Cold start, Pakistan, India US visit

Invisible.Sword

Councller (250+ posts)
کولڈ سٹارٹ ڈاکٹرائن، بھارت، امریکی دورہ اور پاکستان

موجودہ حالات کے پیش نظر یہ ضروری سمجھا گیا کہ اس موضوع پر پائے جانے والے کچھ شکوک و شبہات کا ازالہ کر دیا جائے تا کہ فوج اور عوام ایک ہی پیج پر ہوں۔ جنگ صرف فوج نہیں لڑتی، پورا ملک لڑتا ہے۔ کوشش کی جائے گی کہ کم سے کم الفاظ میں اور فوجی اصطلاحات سے پرہیز کرتے ہوئے بات سمجھانے کی کوشش کی جائے۔


کہانی شروع ہوتی ہے مشرف دور میں بھارتی پارلیمنٹ پر حملے سے۔ پاکستان کا اس میں ہاتھ تھا یا نہیں یا وہ بھارت کا اپنا ڈرامہ تھا ایک الگ بحث ہے اور اس پر بہت کچھ لکھا جا چکا ہے۔ اس حملے کے بعد بھارت نے یہ دعویٰ کیا کہ پاکستان اس میں ملوث ہے اور ہم پاکستان کو سبق سکھائیں گے۔ آپ کو یاد ہو گا کافی عرصہ پاکستان اور بھارت کی فوجیں سرحد پر آمنے سامنے تھیں۔ جنگ لگنے کے کافی امکانات تھے مگر نہیں ہو سکی۔ یہ جو جنگ نہیں ہو سکی اور بھارت پاکستان کو اپنی طرف سے 'سزا' نہیں دے سکا یہ کولڈ اسٹارٹ کی ابتدا تھی۔

اب یہ سمجھ لیتے ہیں پہلے کہ بھارت کچھ کر کیوں نہیں سکا تھا؟ فوج میں دو طرح کی فورسز ہوتی ہیں۔ ایک کو کہا جاتا ہے ہولڈنگ فورسز (روکنے والی) اور دوسری سٹرائیک فورسز (حملہ کرنے والی)۔ ہولڈنگ فورسز ہمیشہ بارڈر پر ہوتی ہیں جن کا کام کسی بھی ہونے والے حملے کو شروع میں روکنا ہوتا ہے تا کہ سٹرائیک فورسز کو وقت مل جائے اور وہ ایڈوانس کر کے دشمن پر جوابی حملہ کر سکیں۔ بھارت کی پرانی حکمت عملی کے تحت سٹرائیک فورسز دلی اور اس کے آس پاس تھیں۔ اس لیے جب بھارت نے حملے کی ٹھانی تو ان کو اگلے محاذ پر آنا پڑا۔

اس دوران ان کی نقل و حرکت انتہائی آہستہ تھی اور ان کو حملے کی پوزیشن میں آتے آتے تقریبا ً ایک مہینہ لگ گیا۔ اس دوران پوری دنیا اور پاکستان کو ان کے ارادوں کا علم ہو گیا، سفارتی کوششیں شروع ہو گئیں۔ بھارت پر بے تحاشا دباؤ پڑ گیا، ایٹمی جنگ کا خطرہ پیدا ہو گیا۔ نتیجہ یہ ہوا کہ بھارت نے شروع میں جو جنگی جنون کا ماحول بنایا تھا وہ قائم نہیں رہ پایا اور بھارت صرف 'شوک' کر رہ گیا۔


اب بھارت کو یہ احساس ہوا کہ اس کی موجودہ حکمت عملی کبھی بھی کام نہیں دے گی۔ اس لیے کولڈ اسٹارٹ پر کام شروع ہوا۔ یاد رہے کہ سرکاری طور پر بھارت ایسی کسی حکمت عملی سے انکاری ہے بلکہ وہ اسے 'پرو ایکِٹو حکمت عملی' کا نام دیتا ہے۔ بہرحال کانٹے کو جس نام سے بھی پکاریں وہ کانٹا ہی رہتا ہے۔ حقیقت یہ ہے کہ ایسی ایک نئی حکمت عملی بھارت نے بنائی ہے۔ اب اس کی تفصیل سنیں۔ اس کے تحت بھارت کی سٹرائیک فورسز اب بارڈر کے قریب رہتی ہیں۔ آخری جنگی مشقوں میں بھارت کے حملہ کرنے اور جنگ کے لئے تیار ہونے کا وقت ایک ماہ سے کم ہو کر اڑتالیس گھنٹے رہ گیا تھا۔ اور پلان یہ تھا کہ پاکستان پر حملہ اچانک اور ایسے انداز میں کیا جائےکہ وہ اور پوری بین الاقوامی برادری حیران رہ جائے، دباؤ ڈالنے کا موقع ہی نا ملے اور بعد میں جب بھارت حملہ کر چکا ہو تو بھارت اپنا 'کرودھ' نکال ک پیچھے لوٹ جائے اور بین الاقوامی دباؤ الٹا پاکستان پر پڑ جائے کہ دیکھیں جی وہ واپس چلے گئے ہیں، اب جنگ یا ایٹمی حملے کی کوئی تک نہیں بنتی۔ یوں جنگ کو ایٹمی سکیل پر لے جائے بغیر پاکستان کو سزا دینے کا پرانا بھارتی خواب پورا ہو سکے۔

