Lt Gen (retd) Shahid Aziz opens Pandora Box on Kargil issue

[Saleem]

When it comes to Kargil issue, thoughtful people have invariably found fault with Musharraf. It is painful to see patriotic Pakistani kids getting into verbal sparring with Indians. I wish there was someplace on forum where one could seriously discuss without Indians doing their trolling duties.

I came to know of the real story behind Kargil in 2001. Since then all the material has essentially confirmed the narrative that Gen (R) Shahid Aziz is telling today. An important source in this regard is AC (R) Kaiser Tufail's account of PAF and Kargil.

It was a pity that Army top brass decided to back Musharraf in his coup. That was a shame and the position in which we find ourselves is a direct result. You can always count on a dictator to make a mess of things and leave it to the worst among politicians to deal with. A few years down the road, these same politicians make the departed dictator look good. Nobody then cares that the political game was set in action by the dictator concerned.

I have always maintained that Musharraf was an unqualified disaster for Pakistan. His failings are many and varied. But any appreciation of his legacy will start from his prime role in Kargil. This episode was a complete disaster for Pakistan and Indians despite having faced serious setbacks and losses, used it to their advantage.

Kargil could have been important as a part of a greater strategy, but Musharraf's limited mind could not comprehend the fall out. The Kargil plan had existed since the mid-70s. Brig. G. M. Chaudhry was probably the first to pitch it to Z.A. Bhutto when he visited the sector as PM. BB was with him then, and that is why when (as a Maj. Gen) Musharraf proposed the plan to her in 1990(?) she immediately asked him if he had considered the diplomatic fall-out. Musharraf had not done so then, and even in 1999 he was clueless as to the international dimension of this misadventure. That is mule-headedness right there if you can see it. Poor stupid old Nawaz Sharif was taken for a trip to Lala-Land and was promised Kashmir (or a part thereof). The same Nawaz then had to rush to Washington upon Musharraf's urging to get Americans to intervene.

If one starts with a basic proposition that Musharraf would lie compulsively to save his a**, then one could see all that went wrong since 1999 to this day.

the fact remains that main blame goes to the "civilians"; even if one forgets everything else, nawaz appointed prevez as COAS with the [malafide] intent that he would be malleable and permit nawaz to continue his loot - it nawaz had appointed someone on merit nawaz could not have continued his loot - pervez says in his own book that after reviewing his service record on becoming chief he was surprised at having been chosen; similarly the zulfiqar choose zia because he thought zia would permit him to continue the crimes of FSF and zulfiqars proteges and hsi degenerate life style and that after zukfiwar threw away half the country....

 

[unicorn]

 

[Hyperion]

This Hamid Mir fella seems to be a "ganja" supporter. Is he?

 

[Alpha1]

@Pfpilot forget everyone else, ever wondered why your post was 'thanked' by "HINDUVATA" Members of Pdf! I just came across the comment coming from bottom to top on the page!
.
.
And i was covinced that your post was not worth it by just seeing the name of the person who thanked it first(fateh71) a known hinduvata troll!
.
.
.
But then i decided to read your post! After i saw your flag and your being (TT) I read it anyhow!
.
U blame army for every ill! And claim army controlls pakistan and itself installs politicians!
Well, i think if the army was looking for its own interest it should have built an 'army house' with is NOT 20 TIMES SMALLER THEN THE CHIEF MINISTER'S HOUSE!!
.
.
.
I agree with @batmannow though zia,musharaf were not exceptional generals they were many times better than politician in term of managment,economy etc!

 

[unicorn]

This Hamid Mir fella seems to be a "ganja" supporter. Is he?

Where it seems to you in the article that he is supporting NS?

Your previous predefined assumptions will always disturb your judgement. The harm to that habit is you completely overlook the other facets described in that article.Like for example The General claim that american once asked him to work for them in the Pak Army.

As far as my observation is concerned Hamid Mir intentions never appear one sided to me.

 

[haviZsultan]

This Hamid Mir fella seems to be a "ganja" supporter. Is he?

