A collection of neutral assessments on the 1965 war

[niaz]

It is about 50 years but I vividly remember it. I was a student in London and used to read all the UK newspapers and listen to the BBC to get the news. Additionally, at that time there used to be a hostel for Pakistanis near the Lowndes Square where a couple of days old Pakistani newspapers were available, I used to go there to read Pakistani side of the story. At that time I was also convinced that Pakistan won the war.

Since then I have read analysis of the war by Indians as well as Pakistanis; also by the neutral observers and conclude that this was a war where both the sides can claim to have won.

Pakistan initiated the hostilities thru "Operation Gibraltar" in August 1965. Pakistan’s objective was to liberate Kashmir, which did not happen. Thanks to its cowardly commander, Pakistan’s Ist Armoured Div. also failed to penetrate beyond a few kilometres into India. Thus Indians can claim that they won the war.

On the other hand; even neutral observers agree that Indian aircraft losses were about 4 times more than Pakistan's. Indian massive counter attack on Lahore, Chowinda as well as in Rajasthan sector fizzled out. Thus Pakistan can also claim victory.

With hindsight, one can safely infer that senior commanders at the front and at the GHQ on both sides lacked vision and courage to take risks. For example even an idiot would infer that India would attack anywhere to save Akhnoor from falling. Why wasn’t Pak Army ready for a possible attack on Lahore? Similarly, why did Indian commander fail to exploit the situation when he reached Jallo near Batapur on September 6th, 1965?

Therefore when analysed objectively without any emotional involvement; 1965 conflict emerges as an inconclusive war and was a stalemate where no country really won.

 

[rezangahir]

When did the last time any Muslim country won any war?

 

[qamar1990]

dude your geography sucks

Pakistan even after loosing East Pak & siachin is today just 3.6 times smaller then India , which means forget 7 India is not even 4 times larger but 3.6 times larger then Pakistan & @ that times Pakistan had east pak & siachin means that Pakistan at that time was just 3 times smaller then India & not 7 times
secondly learn to respect other peoples religion , living in the U.S & having such extreme views like Hindus or people of any faith being slave or inferior is not very healthy

lmao..... yes land is 3 times but population is around 7 times.... do you know how stupid you sound lol??
india- "defeated" a country ONLY 3 times smaller
- all this while having a population ONLY 7 times larger!!
what an achievement!!!

 

[niaz]

When did the last time any Muslim country won any war?

This is a frivolous statement. If you care to read history, every nation/ country/ region has her ups & downs.
But since you have brazenly asked the question; during the last 100 years:

Turkey under Kamal Ata Turk defeated combined forces of Britain, France & Greece in 1923 during the Turkish war of independence.

Indonesian independence in 1949 was direct result of armed resistance of the Indonesian National Revolutionary Forces against Nederland occupation. Same thing happened during the Algerian war of independence in 1962.

In my book, if you attack a country & are forced to withdraw without achieving your objective, it is a defeat. On this basis Egypt under the late Jamal Abdul Nasser won the 1956 Suez war against Britain & France.

Each victory & defeat has reasons as to why? Therefore please don’t try to argue with ifs & buts, it is the end result that counts.