اب بات ہو جائے اس کے توڑ کی۔ یہاں آپ پاکستان فوج کے جتنے مرضی ناقد ہوں آپ کو ان کے ملٹری پلاننگ کرنے والے دماغ کو داد دینی پڑے گی۔ توڑ کی طرف آنے سے پہلے کولڈ اسٹارٹ کی ایک خامی بھی سن لیجئے۔ اس بات کی کوئی گارنٹی کولڈ اسٹارٹ میں بھی نہیں تھی کہ پاکستان پہلے ہی دن ایٹمی حملہ نہیں کر دے گا۔ یہ سب اس مفروضے پر مبنی تھی کہ پاکستان انتہائی قدم اتنی جلدی نہیں اٹھائے گا جو کسی حد تک درست تھا مگر یقینی نہیں۔ پھر بھی پاکستان نے یہ محسوس کیا کہ اس کے امکانات واقعی میں ہیں اور ہم بھی نہیں چاہیں گے کہ فورا ً ہی ایک آل آؤٹ ایٹمی جنگ شروع ہو جائے۔ تو اس کے توڑ پر کام شروع ہوا۔

اب پتا نہیں وہ گمنام ہیرو کون ہیں، وہ دماغ کون ہیں، بہرحال ہماری طرف سے ان کو سلام۔ جی میں سمجھ رہا ہوں آپ کا تجسس انتہا کو پہنچ چکا ہے۔ ابھی بتاتا ہوں۔ پاکستان نے ایک نیا میزائل بنایا جو ایٹمی وار ہیڈ لے جا سکتا ہے، اس کا نام النصر ہے۔ اس کی خوبصورتی یہ ہے کہ یہ موبائل ہے، مطلب آپ نے ایک جگہ سے فائر کیا اور پھر 'دوڑ' کر دوسری جگہ سے فائر کیا، یوں اس کے لانچنگ پیڈ کو تباہ کرنا نا ممکن ہو گیا، دوسری خوبصورتی یہ ہے کہ یہ شارٹ رینج ہے، قریبی فاصلے پر مار کر سکتا ہے اور تیسری خوبصورتی یہ ہے کہ اس پر جو ایٹم بم لدا ہو گا وہ محض چالیس سے ساٹھ کلومیٹر کے دائرے میں تباہی پھیلائے گا۔ مطلب بارڈر کے آس پاس ایک پورا کینٹوونمنٹ بمع وہاں موجود تمام فوج کے 'غائب' کرنے کی صلاحیت رکھتا ہے جس میں بھارت کی اہم اہم سٹرائیک فورسز فوراً ہی نشانہ بن جائیں گی اور یوں بھارت کی کولڈ سٹارٹ حکمت عملی فیل ہو جائے گی کیونکہ وہ حملہ کرنے کی پوزیشن میں ہی نہیں رہے گا بلکہ بعد میں بین الاقوامی دباؤ الٹا بھارت پر ہو گا کہ پاکستان نے آپ پر کوئی ریگولر ایٹم بم نہیں پھینکا محض آپ کی فوج پر چھوٹے سکیل پر حملہ کیا ہے وہ بھی آپ کے حملے کے بعد یوں بھارت کو الٹا لینے کے دینے پڑ جائیں گے۔

یاد رکھیں کہ اس جوابی حکمت عملی میں بھی ایٹمی جنگ نا ہونے کی کوئی گارنٹی نہیں۔ سب سے بہتر تو یہی ہے کہ بھارت پاکستان کو 'سزا' دینے کے اپنے جنون پر قابو پائے۔ دو نیوکلیئر ملکوں میں جنگ کوئی آپشن ہی نہیں ہے، ان کو کسی بھی پیمانے پر جنگ نہیں کرنی چاہیے۔ بہرحال النصر میزائل بھارت کے پیٹ میں اٹھنے والی تازہ ترین درد ہے اور اسی لئے نواز شریف صاحب کی امریکا میں طلبی ہوئی ہے۔ آپ کو یاد ہو گا آرمی چیف کا بیان کہ چاہے کولڈ سٹارٹ ہو یا ہاٹ سٹارٹ، ہم تیار ہیں۔

