I am proud of the Kargil operation: Musharraf

[blain2]

Sir, the 1962 war was a disaster for India because they made the wrong calculations and suppositions. Are you drawing the same parallel for Kargil? Please clarify.

It was thought necessary by the IA to undertake. The same applies to Kargil for the PA. As you are well aware, hindsight is a luxury that is not available when planning and conducting operations. You can plan as best as possible. Sometimes it works out, sometimes not.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Your opinion is duly noted, however, a piece of cloth doesn't take away from them anything ! I suppose a khaki clad terrorist in some African state would be acting very soldierly when doing the same.

Pakistan denied kasab was pakistani until the narrative became unsustainable. Pakistan claimed Abu Jundal was pakistani until the claim became unsustainable. Pakistan denied there was nuke proliferation until it became unsustainable. Pakistan denied osama was in Pakistan until it was made unsustainable. Yes we are talking about terrorism here. If you are not bound by any convention, spirit of the lahore declaration, laws of war - nothing - then you deserve what you get.

You call it covert war now, all that stops pakistan from calling mumbai terrorism covert war is someone making it unsustainable for them.

 

[EyelessInGaza]

Your opinion is duly noted, however, a piece of cloth doesn't take away from them anything ! I suppose a khaki clad terrorist in some African state would be acting very soldierly when doing the same.

But PA is not a rag tag African army, it is a professional fighting force with a martial tradition. It has a competent officer cadre with disciplined soldiery, and a chain of command. No reasonable Indian would deny that.

If this was some third rate force of mercenaries, no one would have bothered about 'honour', 'izzat', least of all me. Not for PA. Hence, IMO, a piece of cloth does take away a lot. Honour, definitely.

 

[blain2]

1962 war is due to NEHRU forward policy.... which fought directly... and kargil is not like that..... PA occupied emptied IA posts without any fighting... but fought to keep them....

Not true. Please read up. The Chinese identified the Indian ingress and then took action. It was not an immediate force on force conflict. Your side went in, took up positions, the Chinese eventually responded and pushed your troops out.

 

[Armstrong]

No, Pakistan didn't, that is what the whole brouhaha is about.

First of all, pretending that armymen are rogue mujahideen "non state actors" is not really going to help militarily, is it? Whether they are armymen or mujahideen, India would use the same tactics to evict/kill them. Besides, that's not even a charade that could be kept up for long, to give any political or diplomatic benefits on the world stage. What military value did that ATTEMPTED deception have, other than demoralizing your own soldiers? Its not like insisting that they are mujahideen made any difference to the Indian army's tactics.

The names of the dead soldiers was put up on ISPR's website in 2008.

The Rogue Mujahideen thing was about 'narratives' being perpetuated in the media to garner plausible deniability for us....nothing more...nothing less !

What demoralization are you talking about ? Have you ever conversed with the NLI or a serving military officer to gauge how ever so demoralized they were ? I was there in the Northern Areas & later AJK in '99 & so I know how charged the atmosphere was - If there was any amount of demoralization - I sure as hell didn't feel it when talking to the soldiers & locals alike - There were a lot of military movement subsequent to the Kargil withdrawal so I did happen to talk to quite a few soldiers over there.

What does ISPR's website have to do with ? I suppose the Medals were given in '08 as well....right ?

 

[Argus Panoptes]

It was thought necessary by the IA to undertake. The same applies to Kargil for the PA. As you are well aware, hindsight is a luxury that is not available when planning and conducting operations. You can plan as best as possible. Sometimes it works out, sometimes not.

I agree that Gen Musharraf thought that Kargil needed to be undertaken for whatever reasons best known to him. However, your parallel makes it equally, and painfully, clear, that he made horrendously wrong assumptions and suppositions that simply "did not work out". Hence the disaster that it turned out to be for Pakistan as a whole.

 

[illusion8]

that is a very big statement you are making ,if this is true then, can you back it up with adequate sources,proofs that kargil is controlled by Pakistan as of today ? , if so what is the size of that particular area in sq mi which which as per your claim is currently under Pakistani control, specially its location,maps etc
please provide an authentic source of your claim

also can some senior's , MOD'S, think tank on this forum shed some light on this

@Oscar sir is this true ? as a knowledgeable person here could you please verify this

I guess he doesn't know of the big IAF airbase that's coming up right bang in the middle of those Kargil peaks.

 

[surya kiran]

Siachen and Kargil sit across the very same LoC. Lets not create any confusion about that. Kargil was with Pakistan in 48 and in 65. It was taken over in 1971 by the IA and not returned so lets not talk about firmly this or that.

If Kargil operation violated Shimla agreement, so did Siachen. No changing of contours of the LOC through force applied in 1984 just as it did in 1999. You folks broke the rule first!

Clarification. Siachen and Kargil are 2 different cases.

1. Kargil was not a dispute. It was on the Indian side of the LoC. Unlesss, you are now stating that you do not recognise the LoC.
1. Siachen we can keep harping on the direction of the line. There were different viewpoints. In the case of Kargil there were no difference on viewpoits on which side of the LoC Kargil fell.

 

[Armstrong]

But PA is not a rag tag African army, it is a professional fighting force with a martial tradition. It has a competent officer cadre with disciplined soldiery, and a chain of command. No reasonable Indian would deny that.

If this was some third rate force of mercenaries, no one would have bothered about 'honour', 'izzat', least of all me. Not for PA. Hence, IMO, a piece of cloth does take away a lot. Honour, definitely.

Then I suppose every Special Op when conducted in civilian clothing is extremely dishonorable !

