What's new

Role of Big Powers in Indo-Pak War of 1971

Rangila

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Feb 20, 2013
Messages
2,211
Reaction score
-2
Country
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic Of
Location
Argentina
download-314.jpg



New Delhi: Today, we are observing the anniversary of the conclusion of the “War of the Century” in 1971, which saw the surrender of 93,000 Pakistani troops to the Indian Army and the Mukti Bahini in Dacca, and the emergence of a new nation, Bangladesh. India could achieve this in spite of the support that Pakistan had of the United States of America. Recent documents that have come to light indicate that U.S. President Richard Nixon was on the phone with Secretary of State Henry Kissinger trying to find out how to save Pakistan even though it attacked Indian airfields, which Nixon felt “was a reckless act that prompted India to declare war.”


Kissinger in his reply said “If they lose half their country without fighting, they will be destroyed. They may also be destroyed this way, but they will go down fighting”. The U.S. then decided to continue its support Pakistan. Earlier, following Pakistan’s crackdown on the Eastern Wing, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi went on a tour of West European countries, Britain and the United States of America to make them aware of the scale of the crackdown by the Pakistan Army on its eastern wing and its impact on India, as millions of refugees poured in.


When Indira Gandhi could not prevent Western countries, particularly the USA from supporting Pakistan, she sent External Affairs Minister Swaran Singh to Moscow to conclude the Indo-Soviet Treaty of Peace Friendship and Cooperation with the Soviet Union. The treaty was signed on August 9, 1971.When the war broke out on December 3, Nixon was upset and contacted Kissinger and recalled that even though he had “warned the b…ch” (referring to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi) against taking action against Pakistan. He said Pakistan had given an accuse to India to declare war on Pakistan by bombing Indian air fields . He wanted to help Pakistan and asked Kissinger to approach France, China and some West Asian states to send fighter aircraft to help Pakistan.


The Chinese did not react to the message. India attacked Pakistan Army concentrations in East Pakistan and troops converged from West Bengal, Meghalaya and Tripura. India also air dropped paratroopers from the Para Brigade on Tangail, who proceeded towards Dacca. During the first week of the War, Indian Air Force attacked East Pakistan air bases and the Navy blocked access to the Pakistani ships by taking control of the Dacca and Chittagong ports.The United States still did not give up its efforts to support Pakistan. On December 10, the Indian Intelligence intercepted an American message that the US Seventh Fleet, which was based in the Gulf of Tonkin, led by the nuclear-powered USS Enterprise, which had on board 70 fighters and bombers to proceed towards the war zone. Nixon persuaded the British Navy to join in the U.S. effort.


India’s eastern fleet, which was commanded by Vice Admiral N.Krishnan, asked the Government of India to give him the orders to defend, and the Indian Air Force got itself ready to counter any attack by U.S. aircraft from the USS Enterprise.What prevented them the U.S. threat from materialising was the dispach of a number of nuclear armed flotillas from Vladivastok on December 13 in an effort that the Americans and British from getting closer to Ïndian military objects” They also encircled the U.S. Fleet. The records, recently unclassified, disclosed the conversation between the British Fleet Commander and the U.S. Seventh Fleet Commander : “Sir, we are too late. There are Russian atomic submarines here and a big collection of battleships”. The US Fleet could not come close to Karachi, Chittagong or Dhaka.


The Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral S.M. Nanda and the Chief of the Air Force, Air Marshal P.C. Lal were in close touch with the developing situation. India also used psywar techniques to expedite the conclusion of the war. The Chief of Army Staff, General S.H.F.J. Manekshaw, in a broadcast directed against Pakistani soldiers, told them that if they surrendered to the Indian Army, their security will be guaranteed, and they would be evacuated from East Pakistan, looked after in India and sent home safely. He also assured them that they will be guarded against attack by hostile elements in East Pakistan. India also air dropped pamphlets conveying this along with surrender documents at Pakistani military bases and troop concentration.The impact was immediate.


