What's new

Indira Gandhi wanted to liberate Pakistani Kashmir: Advani

CaPtAiN_pLaNeT

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
7,685
Reaction score
0
Indira Gandhi wanted to liberate Pakistani Kashmir: Advani


Indo-Asian News Service
New Delhi, November 21, 2010
First Published: 18:57 IST(21/11/2010)
Last Updated: 19:00 IST(21/11/2010)

Indira Gandhi wanted to liberate Pakistani Kashmir: Advani - Hindustan Times

American leaders were convinced during the 1971 war that then Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was thinking of breaking up West Pakistan and "liberate" Pakistani Kashmir, LK Advani posted on his blog on Sunday. Quoting a new book, Advani said wrote that the question about Gandhi's objectives had
been on his mind after he read "Bangladesh Liberation War: Myths and Facts" by BZ Khasru, the editor of a New York financial publication.

"A question that had been on my mind since some weeks was: when in 1971 Indiraji decided to help Sheikh Mujibur Rahman carve out an independent Bangladesh for the Bengalis of East Pakistan, was she also simultaneously thinking of an operation in West Pakistan aimed to achieve two major objectives, namely to balkanize West Pakistan, and to liberate Pakistan occupied Kashmir," Advani said.

"Till now I have never before heard anyone else even suggest this. But this book carries ample data to show that whether or not Gandhi actually contemplated to achieve these objectives, Washington's top leaders of those times, President Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, the president's national security adviser, were both convinced that Gandhi was seriously thinking of action in that direction, and that the Soviets were likely to help India in achieving its objective," he said.

Advani said US relations with India those days were very bitter and Nixon disliked Gandhi. He said America had developed a great liking for successive Pakistan presidents, Ayub Khan and Yahya Khan.

"After Gen Yahya Khan's meeting with President Nixon at the White House, Kissinger seriously probed with Pakistan whether they would be willing to use their influence with China for a US-China rapprochement," he said.

The BJP leader said that during the India-Pakistan crisis in relation to East Bengal, the US not only dispatched its nuclear-armed Seventh Fleet to the Bay of Bengal and warned Moscow "to stop India from destroying West Pakistan" but also tried hard to make China threaten India against any armed intervention in East Pakistan.

"If what US apprehended was what actually had been planned, USA's threats and moves really paid off," he said.

Advani quoted a chapter titled "‘Balkanize' West Pakistan: Why Gandhi backed off" from the book.

"As the Indian military marched into East Pakistan, full throttle, and international efforts to stop the fighting gained momentum at the United Nations, Gandhi found herself between a rock and a hard place.

"On the one hand, if she advanced her campaign to completely crush the Pakistani military in the West as she had promised to her cabinet months earlier, she would face a potential fight with Washington and Beijing and antagonize Moscow, which had wanted to end the war after capturing Dhaka. On the other hand, if she backed off, her colleagues would give her a hard time and India would lose a rare opportunity to permanently cripple an arch enemy."

Advani said Gandhi explained to her cabinet that if India accepted the UN ceasefire proposal after Bangladesh's liberation, it could avoid further complications with the US and this "might also rule out the current possibility of a Chinese intervention in Ladakh".

India's defence minister Jagjivan Ram and several other military leaders, however, opposed a ceasefire until India had taken certain unspecified areas of Kashmir and destroyed "the war mechanism of Pakistan".

"Gandhi overruled the opponents, saying that 'for the moment India would not categorically reject' the UN ceasefire proposal. India would accept a ceasefire after the Awami League regime was installed in Dhaka," Advani said.

The BJP leader said he saw no reason to doubt the findings of the author.

Advani added that after reading the book he wished some objective Indian historian researched Indian source material and government documents to give the country a version of events as seen from the Indian side.
 
.
But poor Indra Gandhi could not make it. All she was successful to is to divide the muslims of East and West Pakistan. Now India is able to kill muslims in Kashmir and cover up killings of muslims in Gujrat. Muslims just are playing in the hands of Indians and this will continue.
 