 

[danger007]

Not true. Please read up. The Chinese identified the Indian ingress and then took action. It was not an immediate force on force conflict. Your side went in, took up positions, the Chinese eventually responded and pushed your troops out.

62 is big mistake from NEHRU .... but the nature of the war is too different from Kargil...

 

[Armstrong]

Pakistan denied kasab was pakistani until the narrative became unsustainable. Pakistan claimed Abu Jundal was pakistani until the claim became unsustainable. Yes we are talking about terrorism here. If you are not bound by any convention, spirit of the lahore declaration, laws of war - nothing - then you deserve what you get.

You call it covert war now, all that stops pakistan from calling mumbai terrorism covert war is someone making it unsustainable for them.

Pakistan denied Kasab till proof was presented to Pakistan instead of media frenzy that passes for facts with India !

Pakistan is bound for 'evidence' & not 'conjecture' !

 

[janon]

Its debatable. I would draw some parallels with Indian Army's operation in 62. Was the IA and the GoI not expecting a Chinese reaction? Certain calculations and suppositions were made and they did not hold true. I would say the same applies here.

Sir, the 1962 war was a disaster for India because they made the wrong calculations and suppositions. Are you drawing the same parallel for Kargil? Please clarify.

I don't see how that's a valid analogy. There were several small skirmishes leading to that war, and the first major offensive was begun by the Chinese. The objectives of the war was very different too, India was not hoping to take away Tibet from china. It was not a time and place that India chose. It was not about India infiltrating its soldiers into china and hoping that china wouldn't retaliate. That war ended disastrously for India, but that is the only parallel I can see with kargil war and Pakistan.

If India had infiltrated several armymen into Tibet with the aim of taking Tibet from china, and then been beaten back, I would question my govt as to what exactly it was intending to do. Which is why it is a complete mystery as to what exactly musharaff hoped to achieve, with the kargil debacle. In what scenario would it have been a success? Is there any realistic possibility of achieving anything?

 

[Capt.Popeye]

that is a very big statement you are making ,if this is true then, can you back it up with adequate sources,proofs that kargil is controlled by Pakistan as of today ? , if so what is the size of that particular area in sq mi which which as per your claim is currently under Pakistani control, specially its location,maps etc
please provide an authentic source of your claim

also can some senior's , MOD'S, think tank on this forum shed some light on this

@Oscar sir is this true ? as a knowledgeable person here could you please verify this

I don't know if you will be willing to take my word for it.........
But for 5353 (which is not the the highest point in Kargil, btw) the LOC has been recovered by the IA. When the IA vacated the pickets in the winter of 1998, 5353 was also vacated. And has been documented, the PA crept in and occupied the vacant posts. There was no battle for them.

After the IA returned and mounted assaults in the summer of 1999, 5353 was left alone. It was not worth retaking. For some reasons; resupply was not easy from the southern ridges and spurs that were recovered by the IA. Plus Tiger Hill actually lies between 5353 and the Indian supply route. Tiger Hill is approx SSE of 5353 and directly blocking the part of the highway that is in view. About NxW of Tiger Hill are suitable locations for gun emplacements that can bring down counter-battery fire on 5353. But in the light of the actual Kargil experience, the IAF can let loose LGBs on any position now; which includes 5353. That method has been found to be more efficacious (though more expensive) than Arty.
Finally with the contruction of the alternative route to Leh and Zojila via Himachal; the dependence (and vulnerability) of NH 1A is much reduced.

Ah, and before I overlook this point; the C-130s and the C-17s will be yet another route to resupply Ladakh and Siachen. The incentives for 1999 have gone.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Pakistan denied Kasab till proof was presented to Pakistan instead of media frenzy that passes for facts with India !

Pakistan is bound for 'evidence' & not 'conjecture' !

India presented no proof of kasab's nationality. Pakistan took weeks even after knowing village name in punjab and only after it became unsustainable with international media reaching his home that pakistan admitted. You are distorting facts, unless you are suggesting international media reached an impoverished village in south punjab before Pakistani state?

Secondly last year pakistan fought for possession of abu jundal - one more terrorist from the same mumbai attacks, and never gave up claim on him. Surely they knew his origins before fighting with saudi for a month for his possession. Are you telling me they did not even verify his passport details during one month of diplomatic tussle between SA/ pakistan and india??? that they did not know he is an indian terrorist? They wanted him back because he belonged to pakistani state's terror machine.

There is clear evidence for not wilfully blind to see where pakistan stands on these matters - they lie lie lie until it becomes or made unsustainable, and people like you are left to present apology and offer meek defence.

 

[EyelessInGaza]

Then I suppose every Special Op when conducted in civilian clothing is extremely dishonorable !

Good and interesting point.

I had thought about it before making my first post on the subject, which is why I had said:

Large scale operations where the armed force participants do not even wear their uniforms

But yours is a valid question. To me special op teams in mufti against 'non -state elements' in territories under their civilian control is fine.

Special op teams in mufti in enemy territory in war time does happen a lot (so I read) but is pushing it in my opinion. If I recall correctly, such teams lose protection of the Geneva Convention, but that's a side argument.

Army units in mufti in enemy territory during peace time is wrong. Army units in mufti in enemy territory during war is also wrong. IMO.

There is also the gray area of unit strength. Is one soldier in mufti in enemy territory 'as wrong' as a platoon or a company or a battalion or a regiment in mufti in enemy territory? I don't know where that line gets crossed, but I do believe that when you're speaking of regiments, that line has been crossed a long time ago.