On December 14, on hearing that soldiers from the Indian Para Brigade, dropped at Tangail, were nearing Dacca Lt.-Gen A A K Niazi in his interaction with Major General J.F.R. Jacob, Chief of Staff of the Eastern Command-who had flown into into Dacca — said he was willing to surrender. He also conveyed this message to the American Consul General in Dacca , who conveyed it to Washington.On December 16 the surrender took place in the Dacca Race Course. Lt Gen A A K Niazi surrendered to Lt. Gen J.S. Aurora, GOC-in-c of the Eastern Command of the Indian Army. The news of the surrender was announced by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in Parliament. We saw Army Chief General Sam Manekshaw, carried by crowds when he arrived at the South Block. During the war, I had the privilege to work as the Public Relations Officer of the Indian Army, and involve myself in all communication efforts before and during the war . I too felt a little taller that day.

Role of Big Powers in Indo-Pak War of 1971 | Latest News & Gossip on Popular Trends at India.com
 
1971 was one the most difficult times for India, list of nations against India was far greater than list of nations supporting India. Despite such a situation we managed a strategic victory of huge magnitude.

Nations against in India in 1971 :
1. USA
2. European nations
3. Middle East nations excepts Syria and Egypt.
4.Indonesia
5. South Africa
6. China

Nations supporting India
1. Soviet Union
2. Egypt
3. Syria
 
In fact the people of east Pakistan were not happy from the rulers of west Pakistan. they were seeing their future dark in the united Pakistan. As the Muslims of the united India who struggle for their separate country which,s result was in the shape of Pakistan.The rulers cannot rule by force with out the choice of people. There was no conqueror and no conquered 1971 war. If the conqueror was at that time, They were the PEOPLE OF BANGLADESH. Not India nor Pakistan.
 
Way too much is made about the 1971 war. Did'nt matter if it happened in 1971, 1981, 1991 or 2001. bangladesh was always set to be separated from Pakistan. bangladesh is a nation that is 1000s of miles away from us. Pakistanis have nothing in common with bangladeshis. Pakistanis differ completely to bengalis in terms of physical looks, genetics, race, heritage and culture. bengalis are as alien to Pakistanis as are indians and Africans. In fact, reality is that Pakistanis have far more in common with Iranians, Arabs and Turks than we do with bengalis. They are geographically and racially more closer to us than bengalis. In fact creating a nation of Pakistan, Iran and Turkey and expecting it to stay united permanently is more realistic than forming a nation between Pakistan and bangladesh. The biggest mistake of partition in 1947 is that bangladesh was not created then. The creation of bangladesh was a mere inevitability due to the massive and unbridgeable differences between Pakistanis and bengalis and due to the fact they are 1000s of miles away from us.
 
Last edited:
1971 was one the most difficult times for India, list of nations against India was far greater than list of nations supporting India. Despite such a situation we managed a strategic victory of huge magnitude.

Nations against in India in 1971 :
1. USA
2. European nations
3. Middle East nations excepts Syria and Egypt.
4.Indonesia
5. South Africa
6. China

Nations supporting India
1. Soviet Union
2. Egypt
3. Syria
The great support of the Bangladeshi people was with India. It was the VICTORY of Bangladeshi people not of Indian army.
 
In fact the people of east Pakistan were not happy from the rulers of west Pakistan. they were seeing their future dark in the united Pakistan. As the Muslims of the united India who struggle for their separate country which,s result was in the shape of Pakistan.The rulers cannot rule by force with out the choice of people. There was no conqueror and no conquered 1971 war. If the conqueror was at that time, They were the PEOPLE OF BANGLADESH. Not India nor Pakistan.

The great support of the Bangladeshi people was with India. It was the VICTORY of Bangladeshi people not of Indian army.

The people of Bangladesh could not have fought against pakistani tanks and APCs and combat jets. It was the Indian military that destroyed Pakistan's air and naval forces in the east, and terrified the army into surrendering en masse. It was the Indian army that parachuted into Dhaka and captured it from Pakistan. Pakistan army surrendered to INDIA - not to Bangladesh. Today is the anniversary of that glorious surrender.

Not taking anything away from the Bengali fighters - but without India, they wold have been massacred by the murderous Pak army with its "Operation searchlight" and so on.

After so many years, is it still impossible for you to believe that the mard-e-momins were vanquished by those kafirs?
 