تب سے بھارت اور پاکستان دوبارہ برابری کی پوزیشن پر آ چکے ہیں اور یہ امریکا سرکار کو پسند نہیں۔ دورے کا دوسرا پہلو پاکستان کو کوئی چھوٹی موٹی 'مونگ پھلی' دے کر اپنے نیوکلیئر پروگرام پر کچھ پابندیاں لگوانے پر آمادہ کرنا ہے۔ لیفٹیننٹ جنرل ناصر جنجوعہ کو اسی لئے اچانک سرچارج عزیز معاف کیجئے گا سرتاج عزیز کی جگہ لگایا گیا ہے تا کہ نواز شریف صاحب کے دورے کے دوران پاکستان کا موقف کھل کر بیان کیا جا سکے اور کوئی غیر حقیقی معاہدہ نا ہو سکے۔


امید ہے کہ نواز شریف صاحب بھی ملکی مفاد کے خلاف چھپ چھپا کر جانے کی کوشش نہیں کریں گے ورنہ بقول ایک اینکر کے شائد ان کا واپس آنا ممکن نا ہو اور ان کو امریکا میں ہی رہنا پڑ جائے۔

نوٹ: اس پورے مضمون میں کوئی بھی چیز ایسی نہیں ہے جو 'سیکرٹ' کا درجہ رکھتی ہو۔ یہ سب کھلے عام موجود معلومات کی بنیاد پر لکھا گیا۔ ہاں صرف ان کو اکھٹا کرنے کا کام مصنف سے سرزد ہوا ہے۔ پاک فوج زندہ باد، پاکستان پائندہ باد۔ نواز شریف بھی زندہ باد اگر وہ اپنی خوشی سے پاکستان کے دفاع اور مفاد کا خیال رکھتے رہیں تو۔
 
Last edited:

Reason

Minister (2k+ posts)
Yeh Article kisi Retired Genereal nein Likha hai. Pakistan army can only win a war against one country, and that is Pakistan itself. They can win a war against our elected government, they can throw away our constitution. They can't fight India, they are not capable of fighting them.
 

GreenMaple

Prime Minister (20k+ posts)
Yeh Article kisi Retired Genereal nein Likha hai. Pakistan army can only win a war against one country, and that is Pakistan itself. They can win a war against our elected government, they can throw away our constitution. They can't fight India, they are not capable of fighting them.

And this comment posted by a laptop general!!!
 

Aadmi

Minister (2k+ posts)
Yeh Article kisi Retired Genereal nein Likha hai. Pakistan army can only win a war against one country, and that is Pakistan itself. They can win a war against our elected government, they can throw away our constitution. They can't fight India, they are not capable of fighting them.
Tere jeson ki mirchi mitane k liay hi alnasr banaya hai :)
 

Sphere Manisfest

Senator (1k+ posts)
Well done Pakistan

detail.php


http://e.dunya.com.pk/detail.php?date=2015-10-21&edition=ISL&id=1947979_99632410
 

MashraQi Larka

Minister (2k+ posts)
امید ہے کہ نواز شریف صاحب بھی ملکی مفاد کے خلاف چھپ چھپا کر جانے کی کوشش نہیں کریں گے

پریشان ہونے کی ضرورت نئی ہے۔ نواز میلٹری ڈِکٹیٹر نئی ہے جو ایسا کرے۔۔
 

Reason

Minister (2k+ posts)

Look Pakistan lost all wars against India, and this makes feel angry. So we look at these news to make us feel good. This is a bogus policy. If we use nuclear weapons, they will use them too in return. And millions of people will perish because of our stupidity. Second, India has been much smarter when it comes to foreign policy. We have already faced international humiliation during the Kargil Debacle, and no country even China will tolerate our behavior. The world will side with India even if we are right, because of our past blunders. Our Generals think they know foreign policy better than anybody else. I thought that our military establishment will have a change of attitude after the attack on school children.
 