No, PPP.... (source: journalist in GEO)

 

[Pfpilot]

@Pfpilot forget everyone else, ever wondered why your post was 'thanked' by "HINDUVATA" Members of Pdf! I just came across the comment coming from bottom to top on the page!
.
.
And i was covinced that your post was not worth it by just seeing the name of the person who thanked it first(fateh71) a known hinduvata troll!
.
.
.
But then i decided to read your post! After i saw your flag and your being (TT) I read it anyhow!
.
U blame army for every ill! And claim army controlls pakistan and itself installs politicians!
Well, i think if the army was looking for its own interest it should have built an 'army house' with is NOT 20 TIMES SMALLER THEN THE CHIEF MINISTER'S HOUSE!!
.
.
.
I agree with @batmannow though zia,musharaf were not exceptional generals they were many times better than politician in term of managment,economy etc!

Sigh...you claim to have read what I wrote, then ignored everything that was written. I have never claimed the civilian leadership has been anything but incompetent; I actually conceded that much. But that should not allow the army to wash its' hands of the sins it has committed. I normally don't reply to such posts because I find it a little offensive when I spend so much time writing my posts and presenting as well rounded an argument as I can. Your reply is composed of some rambling about Indians and house sizes. I will take the bait and explain in a little more detail why I fail to see the benefits of the glorious reign of the Generals.

You mention the economic progress of Pakistan during dictatorships. Musharraf's government was not fiscally responsible in the slightest. Pakistan's growth during the early part of the last decade had much to do with factors that either bypassed the government or tolerated it. As many members have reasoned before, US aid played a major role in propping up the Pakistani economy. After the embarrassing Nawaz Sharif years, 9/11 provided Pakistan with the golden opportunity to play Robin to America's Batman. The aid started pouring in and bureaucratic and social institutions, long neglected, began to function with actual cash flow. Of course, aid itself is not a requirement for economic growth, but in our case, it took the place of an absent tax base. After 9/11, there was also a large influx of cash from foreign Pakistanis back to home. Possibly, out of fear when the Americans were searching for terrorist anywhere from under your bed to the neighborhood preschool. The large influx of cash, predominantly aid based, increased domestic spending and resultant consumption. All of this required greater production, which provided people with jobs and companies with profits.

If you would like to ignore the aid factor, then let us explore the wider world economy. Before the late decade recession, the global economy was booming and economists saw no ceiling in sight. In a world where economies are increasingly reliant on each other, the growth of developed and developing nations spilled over into Pakistan. As large corporations faced more competition from new players and upstarts, the third world was the next natural step in the drive to compete with ever smaller profit margins. Pakistan wasn't ideally placed for such investment, but after the saturation of China and India, Pakistan was part of the next batch of unexplored nations. Once the global economy spluttered to a standstill, the ripple affects were felt everywhere. Pakistan, so overly dependent on the growth of others, was hit harder than more sophisticated economies.

On the other hand, where Musharraf could take credit was the consistency and stability his era entailed. Nations and corporations crave low risk and stable environments and that much Pakistan was at the time. But the question is, at what cost? Pakistan was stable because we "yes sir"-ed our way into the good books of the Americans. Where they asked for an inch, we gave a mile. The resultant near civil war state we find ourselves in is a direct consequence of the concessions Musharraf made to the Americans. We had stability, but it came at the expense of long term prosperity of the very concept of Pakistan. Today, as drones fly over Pakistan and the Americans bully us, we have no foot to stand on as Pakistan had already agreed to these conditions. Musharraf, like Zia before him, bet the future for marginal gains in the present. He procured fighters, international corporations eagerly stepped in, money poured in; yet half a decade later, it is all gone. The reason has as much to do with the phantom growth and stability of Pakistan as it does with Zardari.

I have only scratched the surface of these issues, as I don't feel I could do them justice in greater detail without writing a novel on the subject. Sadly, I am not near enough talented a writer to hold people's attention for that long. I'll just add that there needs to be a distinction between the leaders of the armed forces of Pakistan and the troops themselves. I have nothing but the utmost respect for Pakistani soldiers, but I will not make excuses for their incompetent leadership.

 

[Hyperion]

Dude, I don't know, that's why I asked for the information. You seem to be pretty bitchy about stuff, just like a girl during her periods. Life not treating you so well?

Where it seems to you in the article that he is supporting NS?

Your previous predefined assumptions will always disturb your judgement. The harm to that habit is you completely overlook the other facets described in that article.Like for example The General claim that american once asked him to work for them in the Pak Army.

As far as my observation is concerned Hamid Mir intentions never appear one sided to me.

Now that's more like an answer to a query.

No, PPP.... (source: journalist in GEO)

 

[haviZsultan]

PFpilot I largely agree with the majority of your post. However....
I do not believe this to be true:

As many members have reasoned before, US aid played a major role in propping up the Pakistani economy.

I do not have time for a long response. Here are our (latest) losses in the war on terror (there are other stats from past too):

Terror war loss swells to $80b

Here is our aid:

US aid to Pakistan

That figure for aid too is overstated as a lot of it is part of beaureucratic costs and to maintain the staff at the US embassy. There is the 68 billion figure (Pakistan monetary losses) from 2011 too so our losses with time have been increasing. I do not know though if this counts loss of foreign investment.

So this is a fallacy and when we say this we perpetuate the myth going around in the US media that Pakistan has received more than it has lost and is milking aid from the US and stands to gain. This is why I challenged you, because if we belittle our sacrifice and fully back their story and line of thought Pakistan may never be treated as an equal ally by the United States (it is not being treated as such even now and since 1980's.

However you would be right in saying that the aid went to the government so it propped up the government at the cost of the national economy but it has propped up both Musharraf and Zardari. Personally I believe Musharraf was better on the economic front and I reach this conclusion by the gdp growth rate during his time (second highest in the world in 2005) but his NRO and a lot of mistakes undid everything. In many ways that aid was no more than a bribe to Pakistan to puts its interests in the background while the leaders fill their pockets with aid. Carry on with the debate.

It is best that democracy prevails. Vote PTI. It is not the job of the army to rule. I made the mistake to support them, today Sharifs and Bhutto's are back in power. That was the biggest betrayal. NRO.

 

[Pfpilot]

PFpilot I largely agree with the majority of your post. However....
I do not believe this to be true:



I do not have time for a long response. Here are our (latest) losses in the war on terror (there are other stats from past too):

Terror war loss swells to $80b

Here is our aid:

US aid to Pakistan

That figure for aid too is overstated as a lot of it is part of beaureucratic costs and to maintain the staff at the US embassy. There is the 68 billion figure (Pakistan monetary losses) from 2011 too so our losses with time have been increasing. I do not know though if this counts loss of foreign investment.

So this is a fallacy and when we say this we perpetuate the myth going around in the US media that Pakistan has received more than it has lost and is milking aid from the US and stands to gain. This is why I challenged you, because if we belittle our sacrifice and fully back their story and line of thought Pakistan may never be treated as an equal ally by the United States (it is not being treated as such even now and since 1980's.

However you would be right in saying that the aid went to the government so it propped up the government at the cost of the national economy but it has propped up both Musharraf and Zardari. Personally I believe Musharraf was better on the economic front and I reach this conclusion by the gdp growth rate during his time (second highest in the world in 2005) but his NRO and a lot of mistakes undid everything. In many ways that aid was no more than a bribe to Pakistan to puts its interests in the background while the leaders fill their pockets with aid. Carry on with the debate.

It is best that democracy prevails. Vote PTI. It is not the job of the army to rule. I made the mistake to support them, today Sharifs and Bhutto's are back in power. That was the biggest betrayal. NRO.

I would not disagree with that at all. I appreciate your point. Where it divulges from mine is that you present figures from a time period where the war on terror ramped up. The last few years have been a disaster, with not only a rising extremist problem, but also the disintegration of Balochi identification with Pakistan. The scale of the losses at this point cannot be argue with; but when Musharraf eagerly climbed aboard the War on Terror train, things were not as they are now. Years of nonstop fighting, drone strikes, kidnappings and little results have left inhabitants of that area alienated as well and hostile. The fatigue has set in, in urban centers too, as people are increasingly numb to the constant bombings and deaths that have stemmed from the extremism. The policy of appeasing the America at the expense of the local population, while simultaneously failing to go all out in the pursuit of ending extremism has blown up in our face...we played both sides and failed.

The exact losses are debatable in how accurate they are, but your point would still stand, in that they are large enough. But they were not so in the initial years. The aid falls short in relation to the current situation in Pakistan; we were in control in 2002, we aren't nearly as secure today. As the situation worsens, the losses will rise and the economy will crumble further. What must be acknowledged in this disaster is that it was set in motion when we sold our Western border foreign policy to the highest bidder. The current gap between the aid and expenditure only further strengthens the argument against Musharraf and how near sighted his planning was. A mere 10 years later, the aid does not justify the painful alliance we have ongoing with the US.

I will concede a point that I realized I have not mentioned so far and that is the corner Pakistan was in after 9/11. I will not be able to argue with anyone who claims Musharraf had no choice but to go along with the US. It is unwise to end up on the wrong side of the Americans; yet, did such extreme concessions need to be made? Could we not have supported the US without ending up in a position where they can bomb Pakistan people, inside Pakistan, in Pakistani towns to smithereens? It goes back to the sad idea that we agreed to anything and everything for immediate aid, but had no plans to follow through and played the other side behind the scenes . In the end the Americans aren't happy despite the extreme power they have over Pakistan and are striking within our nation to do the work our military failed to deliver on.

One more point, it isn't always the smartest idea to rely on economic growth based on a year or two. Analysis of a 10 or 20 year period is far more revealing. There are always outliers, and Pakistani growth did peak at what I at the time considered impressive numbers. But in the long run, it was not sustainable. Hindsight has made it exceedingly clear that those numbers were mere blips on a very depressing couple of decades of stagnation. It is equally important to compare growth relative to other nations, because no nation operates in a vacuum. Based on these points, our growth was nothing out of the ordinary; of course, not embarrassing as it is today, but not extraordinary either.

So while you aren't wrong in the slightest, I disagree on some of the finer points based.

 

[True pakistani 22]

JEW News and Hamid Mir stop doing Propaganda

 

[The Green1]

A traitor was bought and a book was the plot !
Home mates were naughty, the neighbours came to party.

General Shahid aziz's book came out after how many years Gen Musharrafs books was printed ?
A person got sold out and in return he wrote a book to damage his own country. What a shame. Also he claims he didnt knew the full details of the kargil incident and it took him 13 years to know the truth and write a book on it at a time when Our army is facing multi dimensional threats.
What a sick fuq and a sell out !

 

[Zarvan]

What started this latest round of Kargil posts?

General Shahid Aziz had written a book on this that has what started this and also a book has come bu a Colonal of Pakistan Army and in that he also said that Musharraf himself crossed the border and spent the night in Indian side

 

[Spring Onion]

But they are not as good once they come out of the army.. are they? Top generals are privy to the sensitive national security secrets & a good general takes it to the grave with him. But it's astonishing to see some retired generals are not that far from being lotas like the one you find in your political setup.



But that's not what Aziz is claiming... is it? As per him only 4 people knew the plan.. & if I'm not wrong.. It's Gen Ziauddin Butt who was heading ISI then & even he seems to claim that he was not completely conversant with the whole plan.

For the bold YES you are 200% rights thats why the Musharraf stand has more weight and should be followed in future too as you can not expose plans even to every Gen or official in service.

The army has own mechanism of monitoring the conduct of the officials and know very well who to keep informed and looking at conduct of Gen Aziz it was good that he was kept out of the loop.

 

[GURU DUTT]

well good to see after all these years pakistani junta getting the real taste of truth no matter whats the timing at least it came owt to many who question his integrity or timing well what do you think would have happened if he had raised his voice like the then naval and air force chiefs of pakistan well you know better he would be named a traitor but he was smart he kept it to himself used all the perks given by the army and when after he was retired came owt and as for writing well writing a book takes time but thats not the point the point is that indians learned there lessons the hard way and re modelled there intelegence and Army , Airforce prepardedness but Navy took its own sweet time and the results came in form of Mumbai attack nevertheless indians mordanised its armed forces in a big big ay from the starting but paksitanies chose to ignore the lessons and brushed the dirt under the carpet and results strted coming with a bloody and irritating regularity but still they are not willing to change well in short nobody cares this episode is good for india and its Foriegn relations God Bless general Shaid Aziz