The people of Bangladesh could not have fought against pakistani tanks and APCs and combat jets. It was the Indian military that destroyed Pakistan's air and naval forces in the east, and terrified the army into surrendering en masse. It was the Indian army that parachuted into Dhaka and captured it from Pakistan. Pakistan army surrendered to INDIA - not to Bangladesh. Today is the anniversary of that glorious surrender.

Not taking anything away from the Bengali fighters - but without India, they wold have been massacred by the murderous Pak army with its "Operation searchlight" and so on.

After so many years, is it still impossible for you to believe that the mard-e-momins were vanquished by those kafirs?
Bangladeshi people were fighting against Pak army. Bangaladeshi soldiers officers in Pak army air force and Navy were not accept order of their seniors.during this civil war Indian army with the help of Bangladeshi people and Pak armed forces bangladeshi soldiers officers pilots attacked east Pakistan and the result became as Bangladesh an independent country.Bangladesh celebrated this day 16 December as VICTORY DAY.
 
Bangladeshi people were fighting against Pak army. Bangaladeshi soldiers officers in Pak army air force and Navy were not accept order of their seniors.during this civil war Indian army with the help of Bangladeshi people and Pak armed forces bangladeshi soldiers officers pilots attacked east Pakistan and the result became as Bangladesh an independent country.Bangladesh celebrated this day 16 December as VICTORY DAY.

Yea, I see that you have gulped your school textbooks, hook line and sinker. You must be pretty young - read up a bit more on the war from sources other than your textbooks. The reason they teach you this BS is because back then the prevailing wisdom was that one mussalman is better than ten kafirs, "hindu India" cannot defeat Pakistan, and so on. The splitting of the country was a big blow to these theories, and to get around that, your country pretends that India only entered after the civil war started.

India was always involved - training resistance fighters, to decimating Pakistan's armed forces. Go check the timeline of events. (From reputable sources, not your middle-school textbooks.) Go check how many battles the IA fought, to dislodge PA from their positions. How base after base fell to the invading Indian army. How Bengalis showered the IA with flowers.

Who do you think trained so many battallions of Mukti Bahini? It was RAW and the special forces of the IA. Even so, they could not have fought too long against the Pak army which had overwhelming superiority in firepower.

Of course the Bengalis fought - but without India they would not have vanquished Pakistan.
 
Yea, I see that you have gulped your school textbooks, hook line and sinker. You must be pretty young - read up a bit more on the war from sources other than your textbooks. The reason they teach you this BS is because back then the prevailing wisdom was that one mussalman is better than ten kafirs, "hindu India" cannot defeat Pakistan, and so on. The splitting of the country was a big blow to these theories, and to get around that, your country pretends that India only entered after the civil war started.

India was always involved - training resistance fighters, to decimating Pakistan's armed forces. Go check the timeline of events. (From reputable sources, not your middle-school textbooks.) Go check how many battles the IA fought, to dislodge PA from their positions. How base after base fell to the invading Indian army. How Bengalis showered the IA with flowers.

Who do you think trained so many battallions of Mukti Bahini? It was RAW and the special forces of the IA. Even so, they could not have fought too long against the Pak army which had overwhelming superiority in firepower.

Of course the Bengalis fought - but without India they would not have vanquished Pakistan.
EXAMPLE ! A woman who demand for divorce from her husband he reject her demand.Then she call her relatives as brothers sisters father mother cousins etc.the relatives comes her home and defeat her husband and demand once again for divorce but husband does not accept their demand of divorce. Other day she goes to court. At last she gets divorce according to the court decision. Q? Who is responsible for this divorce? who destroyed this home? court relatives or herself?