Reason

Minister (2k+ posts)
پریشان ہونے کی ضرورت نئی ہے۔ نواز میلٹری ڈِکٹیٹر نئی ہے جو ایسا کرے۔۔

Don't know about Nawaz Sharif, but some brave commando general might be feeling a little adventurous and may want to embarrass Pakistan in front of the whole world again i.e Kargil
 

MashraQi Larka

Minister (2k+ posts)
Don't know about Nawaz Sharif, but some brave commando general might be feeling a little adventurous and may want to embarrass Pakistan in front of the whole world again i.e Kargil

بات ہے پرسیپشن کی۔ سیاستدانوں کی پرسیپشن بہت خراب ہے جبکہ عسکری قیادت کی پرسیپشن بہت اچھی ہے۔ سیاستدان اب اِتنے بھی برے نئی ہیں، جِتنا کہ عسکری قیادت دِن رات اُنکو بنانے پر زور لگا دیتی ہے۔

دوسرا یہ کہ چلو،، ہمیں نواز سے کسی اچھے کی امید نئی ہے یا لگتا ہے کہ وہ اچھا نئی کریگا ۔۔ لیکن ہم نواز سے کسی میلیٹری ڈِکٹیٹر سے زیادہ اچھے کی امید تو کر ہی سکتے ہیں۔ نواز جو بھی کریگا، کِسی میلٹری ڈِکٹیٹر سے زیادہ بُرا نئی کرنے لگا وہ کم از کم۔
 

Invisible.Sword

Councller (250+ posts)
Dear reason
I think your point and apprehension has already been addressed in the article. Please read it again. Secondly thanks for confusing me with a retired General when I'm not even a Sipahi :D
 

Neutral man

Senator (1k+ posts)
Yeh Article kisi Retired Genereal nein Likha hai. Pakistan army can only win a war against one country, and that is Pakistan itself. They can win a war against our elected government, they can throw away our constitution. They can't fight India, they are not capable of fighting them.

Agar Pakistan war nahi kr skta to ,, hamare tactical weapons dekh kr tumhari patloon kio geeli ho jati he,,
65 me tumhari bundd bandoook ki thi wo bhool gaye,,,
or
agr ye man b lo k Pakistan khud k khilaf hi jung jeet skta he,, to ye b dekho k Pakistan k dushman bi kon kon hen...
Pakistan ko jitne masail ka samna he agar tumhare India me hote to 100 crore se zada mulk ban jate...
100 crore se zada bhagwan hote,,
Pakistan me itni capacity thi k usne sab kuch bardasht kia or ajj b qayim he,,,Or InshaAllah rahe ga bhi,,
tum apni kher manao,,,
 

Reason

Minister (2k+ posts)
Dear reason
I think your point and apprehension has already been addressed in the article. Please read it again. Secondly thanks for confusing me with a retired General when I'm not even a Sipahi :D

I read the article. It was a warning to Nawaz Sharif that he may end up doing some kind of agreement with the US. Nasir Janjua has been put in by the army to check Nawaz Sahrif on the trip. Just this act alone makes me want to puke. These are the reason, why one can never be loyal to Pakistan. You see in a civilized democratic country, military dare not do anything against the wishes of the civilian government and can only do what the elected parliament wants it to do. Pakistan army needs civilians to do face saving every time they get beaten by India. And Americans aren't stupid, they know why Nasir Janjua is coming with Nawaz. Now Americans really know who is in charge of Pakistan.
 

Reason

Minister (2k+ posts)
Agar Pakistan war nahi kr skta to ,, hamare tactical weapons dekh kr tumhari patloon kio geeli ho jati he,,
65 me tumhari bundd bandoook ki thi wo bhool gaye,,,
or
agr ye man b lo k Pakistan khud k khilaf hi jung jeet skta he,, to ye b dekho k Pakistan k dushman bi kon kon hen...
Pakistan ko jitne masail ka samna he agar tumhare India me hote to 100 crore se zada mulk ban jate...
100 crore se zada bhagwan hote,,
Pakistan me itni capacity thi k usne sab kuch bardasht kia or ajj b qayim he,,,Or InshaAllah rahe ga bhi,,
tum apni kher manao,,,

hahaha. Here are the facts about 1965 war from neutral observers (dekho hamaari fauj ki kitni izzat hai duniya mein):

Neutral assessments

There have been several neutral assessments of the losses incurred by both India and Pakistan during the war. Most of these assessments agree that India had the upper hand over Pakistan when ceasefire was declared. Some of the neutral assessments are mentioned below —

The war was militarily inconclusive; each side held prisoners and some territory belonging to the other. Losses were relatively heavy—on the Pakistani side, twenty aircraft, 200 tanks, and 3,800 troops. Pakistan's army had been able to withstand Indian pressure, but a continuation of the fighting would only have led to further losses and ultimate defeat for Pakistan. Most Pakistanis, schooled in the belief of their own martial prowess, refused to accept the possibility of their country's military defeat by "Hindu India" and were, instead, quick to blame their failure to attain their military aims on what they considered to be the ineptitude of Ayub Khan and his government.

