Kargil: A Debacle or A Lost Opportunity?

[Tornado]

The Kargil truth is hidden under secrecy laws and the politicization of the event–both India and Pakistan makes it very difficult to get to the truth. But the basic question remains the same . what forced pakistanis to infiltrate at the crucial time when top leaders of both counteries were on table to discuss peace.
And most political probables;
1. Pakistan sponsored insurgency in the Kashmir valley and J&K had been effectively contained by India, and Pakistan political leadership was at a loss to keep Kashmir boiling.
2. International community was no more interested in the Kashmir problem and even USA and China were urging Pakistan to stop supporting the insurgency.
4. Domestic problems of Pakistan were again raising their head, the Mullahs were demanding their pound of flesh, Taliban trained, equipped and supported by Pakistan for invasion of Afghanistan now wanted same sort of shariat rule in Pakistan, and the provinces were restive.
5. Pakistan's new Chief of Army Staff, Gen Parvez Musharraf was a mohajir and needed to establish his credentials as more Pakistani than even a Punjabi. He was a commando and a protégé of Zia-ul-Haq, and needed to take on India to show his Napoleonic military qualities. He had been deeply involved in the fight in Afghanistan against Soviet forces. He felt that if he could worst the Soviets, Indians would be a cakewalk.
6. Both countries were now nuclear weapons states, and an all out war was perhaps ruled out, as it involved the danger of escalation to nuclear war, thus negating India's conventional superiority and permitting Pakistan to fight the war on its ground and time of choosing. And militarily
1. Kargil is the most crucial part of Indian held sector on the LOC, where the NH1A passes closest to the LOC and Pakistan can intercept our Lines of Communication to Leh in Ladakh region, thereby cutting off Indian army's 3 Infantry Division in Ladakh facing Chinese on Aksai chin and Pakistan at Siachin.
2. Kargil is far removed from both Srinagar and Leh for any quick reaction by Indian army. It is in a bowl, flanked by Zojila on this side and Tungla on the other side.
3. Zojila, the pass of blizzards at 11,578 ft remains closed for over six months in the year, thus cutting the line to Kargil from Srinagar. Kargil sector is stockpiled for six months, any more ammunition or rations have to be brought through Zojila only
4. Terrain is the most inhospitable in this region, on par with next only to Siachin. Any territory captured once by the Pakistanis will be most difficult to recapture due to the difficulty of terrain and weather.
5. Kargil defended by only one infantry brigade of Indian army, with four infantry battalions covering an area of over 200 Km frontage, thus with very low density of troops.
6. Indian army due to inhospitable weather in winters withdrew to lower posts leaving upper posts empty, and only surveillance mounted by foot patrols in the lower regions as higher region extremely difficult to reach.
7. Aerial surveillance mounted irregularly due to bad weather conditions.
8. Pakistan Lines of Communication on the other side are more stabilized and he can reach the heights even in winters from Skardu side, as Skardu is connected to Gilgit through an all weather motorable road throughout the year.
9. Pakistan had an overlooking position on the Srinagar- Leh road even in normal times and could monitor our activities.
10. Kargil sector had remained dormant since 1971 after the Shimla agreement. No activity of infiltration or sabotage had taken place as it was a Shia dominated area and was far removed from the Kashmir valley.Indian security forces thus were less vigilant. source

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

^^ A decent analysis of the strategic/tactical aspects of Kargil - unfortunately the usual Indian canards of 'Pakistan needed to 'bolster domestic opinion' to explain the justification behind Kargil.

 

[Kasrkin]

AM's post on the other hand was much more effective in conveying the message that he did not find the torture story true based on facts rather than rhetoric.

Yes I saw how ‘effective’ AM’s polite correction of your inherit misconception was.

Even now I don't see any report credible enough to discredit those reports. It is ultimately what you want to believe.

So I was compelled to ask you, why do you insist on believing crap about Pakistan in defiance of logic all the time?

Drop this discussion as it has degenerated to personal attacks

Ha! Isn’t that convenient for you? Your persistent and dishonorable rants have been neatly and effectively refuted. Why did you not bother reading any of it because I questioned your neutrality? Or was the English not simple enough for you? I can simplify the extracts if you require.

