'Breaking up Pak hasn't helped us militarily'

Discussion in 'Internal Security' started by LETHALFORCE, Dec 11, 2011.

  1. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,536
    Likes Received:
    6,537
    'Breaking up Pak hasn't helped us militarily' - The Times of India

    While Pakistani General AAK Niazi surrendered to Gen JS Aurora in 1971, it was Lt Gen JFR Jacob who negotiated terms of the surrender. The veteran speaks to Parakram Rautela about the 14-day war for the liberation of Bangladesh, his starkest memories from that time, and why he thinks India did not use the surrender of 93,000 Pakistani soldiers to its advantage. Excerpts:

    You have said you disobeyed orders when it came to the 1971 war in Bangladesh. That Sam Maneckshaw, the Army chief, believed it would be enough to capture the port towns of Khulna and Chittagong, for, if that happened, Dhaka would fall on its own. But you refused and carried on to Dhaka. Was there no price to pay for that?

    No, there wasn't any price to pay. We won Bangladesh. You win a war, how can there be a price to pay?

    As a team, how well did Sam Maneckshaw, Gen Aurora and you work?

    I was fond of Sam. He gave me a dog, a dachshund. I got along with Aurora, too.

    But professionally you didn't see eye to eye?

    Yes, we had our professional disagreements.

    If the three of you were not agreeing on what to do, then what happened in 1971? Did we get lucky?

    I can tell you what happened. On December 3, we joined the war. On December 13, we were on the outskirts of Bangladesh. On the 14th, we were ordered to go back and capture all the towns we'd bypassed and those orders were copied to the corps commanders. I told them to ignore the orders. We'd intercepted a message about a meeting on the 14th in Government House. I told the Air Force to bomb it. The governor resigned and went to the American consulgeneral with a ceasefire proposal.

    How did the surrender happen?

    Maneckshaw told me to go and get a surrender. I said, 'I've sent you a draft, do I negotiate on that?' He said, 'You know what to do.' At Gen Niazi's (chief of Pakistan's eastern command) headquarters, I read out my unconfirmed draft. Niazi said to me, "Who says I'm surrendering? I'm here to discuss the terms of the ceasefire." I told him I'd give him 30 minutes to think it over and after that I'd order the bombing of the Dhaka cantonment. Thirty minutes later, I went back and asked him three times if he'd accepted? There was no answer. So I told him I take the surrender as accepted. And that he would have to surrender in public; I'd already given the instructions.

    Why is the surrender story so controversial with so many versions in circulation?

    I haven't heard the other stories. My story is the one that I've written in my book Surrender at Dacca: Birth of a Nation. I sent copies of it to Maneckshaw and to Aurora, and neither of them sent me a rejoinder. Maneckshaw, though, did ask me "why I put in that horrible photograph of his in the book?"

    What is your starkest memory from those days?

    I remember Gen Niazi's headquarters in Dhaka... when I read out the instrument of surrender to him, he burst into tears. And then at the Ramna Race Course, at the public surrender, the Bangladeshi people wanted to lynch him. We had a difficult time getting him out of there.

    Did we squander the advantage of the military victory?

    Yes. We should have got a written agreement from Pakistan President Bhutto in Shimla in 1972, saying the ceasefire line in J&K is the boundary line. But he said he couldn't give us anything in writing, for he'd be lynched back home. Bhutto later reneged on his word.

    The breaking up of Pakistan was supposed to make India safer. Has it?

    No, I don't think things are very different. Earlier, when there were two fronts - Pakistan to our west and East Pakistan (Bangladesh) to our east - Pakistan didn't really have the capacity needed to create trouble for us. Now, with all their troops and equipment in Pakistan, they're better able to focus on them.
     
    Galaxy, agentperry and W.G.Ewald like this.
  2.  
  3. The Messiah

    The Messiah Bow Before Me! Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,788
    Likes Received:
    4,552
    I'd say it has.
     
    Tshering22 and hit&run like this.
  4. W.G.Ewald

    W.G.Ewald Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2 Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Messages:
    14,140
    Likes Received:
    8,528
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    MacArthur was the same way. :laugh:
     
  5. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,273
    Likes Received:
    11,279
    Location:
    BANGalore
    Well we will have to break up Pakistan in its current state to know if it helps us or not. That it will help I have no doubt about.

    Thank you Gen for your role in the east. The enemy still hasn't forgotten the mauling and humiliation they received.
     