  • TIME magazine reported that India held 690 mi[SUP]2[/SUP] of Pakistan territory while Pakistan held 250 mi[SUP]2[/SUP] of Indian territory in Kashmir and Rajasthan. Additionally, Pakistan had lost almost half its armour temporarily.[SUP][94][/SUP] The article further elaborates,
Severely mauled by the larger Indian armed forces, Pakistan could continue the fight only by teaming up with Red China and turning its back on the U.N.

  • Devin T. Hagerty wrote in his book "South Asia in world politics"[SUP][20][/SUP] –
The invading Indian forces outfought their Pakistani counterparts and halted their attack on the outskirts of Lahore, Pakistan's second-largest city. By the time United Nations intervened on September 22, Pakistan had suffered a clear defeat.

  • In his book "National identity and geopolitical visions",[SUP][95][/SUP] Gertjan Dijkink writes –
The superior Indian forces, however, won a decisive victory and the army could have even marched on into Pakistani territory had external pressure not forced both combatants to cease their war efforts.

  • An excerpt from Stanley Wolpert's India,[SUP][96][/SUP] summarizing the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965,
In three weeks the second Indo-Pak War ended in what appeared to be a draw when the embargo placed by Washington on U.S. ammunition and replacements for both armies forced cessation of conflict before either side won a clear victory. India, however, was in a position to inflict grave damage to, if not capture, Pakistan's capital of the Punjab when the cease-fire was called, and controlled Kashmir's strategic Uri-Poonch bulge, much to Ayub's chagrin.

  • In his book titled The greater game: India's race with destiny and China, David Van Praagh wrote[SUP][7][/SUP] –
India won the war. It gained 1,840 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (710 sq mi) of Pakistani territory: 640 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (250 sq mi) in Azad Kashmir, Pakistan's portion of the state; 460 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (180 sq mi) of the Sailkot sector; 380 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (150 sq mi) far to the south of Sindh; and most critical, 360 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (140 sq mi) on the Lahore front. Pakistan took 540 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (210 sq mi) of Indian territory: 490 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (190 sq mi) in the Chhamb sector and 50 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (19 sq mi) around Khem Karan.

  • Dennis Kux's "India and the United States estranged democracies" also provides a summary of the war,[SUP][97][/SUP]
Although both sides lost heavily in men and material, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the better of the war. New Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated.

  • BBC reported that the war served game changer in Pakistani politics,[SUP][98][/SUP]
The defeat in the 1965 war led to the army's invincibility being challenged by an increasingly vocal opposition. This became a surge after his protege, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, deserted him and established the Pakistan People's Party.

  • "A region in turmoil: South Asian conflicts since 1947" by Robert Johnson mentions[SUP][8][/SUP] –
India's strategic aims were modest – it aimed to deny Pakistani Army victory, although it ended up in possession of 720 square miles (1,900 km[SUP]2[/SUP]) of Pakistani territory for the loss of just 220 square miles (570 km[SUP]2[/SUP]) of its own.

  • An excerpt from William M. Carpenter and David G. Wiencek's "Asian security handbook: terrorism and the new security environment"[SUP][99][/SUP] –
A brief but furious 1965 war with India began with a covert Pakistani thrust across the Kashmiri cease-fire line and ended up with the city of Lahore threatened with encirclement by Indian Army. Another UN-sponsored cease-fire left borders unchanged, but Pakistan's vulnerability had again been exposed.

  • English historian John Keay's "India: A History" provides a summary of the 1965 war[SUP][100][/SUP] –
The 1965 Indo-Pak war lasted barely a month. Pakistan made gains in the Rajasthan desert but its main push against India's Jammu-Srinagar road link was repulsed and Indian tanks advanced to within a sight of Lahore. Both sides claimed victory but India had most to celebrate.

  • Uk Heo and Shale Asher Horowitz write in their book "Conflict in Asia: Korea, China-Taiwan, and India-Pakistan"[SUP][101][/SUP] –
Again India appeared, logistically at least, to be in a superior position but neither side was able to mobilize enough strength to gain a decisive victory.

  • Newsweek magazine, however, praised the Pakistani military's ability to hold off the much larger Indian Army.[SUP][102][/SUP]
By just the end of the week, in fact, it was clear that the Pakistanis were more than holding their own.

Conflict resumed again in early 1965, when Pakistani and Indian forces clashed over disputed territory along the border between the two nations. Hostilities intensified that August when the Pakistani army attempted to take Kashmir by force. The attempt to seize the state was unsuccessful, and the second India-Pakistan War reached a stalemate.
 