Dead Reckoning: Memories of the 1971 Bangladesh War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dead Reckoning: Memories of the 1971 Bangladesh War is a controversial book on the Bangladesh Liberation War written by Sarmila Bose.[1]

Bose claims that allegations of genocide and rape by the Pakistan Army were exaggerated by Bangladesh and India.[2][3][4] She presents interviews of some selected[5][6] witnesses in favor of her opinion. She also accuses Bangladeshi liberation accounts of ignoring atrocities against Urdu-speaking people in East Pakistan. Bose's book implies a claim to being the 'first' to dissect the death toll of 3 million in 1971, but it has been termed as 'hollow' and 'self-promotional' as researchers like Zunaid Kazi had already documented 12 different media estimates of death tolls.[1] Some of the books on Pakistan Army's atrocity during 1971, written by Pakistanis were termed as 'limited' by Bose.[

EXAMPLE ! A woman who demand for divorce from her husband he reject her demand.Then she call her relatives as brothers sisters father mother cousins etc.the relatives comes her home and defeat her husband and demand once again for divorce but husband does not accept their demand of divorce. Other day she goes to court. At last she gets divorce according to the court decision. Q? Who is responsible for this divorce? who destroyed this home? court relatives or herself?

Dead Reckoning: Memories of the 1971 Bangladesh War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dead Reckoning: Memories of the 1971 Bangladesh War is a controversial book on the Bangladesh Liberation War written by Sarmila Bose.[1]

Bose claims that allegations of genocide and rape by the Pakistan Army were exaggerated by Bangladesh and India.[2][3][4] She presents interviews of some selected[5][6] witnesses in favor of her opinion. She also accuses Bangladeshi liberation accounts of ignoring atrocities against Urdu-speaking people in East Pakistan. Bose's book implies a claim to being the 'first' to dissect the death toll of 3 million in 1971, but it has been termed as 'hollow' and 'self-promotional' as researchers like Zunaid Kazi had already documented 12 different media estimates of death tolls.[1] Some of the books on Pakistan Army's atrocity during 1971, written by Pakistanis were termed as 'limited' by Bose.[
Criticism[edit]
Bose's study has been criticized by various historians and academics for numerous inaccuracies and excessive reliance on Pakistani military and government sources. Researchers have accused her of flawed and biased methodology, historical revisionism[8] and downplaying[9] war crimes.[5][10][11][12]In several cases, she misquoted her interviewees and other academics that she cites as reference.[13] Bose has been criticized for her bias towards Pakistani Army in the language she deploys — Bangladeshi accounts are labelled “claims”, Pakistani officers’ accounts are straightforward accounts.[14] Bose's impartiality has also been questioned due to her role as an advocate of US arms sales to Pakistan.
Criticized before publishing the book[edit]
Bose has been criticized long before publishing the book for her research methodologies. She accepts the statement of Pakistani Brigadier Taj that no women were tortured in Rajarbag to be true even though Taj was not present during the operation. But she invalidates the testimony of an eye witness of the incidents of rape done by Pakistani Army as the witness is illiterate. In another case, she asserted that since one rape victim feared for her life, she must have consented to having sex with Pakistani soldiers.[20]
Admiration for Pakistani Generals[edit]
Bose is enthusiastic in her admiration for the commanding general of the Pakistan forces during 1971 war in East Pakistan, Lt. Gen. Niazi, whom she describes as having a "distinguished past and a tragic fate." However, this conflicts even with Pakistani General's view about Niazi. According to Pakistani Brigadier F.B. Ali, "'Tiger' Niazi was a disgrace to the uniform. He was a fraud, a lecher and a coward. When he was General Officer Commanding (GOC) 10 Division, it was well known in the garrison (I was there) that his staff car would often be found standing in Heera Mandi (Lahore's red light district). As GOC EP he used to go around visiting troops and asking JCOs: how many Bengali women have you raped? When discussing his surrender with the Indian general, he tried to ingratiate himself by telling dirty jokes."[12] Late Pakistani Major-General (retd) Khadim Hussain Raja expressed same view as above about Niazi, in his book A Stranger in My Own Country: East Pakistan, 1969-1971, saying Niazi is supposed to have pronounced the words that even Genghis Khan would have hesitated to use: that he would let loose his soldiers on the women of East Pakistan till the lineage/ethnicity of the Bengali race was changed.[21] Historians raised question about whether Bose is fudging figures deliberately, pointing out that the records indicating 93,000 Pakistani soldiers surrendered to the Indian Army in December 1971, which is thrice the number Bose suggests based on Niazi's claim

Dead Reckoning by Sarmila Bose - review | Books | The Guardian
 
EXAMPLE ! A woman who demand for divorce from her husband he reject her demand.Then she call her relatives as brothers sisters father mother cousins etc.the relatives comes her home and defeat her husband and demand once again for divorce but husband does not accept their demand of divorce. Other day she goes to court. At last she gets divorce according to the court decision. Q? Who is responsible for this divorce? who destroyed this home? court relatives or herself?

WTF is this about?

I'll make it simple for you. WE trained Bengalis to wage civil war against you. We raised mukti bahinis, equipped them and trained them. You can even see pictures of that. That is the reason why Pakistan started the war with India, with airstrikes on Indian bases. If it was simply a civil war, you wouldn't be stupid enough to attack India while you were in civil war.

We trained Bengalis to fight you, later we decimated your army, navy and air force, and we cut you into two pieces. Deal with it.
 
WTF is this about?

I'll make it simple for you. WE trained Bengalis to wage civil war against you. We raised mukti bahinis, equipped them and trained them. You can even see pictures of that. That is the reason why Pakistan started the war with India, with airstrikes on Indian bases. If it was simply a civil war, you wouldn't be stupid enough to attack India while you were in civil war.

We trained Bengalis to fight you, later we decimated your army, navy and air force, and we cut you into two pieces. Deal with it.

India was not able to complete this without the help of USSR ...

That is the reason when USSR , started Afghan operation, we with the help of USA , taken our revenge ...

INDIA = 1 reason : only broke Pakistan with the help of USSR
Pakistan = 10 reason : Broke USSR the actual factor of 71 fall .. We eliminated the main factor .. and Pakistan came back as more powerful nation

deal with this...
 
@barbarosa :

Check out "Operation jackpot". That was the Indian army's eastern command's grand logistical and training program for Bengali warriors. You think Bengali citizens or deserting soldiers can form themselves into a united military that can take on a much larger and powerful PA? India was there from the beginning. Raising, training, equipping, commanding.

Operation Jackpot - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yea, there is a lot they don't teach you in school.

Pictures of Bengali warriors being trained by RAW:

indo-pakistani_war_1971_mukti_bahini-training.jpg


26ratuk3.jpg


mukti_bahini4.jpg


India was not able to complete this without the help of USSR ...

That is the reason when USSR , started Afghan operation, we with the help of USA , taken our revenge ...

INDIA = 1 reason : only broke Pakistan with the help of USSR
Pakistan = 10 reason : Broke USSR the actual factor of 71 fall .. We eliminated the main factor .. and Pakistan came back as more powerful nation

deal with this...

Bullsh!t.

The only involvement USSR had, was in preventing USA from interfering. The Soviets placed nuclear subs in the Indian ocean, when the Americans tried to send a carrier.

I know it hurts your ego to know that the vegan kafirs split you into two. That's the reason you keep trying to come up with fictitious theories about how that happened. India split you. Not USSR, not Bengalis by themselves. Making up fiction may soothe your ego, but the truth is the truth.

. We eliminated the main factor .. and Pakistan came back as more powerful nation

deal with this...

So powerful that in the next war, your army didnt even dare to put on their uniform. LOL.

And no, you didn't breakup the USSR. They imploded from within, their constituent nations broke free from the shackles of communism. They tore down the Berlin wall, they revolted.

The Afghan war put a strain on them, yes. Of which Pakistan was a peripheral player - US and Afghans played the major part. And that war itself was only a marginal factor in the breakup of the USSR.

Again, making up narratives to feel proud of yourself, eh? Yea yea, you couldn't even fight India, but fought and defeated a superpower. Gullibility, the hallmark of Pakistanis.
 
Few GK questions for everyone but special comments expected from Pakistani friends.

1. Which is the first army in the world to surrender their arms after world war?

2.Which army holds the record for the largest ever surrender ?

3. Which army is the only army to surrender before a single enemy ?

4. Which army is the only army that begins a war invading others but ends up defending itself?

5. Which army is the only army to secure defeat after defeat despite having superior arms in comparison to its enemy?

6. Which army is the only army to be defeated by a non aligned nation despite of being a part of cold war bloc (CENTO)?

Pakistan Army
 
Back
Top Bottom