    Tshering22 likes this.
  6. W.G.Ewald

    W.G.Ewald Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2 Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Messages:
    14,140
    Likes Received:
    8,528
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    If Pakistan is broken up further, who will administer the resulting political entities? India, the UN?
     
  7. warriorextreme

    warriorextreme Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,369
    Likes Received:
    536
    Location:
    Mumbai
    Blaochistan
    [​IMG]

    Sindhudesh
    [​IMG]

    It will be fun :thumb:
     
    Tshering22 and W.G.Ewald like this.
  8. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,273
    Likes Received:
    11,279
    Location:
    BANGalore
    The people of that region. The Baloch, the Sindhis who have no say in the matters of their region which is dominated by Punjabis.
     
    W.G.Ewald likes this.
  9. warriorextreme

    warriorextreme Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,369
    Likes Received:
    536
    Location:
    Mumbai
    people of that land will rule...and after 30 or odd years they will become headache for india too..
     
    Dovah likes this.
  10. mayfair

    mayfair Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    2,584
    Likes Received:
    1,760
    Location:
    India
    With all due respect Gen. Jacob, by that logic even we were able to concentrate our troops on China and Western (Pakistan) borders instead of thinning them out over three frontlines.

    East Pakistan would have easily created as much or even more trouble for us..it would have been far easier for PLA to station troops and equipment there and create another Gwador, without accompanying Baloch pinpricks. We would have been surrounded by Chinese forces from three sides in the Northeast and that itself lends to some not so comforting scenarios.

    Finally, Pakis being Pakis, would have still gone on to support terror in the North East and with Chinese backing; there would have been no crackdown on ULFA, NLFT, NDFB, KLO and other terror groups.

    On the plus side, perhaps the illegal immigration would have been far less since the border would have been very strictly patrolled by the army.
     
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2011
    Nagraj, Illusive, Dovah and 1 other person like this.
  11. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,543
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Technically, Gen Jacob said is right. Now, the complete military of Pakistan is hunkered down in West Pakistan.

    The anger of being humiliated and their claim of 1 Pak boy = 10 Indians being smashed, has been translated in the idea of destroying India by a 1000 cuts. It is something that India can take it in its stride, but in the bargain, it resurrected the fire of Islamic 'superiority' all Muslim harbour. The initial success in Kashmir, ignite Zia's zeal to take on the Russians in Afghanistan with US arms and money, that turned successful.

    The fundamentalists that were unleashed became heady with the success and they thought they could take on the world. Foolishly they took on their benefactor, the US and they have met their current doom, wherein they are foolishly dying in Afghanistan and also their country is in total turmoil and they are killing each other and also, they are so confused that they are in a mental limbo as to whether to have a military regime or have a civilian Govt.

    They blow hot and cold against their benefactor, the US, but cannot abandon the US since they are the Masters who feed, cloth and pay for their existence.

    In other word, they are not a country in its real sense.

    Hence, who won and who lost?
     
  12. mayfair

    mayfair Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    2,584
    Likes Received:
    1,760
    Location:
    India
    That would have happened with our without 1971. Afghan invasion was bound to happen and the Great game would have played out leading to the terrorists being diverted to J&K as it happened later.
     
  13. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,543
    Location:
    Somewhere
    I am no crystal ball gazer and so I cannot say that it would happen even without 1971.

    What were the indications that it would?

    As per the books, they seem to feel that the Mujhs were the fallout of Zia's 1000 cuts where he honed his strategy and played up to the US.
     
  14. Bangalorean

    Bangalorean Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2010
    Messages:
    6,207
    Likes Received:
    6,496
    Of course it has helped!!! Can you imagine a nuclear BD with missiles pointed towards Guwahati and Kolkata??

    The N-E has had its share of insurgencies as it is, and if BD was Pak, those insurgencies would have been ten times worse!

    Of course the breakup has benefited India!
     
  15. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,273
    Likes Received:
    11,279
    Location:
    BANGalore
    I don't think we would have seen terror as we see today if Astan war of the 80s had not happened. But then we could still have had a cold war and the USSR still in existence and India still supported by the soviets would not have initiated reforms and we still would be in a mess!! God this IF can bring out so many scenarios!!
     
