China helped Pak during Kargil war: Brigadier !

[kseeker]

Ref: China helped Pak during Kargil war: Brigadier - Times Of India

CHANDIGARH: Did China support Pakistan during the Kargil war? The answer is in the affirmative if the claims of Chandigarh-based Brigadier Surinder Singh -- who was the commander of the 121-Brigade in Kargil at the time of the war -- are to be believed.

In a startling revelation, Singh, who himself was on the front when the 1999 India-Pakistan conflict broke out in Kargil, also claimed that his inputs about Chinese support to Pakistan during the Kargil war were ignored and even K Subrahmanyam, head of the Kargil review committee, made an adverse comment against his statements in the report.


Surinder Singh was the commander of "Kargil Brigade," which looked after 160 km border when the Kargil intrusion took place. The revelations are significant as the brigadier has filed a petition before the military tribunal, Chandigarh, demanding an independent probe into Kargil war. The matter is still pending.

In an article released on Wednesday, the brigadier asserted, "Before and during Kargil war, the Chinese had inducted and manned heavy artillery guns in the K2 gun position in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), close to Kargil, and provided fire support to Pakistani Army during the war".

Surinder, who was the first officer removed from the services immediately after the war, has also asserted that China had supported Pakistan by moving their troops into Aksai Chin during the conflict. It is the same area where Chinese are intruding time and again now. "When this was discussed by me with the generals, it was not given due attention. When I propounded that the aims of the Chinese and the Pakistanis coincided in the Kargil/Ladakh area, it was glossed over. In fact, Subrahmanyam made an adverse comment against my thoughts in the Kargil review committee report," claimed the brigadier.

In his petition filed in 2001, Singh had not only sought professional restitution, but also an investigation into the Kargil war. Earlier, his petition was pending with Delhi high court, but after the constitution of Armed Forces Tribunal in Chandigarh, Singh got his case transferred here. He has also claimed in his petition that the threat perception conveyed by him to his immediate seniors was ignored and the senior commanders were giving more importance to activities unconnected to the defensive role of the Army in Kargil sector.

Is this true or just an hyped news ?
@Ray, @pmaitra, @Decklander

 

[Ray]

On what basis is Surinder stating , "Before and during Kargil war, the Chinese had inducted and manned heavy artillery guns in the K2 gun position in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), close to Kargil, and provided fire support to Pakistani Army during the war"?

Has he amplified the same?

What proof to that effect has he got?

However, this much I will say is that Surinder is not the sole villain of the piece.

One has to command 121 and also know of the procedures of vacating posts during winters because of avalanche threat to really come to the conclusion if he was at fault.

Subrahamanyan would not have known that. He would have gone by what was told.

And the Lt Gen ARK Reddy (who did the Army enquiry), was a pliable man to suit the demand of the time and his superiors. He is known to be a person who has risen and created a record, wherein, he never passed the Staff College exam, a pre requisite to higher ranks and yet became a Lt Gen!

He also did well under as Chief of Staff to Lt Gen Ravi Eipe, who ran out of battle at the Thagla Ridge (2 RAJPUT) (Capt Amarinder Singh's book 'Lest we Forget') and who too rose to be the Army Commander, Eastern Command.

 

[kseeker]

A comment on the TOI article...

Harjit Singh Chauhan (New York) 29 Sep, 2013 09:46 PM Wrote:
The action of Brig Surinder Singh is nothing but to Politicalise the matter with the aim to Galvanise his failing. The atmosphere at his HQ was of Party than the Profession. Did he or his Officers at the front ever physically visit the front. It is the locals who told them about the Presence of Pakistan forces. It was better that he accepted his failings. It is a fact that it require courage to admit one's failing. Ask any ex-officer of MAHAR REGIMEN, his Regiment about his claim.

 

[Ray]

A comment on the TOI article...

Harjit Singh Chauhan (New York) 29 Sep, 2013 09:46 PM Wrote:
The action of Brig Surinder Singh is nothing but to Politicalise the matter with the aim to Galvanise his failing. The atmosphere at his HQ was of Party than the Profession. Did he or his Officers at the front ever physically visit the front. It is the locals who told them about the Presence of Pakistan forces. It was better that he accepted his failings. It is a fact that it require courage to admit one's failing. Ask any ex-officer of MAHAR REGIMEN, his Regiment about his claim.

That is not a fair comment.

Every Commander visits what this man is saying 'the front'.

Even those who do not want to walk, have recourse to riding on Mules or what is called 'small Donkey' (local donkeys).

It is asinine to believe that a Commander should patrol the border.

The front defended was from Kaobal Gali to Chorbatla which is 168 km stretch with mountain spines running from South to North.

It means that between each spine was a Valley.

The troops were three battalion and BSF companies.

The posts held were plenty and that meant that while patrolling was done, in addition to defending the post as also having men for administrative duties to including ferrying supplies and cooking et al, it was a Herculean task to surveil every inch of the 168 kms.

Note that 168 km increases in distance if you could going up and down the valleys from the high altitude mountain tops where the posts are to the valley floor and then climbing again, after walking the distance of the valley floor to the end of Indian jurisdiction.

It is all easy for armchair champions to opine, but ask those on the ground who have to ensure that there are adequate troops on the post, that are distanced and far between, to defend against an attack, and at the same time, scupper up troops for patrols, ferry up supplies, stores, ration. K Oil and ammunition.

Further, after every war ends, troops return to their original location.

Can someone explain as to why 8 Div which fought the war, did not go back and was deployed in situ?

Because, the area of 121 was too large for a Brigade to handle and this was projected all the time, but fell on deaf ears.

I was there in both the circumstance and in both I was in the active combat mode. One was 'localised' war and the next time a more active war that all knows about.

And I am from Mahar Regiment.

 

[Ray]

A Kargil-type situation could perhaps have been avoided had the Indian Army followed a policy of Siachenisation to plug unheld gaps along the 168 km stretch from Kaobal Gali to Chorbat La... Such a dispersal of forces to hold uninhabited territory of no strategic value would have dissipated considerable military strength and effort though and would not have at all been cost effective.

"The alternative should be a credible declaratory policy of swiftly punishing wanton and willful violation of the sanctity of the LOC."

..:: India Strategic ::..

*********************

There lies the nub of the issue.