You’re the one who crossed the line here, but what’s the point elaborating. You don’t even acknowledge your obvious factual mistakes, let alone any inherit impulsive troll-like tendencies that have ruined this discussion. But you won’t get away so easily next time if you keep this completely unsubstantiated raw and rhetorical B-S up.

The military leaders of Pakistan gave a poor account of themselves in the situation and failed to honor those they had sent to death.

I’ve never been so insulted in my life. You have exposed your bitter and frustrated mentality, as well as your credibility. Don’t do it again.

 

[Vinod2070]

AM's post on the other hand was much more effective in conveying the message that he did not find the torture story true based on facts rather than rhetoric.

Yes I saw how ‘effective’ AM’s polite correction of your inherit misconception was.

Even now I don't see any report credible enough to discredit those reports. It is ultimately what you want to believe.

So I was compelled to ask you, why do you insist on believing crap about Pakistan in defiance of logic all the time?

This is called polite disagreement! I know you seem to have trouble understanding the concept.

AM's post does convey an alternate viewpoint but is not in anyway any proof. It just keeps the second option open which I will surely consider if I get a more rigorous proof in future. On the contrary if I get a solid proof to the contrary, I am sure he would be ready to change his opinion about the issue.

Drop this discussion as it has degenerated to personal attacks

Ha! Isn’t that convenient for you? Your persistent and dishonorable rants have been neatly and effectively refuted. Why did you not bother reading any of it because I questioned your neutrality? Or was the English not simple enough for you? I can simplify the extracts if you require.

Man, you have just decided to become convinced by your own less than honest and honorable rhetoric here.

You have not refuted anything. None at all. Except if making personal attack counts for that in your language.

While I agree that you are too verbose and use a lot of unnecessary bandwidth to convey what can be more effectively conveyed in a few sentences, don't bother about my English at all!

You’re the one who crossed the line here, but what’s the point elaborating. You don’t even acknowledge your obvious factual mistakes, let alone any inherit impulsive troll-like tendencies that have ruined this discussion. But you won’t get away so easily next time if you keep this completely unsubstantiated raw and rhetorical B-S up.

Point me to any factual mistake and prove it and I will agree. You have failed to do so.

Just imagining the same without proving it is not the same thing!

I can use some words to describe you too. There is no point. I don't know Kasrkin, it is unlikely I will meet him ever. I don't care if he is a troll or not. All I care for is this discussions on an anonymous internet forum with an anonymous person at this point.

The military leaders of Pakistan gave a poor account of themselves in the situation and failed to honor those they had sent to death.

I’ve never been so insulted in my life. You have exposed your bitter and frustrated mentality, as well as your credibility. Don’t do it again.

This is just a statement of the fact that your military leaders refused to acknowledge the intruders as their own, as the military men of Pakistan who were just following orders.

What is insulting in just the mention of an obvious fact that we all know to be true!

Do let me know if you have an alternate version of this fact.

 

[Kasrkin]

Very well, if you insist…

“This is called polite disagreement! I know you seem to have trouble understanding the concept…”

I’m afraid this is not ‘disagreement’. This is denial. Your belief has been thoroughly analyzed, then refuted and then the damage done by it lamented. You’re attitude is part of that damage. I ask again, would you like me to rephrase the extracts?

“AM's post does convey an alternate viewpoint but is not in anyway any proof…”

Since when the hell did this world become about “guilty until proven innocent”? AM and I have explained the reality of the situation logically, we have referred you to the fact that this is the prevalent belief among educated and impartial observers, furthermore it has been explained to you how and why your belief is taken up by the more sentimental, uneducated and primitive lot. I have given you a thorough example in the words of such a commentator, whose very words have been endorsed by no one other than the Indian General very much relevant to this affair. Whose view, I should say will be considered a billion times more credible than yours and leaves you hanging.

No, you’re trying to dismiss this over semantics, you’re failing miserably. And everyone can see that.

“On the contrary if I get a solid proof to the contrary, I am sure he would be ready to change his opinion about the issue…”

What ‘solid proof’ do you want? I’m sure somehow even if the dead soldiers climb out of their graves and come to you, slap you in the face and say “we weren’t tortured”, that won’t be enough for you will it?

You’re such a hypocrite. Just look at the quality and level of ‘proof’ you’ve provided to this forum. A Wikipedia page about some lieutenant, entirely quoted from 3rd rate Indian nationalist websites, and I went through the trouble of finding the book and quoting the entire damn portion along with its Indian endorsement credentials. Just look at the quality of the commentary and commentators. Look at the quality of the research (if what you’ve given can be called ‘research’) you have and I have, and still you insist that you are not narrow minded and biased? Still you refuse to acknowledge that your very specific and dramatic allegations were misplaced?

You have not refuted anything. None at all. Except if making personal attack counts for that in your language…

Was Cloughley making a ‘slur’ at you? Well I suppose he was in a way when he criticized those who believe and insist on un-real crap because it gives them a fake sense of moral self-assurance. I’ll ask again, would you like me to rephrase the highlighted part of my earlier post? Its no problem, you’ve admitted to blocking out contents of my posts before, I’d explain it again for reasons of posterity.

“Point me to any factual mistake and prove it and I will agree. You have failed to do so…”

I would’ve loved to do that if you would’ve provided any facts in the first place.

But since you asked, I’m going to indulge you a bit. Lets go over some of your “proof”. So now, according to Vinod’s ‘indisputable’ Wikipedia page Saurabh Kalia was supposedly tortured for over 22 days by Pakistan. None of the dramatics and gross imagings were spared here…

“Pakistan army had indulged in the most heinous acts; of burning their bodies with cigarettes, piercing ear-drums with hot rods, puncturing eyes before removing them, breaking most of the teeth and bones, chopping off various limbs and private organs of these soldiers besides inflicting all sorts of physical and mental tortures before shooting them dead, as evidenced by the bullet wound to the temple”

The piercing ear-drums with ‘hot rods’, puncturing eyes before ‘removing them’, ‘chopping’ off limbs and ‘private parts’ are all sort of things that are likely to cause severe shock, loss of consciousness and subsequent death due to fatal blood loss. So unless he was given timely, comprehensive medical attention and immediate blood transfusion, there is no way on earth he could have survived those 22 days with even 1 of the above having been done to his body. And even then why would Pakistan save him? Why would Pakistan go through all the difficulty of keeping an eye gauged, ears busted, limps and private parts chopped, teeth and bone broken body alive just so they can shoot it in the head? And the MOST lamest part of all, why would we have bothered returning the completely mutilated body? The body would be looking more like bags of spilled surgical waste than a body if these stories were true anyway, why would we have been stupid enough to return it? Did we think you would not notice the body being in 4 pieces? According to your precious Wikipedia article, we never acknowledged that we had taken prisoners of war, so they would have been ‘Missing in Action’ like most of your casualties are listed from the Rann of Kutch war. So by what logic would we want to give them back?

Next point. Even if you say we were stupid enough to give them back to you. Why did India refrain from seeking justice for crimes of such an incriminating nature? Why was none of this documented? Why were no pictures taken? Why was methodical ‘proof’ not supplied to international media and human right organizations? Why didn’t the said organizations take up such a juicy story on their own? Because, as Cloughley says, your stories were not credible. Even your government knew it. It could have been the crown of India’s international propaganda campaign against Pakistan in Kargil; if only it were true. India never holds back from an opportunity to belittle and embarrass Pakistan, but what happened now? Looks like someone didn’t want too much international attention into moral misconduct in the conflict after all…

There may have been certain…disfiguration. But that sort of thing, as Cloughley points out, can be the outcome of a completely legitimate close quarters fire fight. Shattered teeth, eyes, bones and missing chunks of flesh and such. Why do you wish on me having to spoon feed at this to you?

“…While I agree that you are too verbose and use a lot of unnecessary bandwidth to convey what can be more effectively conveyed in a few sentences, don't bother about my English at all!”

Hm, lol. I’m not worried about your English. It’s Brian’s that usually requires some…elaboration. Your English is fine, it’s just the naïve-ness that’s problematic. I would have agreed with your view about me over-elaborating myself, had any of my factual contributions or explanations ever made it inside of that head of yours, ever... But then again, I doubt anything short of written testimonials by your dead soldiers would have an impact on your self made beliefs.

“This is just a statement of the fact that your military leaders refused to acknowledge the intruders as their own, as the military men of Pakistan who were just following orders.

Do let me know if you have an alternate version of this fact.”

Now we hit the little snag don’t we? I don’t need to come up with an ‘alternative version’ for your BS. I deny your right to judge us in this regard in the first place. I question your credibility to make this elucidation. I question your own standards in according with which you might have made this troll-like, inconsequential, very much un-factual, heavily biased and affront-ive allegation. Morality, like everything else, is relative. So by what scale of immorality are you accusing us so? The one Indian military adheres to? Well in that case thank you very much, but we’re definitely within the universal concepts of discipline, respect and humanism for our soldiers and our enemies. We did acknowledge our fighting men in every way relevant to us. Two of our heroes were given the very highest Pakistani Military Honor, and many many more are revered in ways which you cannot comprehend, even if you had the ability and inclination. Musharraf has talked about them as the couple of NLI battalions who were never defeated till the end in his internationally printed book. The NLI were integrated into the regular Pakistan Army in honor of these very men. Cadets opt to visit their graves and listen to their stories. Not one Pakistan military documentary or book forgets to mention their skills, their courage, their daring and their victories.

So yes I question your right and your intentions in making these trollish claims. I challenge your impartiality, I challenge the notion that you yourself may actually care about the honor of these men. Who are you to decide what is honor for our men and what is not? Who are you to say what is sufficient and adequate acknowledgement and what is not? No one. You’re just a troll, and everyone can see that.

If I would sink to your level, and give you an ‘alternate’ version about who honors the lives of their men then I would talk about Operation Vijay. About the callousness with which your troops were committed without acclimatization, clothing, equipment, training and substandard weapons, I could talk about the value placed in those lives and then I could draw up some ethnic or religious connotations with the regiments that took the brunt of the Pakistani tenaciousness to belittle your nation. And then I could say “give me an alternate version or except this as fact.” But I won’t. I’m not like you. Heck I don’t even think like that. I have no need to convince myself of our enemy’s shortcomings, I am not that insecure, I am content with letting the honor of your men rest as your responsibility. But you are not. I’ve never reacted like this before, but you crossed the line this time. Don’t do it again.

 

[Vinod2070]

I think in the interest of making it clear, let me try to summarize what is being discussed.

You accused Indian soldiers and journalists of lacking "professionalism and humanity" because of the hanging incidents.

I retorted that these events were the result of the prevalent belief in India about the tortures. The fact of the matter is that at that point most Indians believed those reports and this would surely raise tempers of the troops who hear of such atrocities on their mates.

The follow on part to this is whether these reports were true (irrespective of the belief during the war time that they were). You need to understand that my starting point is those decade old reports which I did believe at the time. Now for me to change the belief would need something beyond another set of reports. This is not about “guilty until proven innocent”, it is about changing something that you have believed for a decade.

I am open to changing that belief given a strong reason and irrespective of how you may feel, I did not find what was presented as solid enough, though I would keep myself open to the possibility.

The second part where you seem to take offense is my comment that it was dishonorable for the Pakistan military leaders to not accept that the fighters were Pakistani soldiers. Their refusal to even accept their bodies!

You may feel that it can be compensated by the steps related to NLI and giving those awards. I don't think so. It is not about making judgment, it is about expressing my opinion. I know that many in Pakistan also did not find much honor in not accepting their own troops and calling them "stateless actors" at the time.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I think kasrkin raised a valid objection - it is upto Pakistan to determine how to honor her troops, and for Pakistanis to determine whether they were dishonored or not honored enough.

It is inflammatory for Indians to suggest that Pakistan did not honor her troops - there are no two ways about that, so leave that alone and focus on the thread please.

 

[Contrarian]

I think kasrkin raised a valid objection - it is upto Pakistan to determine how to honor her troops, and for Pakistanis to determine whether they were dishonored or not honored enough.

It is inflammatory for Indians to suggest that Pakistan did not honor her troops - there are no two ways about that, so leave that alone and focus on the thread please.

Then i merely ask you what does denying to accept soldiers or even citizens of your own country mean? Is that honor or dishonor?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Then i merely ask you what does denying to accept soldiers or even citizens of your own country mean? Is that honor or dishonor?