. .
But poor Indra Gandhi could not make it. All she was successful to is to divide the muslims of East and West Pakistan. Now India is able to kill muslims in Kashmir and cover up killings of muslims in Gujrat. Muslims just are playing in the hands of Indians and this will continue.

:no: Oh no no - dont say she failed , she was very successful I tell you , she was one of the brave leader India ever had , she divided her arch enemy Into Half , liberated east pak - did great Job In her tenure unlike her father.
 
.
few things always cross my mind ...why did indian forces not able to achive anything dispite a year long 1965 war...and how could they able to make such a impect in 1971 .....
 
.
few things always cross my mind ...why did indian forces not able to achive anything dispite a year long 1965 war...and how could they able to make such a impect in 1971 .....

The 1965 war a second kashmir war.... Did not have anything to do with Bangladesh Liberation.... Well, 1965 was an attack after India was recovering from the 1962 Nightmare, So we could not make any Impact, although we defended Our Land thus the Tashkent Declaration
 
.
:no: Oh no no - dont say she failed , she was very successful I tell you , she was one of the brave leader India ever had , she divided her arch enemy Into Half , liberated east pak - did great Job In her tenure unlike her father.

Indira Gandhi was a Female Hitler/Zia. She was stubborn, obsessive. Why attack on a Sikh holy day when the Gurudwara will be full of innocent people? Why on holy day when thousands of pilgrims were in the complex. She wanted to send a message by killing innocent yatrees? :tdown:
 
.
Indira Gandhi was a Female Hitler/Zia. She was stubborn, obsessive. Why attack on a Sikh holy day when the Gurudwara will be full of innocent people? Why on holy day when thousands of pilgrims were in the complex. She wanted to send a message by killing innocent yatrees? :tdown:

whats the use of discussing it now dude.... Present generation is trying to forget it.....
 
.
Indira Gandhi was a Female Hitler/Zia. She was stubborn, obsessive. Why attack on a Sikh holy day when the Gurudwara will be full of innocent people? Why on holy day when thousands of pilgrims were in the complex. She wanted to send a message by killing innocent yatrees? :tdown:

Its a different Issue , not related to this Topic - Btw Its a forgotten issue
 
.
few things always cross my mind ...why did indian forces not able to achive anything dispite a year long 1965 war...and how could they able to make such a impect in 1971 .....

She took the advantage of east Pakistan civil war and geography of east pakistan. In fact she divided a country which was already split in two. Many bharatis might consider it as a huge victory but even if dumbest of all Indian PMs would be the PM at that time he would have done the same. That's why their is a huge difference between the results of the two wars.:)
 
.
She took the advantage of east Pakistan civil war and geography of east pakistan. In fact she divided a country which was already split in two. Many bharatis might consider it as a huge victory but even if dumbest of all Indian PMs would be the PM at that time he would have done the same. That's why their is a huge difference between the results of the two wars.:)

The difference is The civil war was Not created By India.... We might have capitalized on it, But Hey You could not take advantage of the war U created In kashmir, So It was a Tit for Tat.... Dont blame her...
 
.
few things always cross my mind ...why did indian forces not able to achive anything dispite a year long 1965 war...and how could they able to make such a impect in 1971 .....

There is a difference(one ended in stalemate and the other ended in surrender of Pakistani army) because 1971 war was preplanned war with defined objectives and all the preliminary ground work including international mediation accounted for, whereas 1965 was a reactionary war,where Indian leader were just reacting to Pakistani offensive and had not laid any groundwork for winning the war .
 
.
The difference is The civil war was Not created By India.... We might have capitalized on it, But Hey You could not take advantage of the war U created In kashmir, So It was a Tit for Tat.... Dont blame her...

Their is a difference between IOK and East Pakistan. Try to understand it.:rolleyes:
 
. . .

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom