that it was not an internal matter.
                    WHile the BD issue was an INTERNAL MATTER.
                    Second there were alot of refugees going to austria and Swiss, did they declare war???
                    No.
                    Lets go back into the past, the vietnam war, many people crossed into Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand.
                    Did any of these countries declare war due to refugee problems.
                    NO.
                    So your statement that india could not deal with the refugee problem and could not see these BD people suffer.
                    BULL****.
                    What about the people in Kashmir???
                    And Sikhs in 84??
                    These people could suffer and but the BD could not?????
                    ANSWER THIS QUESTION - I DARE YA!!

                    1965 tomorrow.
                    You can't fix stupid. So might as well troll them!

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X