  16. mayfair

    mayfair Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    2,584
    Likes Received:
    1,760
    Location:
    India
    The Afghan war would have happened irrespective of 1971..two completely unrelated events.
    Indian would have gone ahead with the nuclear test, leading to ghaas khaayenge..hazaar saal maraayenge rant from Bhutto and the AQ Khan saga..
    India would have still pre-empted Paki perfidy and cartographic aggression on Siachen
    The perceived successes of the US-backed jihad in Afghanistan would have still emboldened the Pakis to support terror in India. They were already supporting the Khalistanis and supporting Kashmiris would have been an obvious development.

    If not 1971, Pakis would have found something else to initiate their war by thousand cuts. The entire premise of the country is based on hating India, Indians (Hindus for them) and kaafir (in no particular order).

    I agree that none of us are prophets to know with certainity what would have happened..but given what HAS happened and our understanding of the Paki national character a few guesses can be made with some degree of confidence

    Pakis have virtually ceded Gilgit-Baltistan to Chinese and would have done the same to Gwador if not for Chinese reluctance to be caught in the quagmire of Baloch insurgency and become another USSR in Afghanistan. I bet my months salary (a pittance actually but that's besides the point) that the Pakis would have done the same in their East Wing.
    Invite the Chinese to setup PLA, PLAAF and PLAAN bases,
    Invite them to station their nuclear tipped missiles there,
    Invite their corporations to invest in gas, mining, forestry and agriculture..
    Withdraw most of their forces to the West or the "real" Pakistan, content in the knowledge that India would be forced to spread their troops to counter the Chinese on at least two fronts in the North and the East, thereby, balancing the power equation on the Western front.

    East Pakistan was treated as a colony and with nothing but contempt by the TFTA Pakis. However, we ould have been left sandwiched between nuclear tipped missiles from the West, the North and East, with nowhere to go but the ocean.
     
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2011
  17. Tianshan

    Tianshan Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Messages:
    675
    Likes Received:
    249
    i think it is possible to say that the split up was inevitable, given the geography and the fact that the two sides had no land connection with each other.

    however, india's involvement gives the pakistani leadership and people, a reason to hate india forever. regardless of whether or not india was actually hurting them, or simply speeding up the inevitable, both of which are plausible.
     
  18. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,543
    Location:
    Somewhere
    I wonder if the split was inevitable. Geography should not have been an inhibitor.

    Pakistanis hate Indians ever since the Independence. History witnesses the same.

    Whether it is hurting Pakistan or not is also being seen.

    Pakistan is in total chaos!
     
  19. pankaj nema

    pankaj nema Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,450
    Likes Received:
    1,407
    We need to see this issue in its entire perspective and NOT what happened after 1971

    The India Pakistan fight has its roots much before partition and independence

    Pakistan and Pakistanis have considered themselves as successors of the Mughal empire

    " We are Mughals " This is what was told to Pakistani children by their elders after 1947

    Pakistani mentality is that they hate the FACT that even after centuries of Islamic rule Hindus got their country
    back and this is considered as a failure on the part of their ancestors

    Pakistan ever since its creation has had one dream

    This dream was expressed in the form of a slogan in 1965 war

    This slogan was " GREEN flag on RED Fort "

    For ACHIEVING this dream of destroying and breaking up India it was COMPLETELY necessary
    FOR Pakistan that the TERRITORY or LAND of Bangladesh was in the hand of Punjabis and Pathans

    Whether or not Bangladesh was to be created at a future date, Pakistani animosity and hatred towards
    Hindus would have ALWAYS been there
     
  20. pankaj nema

    pankaj nema Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,450
    Likes Received:
    1,407
    The Pakistani perspective of 1971 DEBACLE on which there is PLENTY of material
    available on the internet clearly states that

    "Pakistan LOST for ever the ABILITY to have PARITY with India and stand on an equal footing "

    This proves that they are still Hurting

    Similarly and more importantly Pakistan LOST its MIND after the 1971 debacle and like a broken person
    who drowns himself in alcohol Pakistan immersed itself in religion

    The effects of which are there for the whole world to see
     
  21. pankaj nema

    pankaj nema Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,450
    Likes Received:
    1,407
    We should not forget that 25 percent Bangladeshis have an Islamist and Jamaati mindset
    which is at the root of India Bangladeshi UNEASINESS

    25 % Bangladeshis are ISI fans admirers and lovers according to our PM

    So how much easier it would have been for the Pakistani punjabi establishment to cause harm to India
     

Share This Page