The spirit of September 6 Peace or war?
Thirty-four years ago almost to the day, India forced a full-scale war on this nation, the end result of a debatable initiative on our part. Having sent infiltrators into Occupied Kashmir (Operation GIBRALTAR) without accompanying conditions on a virtually suicidal mission, we tried to cover that blunder by trying to seal the entrance to Kashmir (Operation GRAND SLAM) at AKHNUR. Naively we accepted the contention of the brilliant Foreign Office duo (Minister late Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Secretary late Aziz Ahmed) that India would not dare retaliate across the international border. Coincidentally the Indians seemed to be not only prepared for the Pakistani initiative but were also operating on a different beat, that of a set-piece military invasion, planned well in advance of our faux pas. Their offensive to capture the two key cities of Lahore and Sialkot and thus inflict total defeat caught us by surprise, almost all along the line. That they could not succeed was due on the one hand to sacrifice far above the ordinary by the rank and file of the Armed Forces and on the other the failure of the Indians to press home their attacks in the face of this determined resistance. Since we took on a far superior force numerically and beat them to a standstill, it counts as a victory of sorts. We inculcate that spirit in remembering September 6 as the “Defence of Pakistan” Day.
Not that we learnt any lessons as one should from every experience. We suffered thereby to our eternal regret in 1971 and in 1999, fully 28 years later, we still find ourselves unwilling to benefit from our mistakes. On the verge of a new millennium the spirit of Sept 6 represents sacrifice more than anything else. One should incorporate that sacrifice in our aims and objectives in dealing with the 21st century. For too long, half measures and rhetoric has led us up the garden path in dealing with vital issues. We should stop fooling ourselves with fantasies and come to grips with the realities of living as a nation in one of the most dangerous regions of the world. To that end we should not fool ourselves anymore with the routine and the ordinary but spell out goals and the means thereof of reaching our stated objectives.
Pakistan does not covet any Indian territory but we do aspire for a fair and just settlement of the disputed territory of Kashmir illegally occupied by India and kept for over 50 years under brutal suppression. There are commitments on a plebiscite by late Indian PM Jawaharlal Nehru on record which UN Security Council Resolution 242 spells out in clear, emphatic language. Yet the war of 1948 and that of 1965 was exclusively fought over Kashmir, the Kargil episode is only a part of the series of bloodletting. Despite repeatedly promising to settle the issue in bilateral forum, India’s intransigence is a matter of sorry record. If we really want to solve the problem, the choice is between war and peace, to resort to armed means to free the Kashmiri people or do it through the negotiated process, or maybe a combination of both. India has repeatedly shunned the peace process on one pretext or the other, in such circumstances is war the only option or should we continue in this state of limbo of no war-no peace? At some stage we have to decide whether we are prepared to accept either the consequences of war or the frustrations of peace? We have a far smaller military machine and though qualitatively we can be confident about holding back an attack by a quantitatively superior enemy, it will be at the cost of great devastation to our economic infrastructure. To achieve victory the costs will be multiplied, both during peace in the run-up to war and during the war itself. The downside of peace is that we should be prepared to swallow the fact that the Indians would keep on brutally repressing Kashmir, leaving us to continue impotently advocating peace in the face of Indian obduracy and intransigence.
Militarily, capturing Kashmir is now far more possible than ever before. Operation Gibraltar in 1965 was 34 years too early, neither the conditions within Kashmir were ripe as they are now nor did we send in battle-hardened troops in a cohesive plan as we can now. It does not matter whether India sends in double the 600,000 or so soldiers it has presently in the disputed territory, determined troops many times lesser in number will cut and isolate them in the mountainous Kashmir territory. As such over the years India is at an ultimate military disadvantage, defending an indefensible land once the crust of the forward defended localities (FDLs) is broken through at places along the length of the Line of Control (LOC). Along the international border, we can hold the Indians but realistically we cannot really hope to gain a decisive military victory without more military inputs and concentrated, objective training defined to a single purpose. In the ultimate analysis we must also contend with the fact that in being fought to a standstill militarily in the plains of Punjab and Rajasthan and faced with the prospect of losing Kashmir, will not India resort to nuclear weapons?
The only course open to a responsible, motivated Government of Pakistan (GOP) committed to the Kashmiri cause is to lay down a cast-iron time period for settlement of the Kashmir dispute, thereby clearly annunciating that non-settlement within this period would lead to war. During such a period, which may extend from 3 to 5 years the Armed Forces would virtually stop all postings or unit movement while carrying out intensive training for war in that particular region which would be their battlefield location during war. Each unit and formation may be given clear simple mission in a particular location in the event of war and told to be specific in that training. Reserves must be clearly earmarked and their training also conducted for at least three months in the first of the 3-5 year period. Doing away with batmen and JCOs, streamlining the utility corps like EME, Medical, ASC, Ordnance etc to be not only cost-effective but having battlefield utility is a must. Our transportation and communications non-standardisation needs to be addressed, cyber warfare has to be understood and contained. The young officers of Sept 6 are the leaders of the Armed Forces now, let them inculcate that same spirit of sacrifice in pursuing a singular military aim sending a clear message to India that if peace fails war will be a natural result. If we can convince not only the Indians but also the world that we mean business, the dispute in Kashmir will come to some resolution.
All this leads us to the conclusion that while war is an option, perhaps a doomsday one, we must therefore give peace a chance. However, if India perceives that we are not really serious about war, will they give more than a short shrift to all the overtures for peace? How was detente effected during the Cold War except between Superpowers having the knowledge they could destroy each other? As such while pursuing the options available during the period of peace we must initiate measures that convince the Indians that peace is the only route to a settlement and war may be damaging for us but maybe even equally catastrophic for them. In Kargil, India learnt one important lesson, the Spirit of Sept 6 lives on in the rank and file of the Pakistan Armed Forces.
Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.
Comments
No comments yet.
Leave a comment