I think Kasrkin answered that question quite well in his last post, but the larger point is that covert operations by many countries have required plausible denial - that has not been Pakistan's quandary alone.

Beyond that I have to reiterate my last post. This line of discussion on a Pakistani forum is only going to cause the thread to degrade.

 

[Contrarian]

I think Kasrkin answered that question quite well in his last post, but the larger point is that covert operations by many countries have required plausible denial - that has not been Pakistan's quandary alone.

The question of Pakistan's PM then blowing the lid really dents Pakistan's image. However at the end of the day, in the final stages, when Pakistan refused to accept the dead bodies is what i was referring to. Seeing your next line, i leave the issue there itself.

Beyond that I have to reiterate my last post. This line of discussion on a Pakistani forum is only going to cause the thread to degrade.

I agree, i will not pursue this line of discussion any further.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

However at the end of the day, in the final stages, when Pakistan refused to accept the dead bodies is what i was referring to.

One other point related to that - the PA objected to the manner in which India wanted the bodies to be handed over - the mechanism India wanted to utilize was different, with more publicity, than the way the two sides typically handled the issue - through the UN I believe. Blain or Kasrkin might correct me there.

 

[Kasrkin]

No Vinod, you’re wrong. Allow me to clarify the situation here.

I was having a perfectly reasonable discussion here about the factual aspects of the Kargil conflict i.e. the number of posts we had occupied, the number of posts we had to evacuate because of Indian military pressure, the number of casualties on either side, range and numbers of forces arrayed by each side, etc. But then you tried to dismiss my factual assessments by telling me what you saw on ‘your TV’. I pointed out, very reasonably that the Indian media coverage of the war was most biased; therefore what you must’ve seen on TV was obviously not the whole picture. You retaliated in line with your well known childish and impulsive “we Indians are still better than you” tendencies by accusing PTV of being biased (like if I were the one here making claims based on what I saw on “my TV&#8221. In light of this I tried to press the point home again by posting that Indian news paper extract, saying it’s not just that soldiers here who lacked professionalism and humanity (duh), but shockingly it is your ‘neutral’ journalists and editors providing all the fanfare as well. Then again as usual you, instead of addressing the issue at hand, let your impulsive troll-ish tendencies kick in again and threw a barrage of crap at our faces. When I came back and saw that you had dedicated at least 4 posts to mythical but gross stories about Pakistanis mutilating soldiers, I’ll admit I was annoyed.

"I retorted that these events were the result of the prevalent belief in India about the tortures..."

For once in your life cut the crap Vinod and stop lying at us through your face. You made very specific, very uncompromising and dramatic allegations right here. I don’t have to quote them, they are all right here. Have a shame, you’ve still not admitted that your accusations were misplaced. Everyone whose read this thread knows this.

You see it all comes down to the sub-human scum in this world that seeks to de-humanize others. They are the worst of humanity in my opinion. Everything from your allegations of Pakistanis mutilating bodies, to you justifying your soldier’s desecrating Pakistani bodies, to accusing Pakistanis of not honoring their own, to claims of us refusing to accept our bodies…is geared towards de-humanizing Pakistan. And it’s disgusting. Its people like you, who teach and preach this senseless, unchecked, reckless hate that leads to things like that reported in India Today. So you can give up your feints at maturity or impartiality. You’re just a very old troll.

"it is about changing something that you have believed for a decade."

You believe what is convenient for you to believe. It makes it easier for you to ignore who the real mutilators are. By all means continue, it’s no loss to us. You’re just proving every one of my points.

"I did not find what was presented as solid enough,"

Ofcourse not. You’re Wikipedia article is much more solid. Sorry my bad, how could I for a second think that anything could be more credible than wiki. Even if it is confirmed by a relevant Indian general, no sir nothing is more rock solid than wiki.

"Their refusal to even accept their bodies!"

More BS. You’re barrage never lets up does it? You sure have hefty reserves of ignorance, no doubting that. Mind providing any impartial source, anywhere about how Pakistan refused? Exchange of bodies is part of war, there is nothing dishonorable about that. Pakistan did except the bodies of their martyred very graciously. As did India obviously, only difference is that Pakistan considers it to be a solemn act of mutual respect and honor, not like the following where a bloody Bollywood style Indian camera man gleefully operates in the hopes of making the most of it and scoring through a youtube video.

Like I said, we did take our bodies and gave you yours (only we didn’t make a fuss about them being ‘tortured&#8217 and it would make no sense for us to take bodies of some soldiers and refuse to take some others. I pity your mentality if you think anyone can do that. There were a few Occupied Kashmir Mujahideen operating in Kargil too no doubt, not many but still. I’m told most of these guys decided to stay back when orders came to withdraw, because it was their home or they thought they could slip away I dunno. That or as AM suggests an argument over the technicals. Either way we got all our men back as this video proves, its just that some Indians can’t resist making out of context and proportion BS up to stroke their vanity and hate. BS you passionately believe ofcourse without reservations.

"You may feel that it can be compensated by the steps related to NLI and giving those awards. I don't think so."

I don’t recall anyone here asking for your much valued, completely honorable and unbiased ‘opinion’ now, my troll friend.

 

[Vinod2070]

Kasrkin, I see where you are coming from and why all those ad homen attacks.

First, ad homen attacks always demonstrate that the person has lost the plot in the debate. Your continuing at that is not helping the discussion at all.

Second, let me assure you whatever I have mentioned is not intended to convey what you have assumed and therefor come to some conclusions.

I would strongly urge you to not try to infer any hidden meanings in what I mentioned, things like dehumanizing or any of the sort! Let us just try to debate the facts and what can be directly deduced form those facts. The issues are obviously sensitive to all of us.

Keeping to those two issues, I believe it is up to me to find any evidence as being convincing enough or not. By no means am I suggesting that the Wiki link is more creditable than anything you or AM have presented. There is no reason for you to take offense on that count.

Regarding the second part of bodies not being accepted which was just a follow up to Pakistan denying the involvement of their troops, I will try to get some details around that. Obviously the record of Gen. Musharraf's conversation is a good start.

I will rephrase my point to just focus on this single issue, that Pakistan disowned the troops doing the fighting during the course of the war. I will take your point that how to honor them is for Pakistan to decide.

Again, I will disregard all those ad homen attacks and refrain from retaliating to the same.

 

[insas91]

ISI and Pakistani Army officials were disappointed with the decision of the civilian leadership of Nawas Sharif. His decision to withdraw forces and his request and plea to Washington to establish a mutual cease fire, was the wrong move.


Pakistani Army believed Kargil would be a limited conflict and they were right, due to the political bungling by our civilian leader Kargil like 1962 Sino-Indian War was another "Missed Opportunity"

Pakistan simply did not take full advantage.

When the politicians actually came to know about it, opportunity was was already lost.

The plan by the PA was quite impressive. But they made too many mistakes. So did the Indians which caused much of the avoidable casualities. But India was quick to correct those mistakes PA was not.

The biggest mistake on the part of PA was repeated shelling. And hence giving out there position to the IA. IA on the other hand carried out suppresive artillery strikes with an aim to restrict PA movement while the mountain regiment moved in.
The result of the artillery strike was significant as it crippled supply routes of the PA.

But the most applaudable event was when IA sent Mirage's to cause an avalanche which completely erased the supply routes leaving the soldiers of NLI stranded and weakened their morale.


So, in short. It wasn't an oppurtunity. Capturing a strategic position overlooking NH1 was more of an immediate oppurtunity to push deeper. But wouldnt have succeeded in the longer run. IA had both the troop numbers and the infrastructure to carry out a full scale assault to push PA back had they moved closer to NH1.

Nawaz Sharif was perhaps more intelligent in ending the war when her learnt Pakistan was readying its nukes from US itself.
US didnt want to interfere. Here two things happened. Pervez wanted US to interfere to initiate a ceasefire and that a new LOC could be drawn. Nawan on the other hand wanted US to interfere as he sensed that the war could escalate and Pakistan didnt have the resources to sustain a full scale war. If I recollect Nawaz was quoted as saying "In case of a full scale war, Pakistan has enough fuel to last only 6 days and that too unless IN didnt moved in to block Karachi port "

 

[insas91]