Pathfinder

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
hahaha. Here are the facts about 1965 war from neutral observers (dekho hamaari fauj ki kitni izzat hai duniya mein):

Neutral assessments

There have been several neutral assessments of the losses incurred by both India and Pakistan during the war. Most of these assessments agree that India had the upper hand over Pakistan when ceasefire was declared. Some of the neutral assessments are mentioned below —

The war was militarily inconclusive; each side held prisoners and some territory belonging to the other. Losses were relatively heavy—on the Pakistani side, twenty aircraft, 200 tanks, and 3,800 troops. Pakistan's army had been able to withstand Indian pressure, but a continuation of the fighting would only have led to further losses and ultimate defeat for Pakistan. Most Pakistanis, schooled in the belief of their own martial prowess, refused to accept the possibility of their country's military defeat by "Hindu India" and were, instead, quick to blame their failure to attain their military aims on what they considered to be the ineptitude of Ayub Khan and his government.

  • TIME magazine reported that India held 690 mi[SUP]2[/SUP] of Pakistan territory while Pakistan held 250 mi[SUP]2[/SUP] of Indian territory in Kashmir and Rajasthan. Additionally, Pakistan had lost almost half its armour temporarily.[SUP][94][/SUP] The article further elaborates,
Severely mauled by the larger Indian armed forces, Pakistan could continue the fight only by teaming up with Red China and turning its back on the U.N.

  • Devin T. Hagerty wrote in his book "South Asia in world politics"[SUP][20][/SUP] –
The invading Indian forces outfought their Pakistani counterparts and halted their attack on the outskirts of Lahore, Pakistan's second-largest city. By the time United Nations intervened on September 22, Pakistan had suffered a clear defeat.

  • In his book "National identity and geopolitical visions",[SUP][95][/SUP] Gertjan Dijkink writes –
The superior Indian forces, however, won a decisive victory and the army could have even marched on into Pakistani territory had external pressure not forced both combatants to cease their war efforts.

  • An excerpt from Stanley Wolpert's India,[SUP][96][/SUP] summarizing the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965,
In three weeks the second Indo-Pak War ended in what appeared to be a draw when the embargo placed by Washington on U.S. ammunition and replacements for both armies forced cessation of conflict before either side won a clear victory. India, however, was in a position to inflict grave damage to, if not capture, Pakistan's capital of the Punjab when the cease-fire was called, and controlled Kashmir's strategic Uri-Poonch bulge, much to Ayub's chagrin.

  • In his book titled The greater game: India's race with destiny and China, David Van Praagh wrote[SUP][7][/SUP] –
India won the war. It gained 1,840 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (710 sq mi) of Pakistani territory: 640 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (250 sq mi) in Azad Kashmir, Pakistan's portion of the state; 460 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (180 sq mi) of the Sailkot sector; 380 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (150 sq mi) far to the south of Sindh; and most critical, 360 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (140 sq mi) on the Lahore front. Pakistan took 540 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (210 sq mi) of Indian territory: 490 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (190 sq mi) in the Chhamb sector and 50 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (19 sq mi) around Khem Karan.

  • Dennis Kux's "India and the United States estranged democracies" also provides a summary of the war,[SUP][97][/SUP]
Although both sides lost heavily in men and material, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the better of the war. New Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated.

  • BBC reported that the war served game changer in Pakistani politics,[SUP][98][/SUP]
The defeat in the 1965 war led to the army's invincibility being challenged by an increasingly vocal opposition. This became a surge after his protege, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, deserted him and established the Pakistan People's Party.

  • "A region in turmoil: South Asian conflicts since 1947" by Robert Johnson mentions[SUP][8][/SUP] –
India's strategic aims were modest – it aimed to deny Pakistani Army victory, although it ended up in possession of 720 square miles (1,900 km[SUP]2[/SUP]) of Pakistani territory for the loss of just 220 square miles (570 km[SUP]2[/SUP]) of its own.

  • An excerpt from William M. Carpenter and David G. Wiencek's "Asian security handbook: terrorism and the new security environment"[SUP][99][/SUP] –
A brief but furious 1965 war with India began with a covert Pakistani thrust across the Kashmiri cease-fire line and ended up with the city of Lahore threatened with encirclement by Indian Army. Another UN-sponsored cease-fire left borders unchanged, but Pakistan's vulnerability had again been exposed.

  • English historian John Keay's "India: A History" provides a summary of the 1965 war[SUP][100][/SUP] –
The 1965 Indo-Pak war lasted barely a month. Pakistan made gains in the Rajasthan desert but its main push against India's Jammu-Srinagar road link was repulsed and Indian tanks advanced to within a sight of Lahore. Both sides claimed victory but India had most to celebrate.

  • Uk Heo and Shale Asher Horowitz write in their book "Conflict in Asia: Korea, China-Taiwan, and India-Pakistan"[SUP][101][/SUP] –
Again India appeared, logistically at least, to be in a superior position but neither side was able to mobilize enough strength to gain a decisive victory.

  • Newsweek magazine, however, praised the Pakistani military's ability to hold off the much larger Indian Army.[SUP][102][/SUP]
By just the end of the week, in fact, it was clear that the Pakistanis were more than holding their own.

Conflict resumed again in early 1965, when Pakistani and Indian forces clashed over disputed territory along the border between the two nations. Hostilities intensified that August when the Pakistani army attempted to take Kashmir by force. The attempt to seize the state was unsuccessful, and the second India-Pakistan War reached a stalemate.

Tumhari rapist army ki yeh izzat hai

indian_army_rape_cases.jpg
 

Invisible.Sword

Councller (250+ posts)
Dear reason
1. I didn't create or write anything at my own. All of this is available in media
2. Subject of this article is not history but an end of cold start doctrine. Otherwise I would provide you neutral references on history as well
3. There is no short cut to "civilian supremacy". If at least Punjab police is fixed and reformed by Nawaz, I'll be the most vocal advocate of "civilian supremacy"'. They have to first deserve and then desire

Last but not the least: Please don't think for even a moment that I'm in favour of or advocating martial law. The fact is that army is in-charge of security related affairs even in USA. For starters election promise of Obama to dismantle Guantanamo Bay jail and his inability to do so till date will suffice for any starter with even an iota of common sense. This will be my last comment to you if you don't restrict yourself to subject of this article. Warm regards
 

Neutral man

Senator (1k+ posts)
hahaha. Here are the facts about 1965 war from neutral observers (dekho hamaari fauj ki kitni izzat hai duniya mein):

Neutral assessments

There have been several neutral assessments of the losses incurred by both India and Pakistan during the war. Most of these assessments agree that India had the upper hand over Pakistan when ceasefire was declared. Some of the neutral assessments are mentioned below —

The war was militarily inconclusive; each side held prisoners and some territory belonging to the other. Losses were relatively heavy—on the Pakistani side, twenty aircraft, 200 tanks, and 3,800 troops. Pakistan's army had been able to withstand Indian pressure, but a continuation of the fighting would only have led to further losses and ultimate defeat for Pakistan. Most Pakistanis, schooled in the belief of their own martial prowess, refused to accept the possibility of their country's military defeat by "Hindu India" and were, instead, quick to blame their failure to attain their military aims on what they considered to be the ineptitude of Ayub Khan and his government.

  • TIME magazine reported that India held 690 mi[SUP]2[/SUP] of Pakistan territory while Pakistan held 250 mi[SUP]2[/SUP] of Indian territory in Kashmir and Rajasthan. Additionally, Pakistan had lost almost half its armour temporarily.[SUP][94][/SUP] The article further elaborates,
Severely mauled by the larger Indian armed forces, Pakistan could continue the fight only by teaming up with Red China and turning its back on the U.N.

  • Devin T. Hagerty wrote in his book "South Asia in world politics"[SUP][20][/SUP] –
The invading Indian forces outfought their Pakistani counterparts and halted their attack on the outskirts of Lahore, Pakistan's second-largest city. By the time United Nations intervened on September 22, Pakistan had suffered a clear defeat.

  • In his book "National identity and geopolitical visions",[SUP][95][/SUP] Gertjan Dijkink writes –
The superior Indian forces, however, won a decisive victory and the army could have even marched on into Pakistani territory had external pressure not forced both combatants to cease their war efforts.

  • An excerpt from Stanley Wolpert's India,[SUP][96][/SUP] summarizing the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965,
In three weeks the second Indo-Pak War ended in what appeared to be a draw when the embargo placed by Washington on U.S. ammunition and replacements for both armies forced cessation of conflict before either side won a clear victory. India, however, was in a position to inflict grave damage to, if not capture, Pakistan's capital of the Punjab when the cease-fire was called, and controlled Kashmir's strategic Uri-Poonch bulge, much to Ayub's chagrin.

  • In his book titled The greater game: India's race with destiny and China, David Van Praagh wrote[SUP][7][/SUP] –
India won the war. It gained 1,840 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (710 sq mi) of Pakistani territory: 640 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (250 sq mi) in Azad Kashmir, Pakistan's portion of the state; 460 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (180 sq mi) of the Sailkot sector; 380 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (150 sq mi) far to the south of Sindh; and most critical, 360 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (140 sq mi) on the Lahore front. Pakistan took 540 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (210 sq mi) of Indian territory: 490 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (190 sq mi) in the Chhamb sector and 50 km[SUP]2[/SUP] (19 sq mi) around Khem Karan.

  • Dennis Kux's "India and the United States estranged democracies" also provides a summary of the war,[SUP][97][/SUP]
Although both sides lost heavily in men and material, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the better of the war. New Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated.

  • BBC reported that the war served game changer in Pakistani politics,[SUP][98][/SUP]
The defeat in the 1965 war led to the army's invincibility being challenged by an increasingly vocal opposition. This became a surge after his protege, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, deserted him and established the Pakistan People's Party.

  • "A region in turmoil: South Asian conflicts since 1947" by Robert Johnson mentions[SUP][8][/SUP] –
India's strategic aims were modest – it aimed to deny Pakistani Army victory, although it ended up in possession of 720 square miles (1,900 km[SUP]2[/SUP]) of Pakistani territory for the loss of just 220 square miles (570 km[SUP]2[/SUP]) of its own.

  • An excerpt from William M. Carpenter and David G. Wiencek's "Asian security handbook: terrorism and the new security environment"[SUP][99][/SUP] –
A brief but furious 1965 war with India began with a covert Pakistani thrust across the Kashmiri cease-fire line and ended up with the city of Lahore threatened with encirclement by Indian Army. Another UN-sponsored cease-fire left borders unchanged, but Pakistan's vulnerability had again been exposed.

  • English historian John Keay's "India: A History" provides a summary of the 1965 war[SUP][100][/SUP] –
The 1965 Indo-Pak war lasted barely a month. Pakistan made gains in the Rajasthan desert but its main push against India's Jammu-Srinagar road link was repulsed and Indian tanks advanced to within a sight of Lahore. Both sides claimed victory but India had most to celebrate.

  • Uk Heo and Shale Asher Horowitz write in their book "Conflict in Asia: Korea, China-Taiwan, and India-Pakistan"[SUP][101][/SUP] –
Again India appeared, logistically at least, to be in a superior position but neither side was able to mobilize enough strength to gain a decisive victory.

  • Newsweek magazine, however, praised the Pakistani military's ability to hold off the much larger Indian Army.[SUP][102][/SUP]
By just the end of the week, in fact, it was clear that the Pakistanis were more than holding their own.

Conflict resumed again in early 1965, when Pakistani and Indian forces clashed over disputed territory along the border between the two nations. Hostilities intensified that August when the Pakistani army attempted to take Kashmir by force. The attempt to seize the state was unsuccessful, and the second India-Pakistan War reached a stalemate.
is trah ki bht si links hamare pas b henn,,, lekin ye jang jeetne k certificates nahi hote,,,
65 ki jung k bad india 49 years sota raha or 50 sal bad usse apni jeet yaad aa gayi... [hilar]
dunya ki azeem leader apni qoum se jhoot nahi bolte,,, lekin afsos india me aesa bht hota he,, Modi Leader kam Geaderr zada he,,,

india ki delhi establishment na-sirf apne logon se jhoot bolti he balke wo dunya ko b be-waqoof banati he,,,>-aj ka India to kehta he k wo secular he,,
*ye kesa secular mulk he jahan Muslims bari bari achievements k bad b apne ap ko safe nahi samjte...?
*ye kesa secular mulk he jahan beef khane par log qatal ho jate hen??
*ye kesa secular mulk he jahan minorities ki books ki behurmati hoti he??
*ye kesa secular mulk he jahan sanhi samjhoota expreess jesi bewaqoofi hoti he??
*ye kesa secular mulk he jahan rape har gali me aam he,, har ghante me behstar larkion k sath rape ho jata he??
*ye kesa secular mulk he jahan Muthi bhar establishment ne 100 crore logon par apni hindi zaban musallat ki hui he??
*ye kesa secular mulk he jahan ghasib fouj ne Kashmir me atiachar machaya hoa he... ??kashmirion ki nasal kashi ho rahi he
*ye kesa secular mulk he jisne apne neighbour countries me terrorism ko export kia he??? Balochistan,, TTP,, Srilanka,,, Bangladesh,, nepal,, wagera

aese hazaro sawal hen jin ka jawab ap se lena he,,, lekin ap apni awam or dunya se jhoot bolte hen,,, ap jawab nahi den ge,,
ap bat ko gol kar den ge,,, ap 26/11 k master mind khud hen,, apne 1950 se proxy shru ki he,,, ap dunya ko jhoot bol skte henn,,, LEKIN APNE APP SE NAHI,,,,