Revision as of 22:50, 7 July 2015

In brief

India Today December 29, 2008

For the country’s intelligence and military establishment, lulled into complacency by the cross-border warmth generated by prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s Lahore bus journey in February 1999, the nasty surprise sprang up three months later from the heights of Kargil and lasted for six weeks . “By the time the army got its act together, more than 100 soldiers had been killed, many of them mowed down because the enemy’s firepower was grossly underestimated,” wrote India Today in September 1999.

The sequence of the war

How India recovered the occupied territory

How Kargil was won back

The Times of India Jul 26 2014

In the summer of 1999, as the snow began to melt in Kargil's heights, shepherds reported presence of intruders deep inside Indian territory, in strategic positions that overlooked the only road link between Srinagar and Leh. The intruders had occupied fortified posts, many routinely vacated by the Indian Army during winter. The intruders had artillery cover from Pakistan Army positions in the rear. On Kargil Diwas, the story as it unfolded

May 3 (Muslim) Bakerwal Shepherds (who have shown their patriotism to India in every war, 1965 onwards) report the presence of Pakistani intruders on higher reaches. The Army sends out several patrols over the next few days. Reconfirm presence on May 7.

May Second Week | A patrol of the 4 Jat Regiment, led by Captain Saurabh Kalia, and five other soldiers: Sepoys Arjum Ram, Bhanwar Lal Bagaria, Bhika Ram, Moola Ram and Naresh Singh, is taken captive by Pakistan troops. On May 15, the patrol is reported missing

June 9 | The mutilated bodies of these soldiers are handed over to Indian authorities

Operation Vijay

Initial assessments that infiltrators are militants and number a few is proved wrong. Almost 200 sq km of Indian territory is now in the custody of Pakistani soldiers in the garb of jehadi militants. Over 1,700 men of the Northern Light Infantry of Pakistani Army, supported by Special Forces, and artillery, engineers elements are involved. Reinforcements are also on the way.

After initial burst of confusion and surprise, India launches Operation Vijay, mobilizing almost 200,000 troops. About 30,000 soldiers directly involved in the operation.

May 9 | Two acclimatized battalions returning from Siachen are moved to Batalik sector, and over the next few days, another three battalions move from Kashmir Valley to Kargil sector

May 24 |, Two additional brigades also move into the area

By May-end, an additional divisional HQ inducted, to take over command of a portion of Kargil sector from Leh-based 3 Infantry Division May 25 ,

May 25| IAF authorized to launch “offensive air operations“ under Operation Safed Sagar with strict instructions to not cross Line of Control. By now, India has lost around 35 soldiers.

May 26 | MiG-21 and MiG-27 fighters go in waves to fire rockets at enemy fortified positions. Srinagar airport is shut to civilian flights, while armed MI-17 helicopters are deployed in Tololing sector

May 27 | An MiG-27 fighter suffers an engine flame-out. Its pilot Flt Lt K Nachiketa ejects. Squadron Leader Ajay Ahuja, flying a MiG-21, tries to trace the lost, MiG-27 despite antiaircraft guns. Within minutes he is shot down by a Stinger missile. Ahuja's body later returned with point-blank bullet wounds, indicating he probably was captured alive and shot dead. Nachiketa is paraded on Pakistan TV

May 28 | An Mi-17 helicopter shot down by Stinger missiles, killing all four crew members. IAF withdraws helicopters from offensive operations

May 30 | IAF inducts Mirage-2000 fighters armed with laser-guided bombs into battlefield. They launch strikes on Tiger Hill, Point 4388, Muntho Dhalo (a major ammunition and supply dump) among other targets

Launching Operation Talwar, Indian Navy send submarines on patrols close to Karachi harbour. Entire Eastern Fleet moved to join Western Fleet in the Arabian Sea

About 250 Bofors artillery guns are inducted and play a crucial role in all major operations during the Kargil conflict June ,

June Starting first week, Indian military launches aggressive operations to recapture key strategic heights, mounting operation after operation to evict the well-entrenched Pakistani soldiers.

Aim to secure the highway, den access to Siachen Glacier and drive out the infiltrators

July 4 ,| Recapturing Tiger Hill, the steep height that became a byword during the operations, proves extremely difficult till finally it falls on July 4. Tololing and other heights witness intense fighting, both sides lose lives. Point 4590, the nearest point with full view of the highway, and Point 5353, the highest feature in Drass sector, among those taken back after bloody battles

July 11, F aced with determined Indian response and international pressure, Pakistani intruders begin to pull out

July 26 | India Army announces complete eviction of Pakistani intruders. Over 520 Indian soldiers are killed in the entire conflict.

Four Param Vir Chakras (PVCs), nine Maha Vir Chakras (MVCs) and 53 Vir Chakras, among other medals, are awarded for conspicuous bravery

The view from Pakistan: 1

Kargil misadventure

January 28, 2007

REVIEWS: The most awkward of situations

Reviewed by Qurat ul ain Siddiqui

Dawn

Kargil misadventure

This may be “the most comprehensive document published so far in Pakistan on the Kargil misadventure.” It is an endeavour to present the author’s side of the picture, clarify his version of truth and bring to light his facts before a nation that “has been deliberately kept in [the] dark about the bitter facts in this regard.”

Siddique-ul-Farooque also questions the idea that before launching the Kargil Operation, General Musharraf had taken the then prime minister into confidence and that it was Nawaz Sharif who had turned it into a defeat by calling the troops back, despite the fact that much of the international community very clearly demanded that Pakistan withdraw its Northern Light Infantry troops and mujahideen from Kargil. The fiasco led to over 3,000 deaths of officers and jawans of the NLI and mujahideen. Statistics indicate that this was a greater loss than the one suffered by Pakistan during the 1965 war. Farooque also points out that no commission was set up to enquire what actually led to the defeat at Kargil and what the real causes were, so that similar mistakes are not made in the future.

The author presents four different hypotheses to the reader, one of which, he believes, can serve as an explanation as to what ‘prompted’ General Musharraf to launch the operation just when Pakistan had become a nuclear power and the Lahore Declaration had been signed with India to solve the lingering Kashmir dispute without having to give up on “national honour and prestige.” Farooque also refers to as the planning that went into the Kargil Operation, which supposedly began to take shape during Zia’s regime when India had occupied Siachen during his rule and he planned to occupy Kargil as a kind of vengeance. However, that did not come about then due to various political pressures. The plan was reconsidered during the second reign of PPP chairperson Benazir Bhutto but she vetoed the move because she “knew we would have to surrender the territory when the matter was brought to the international community and that’s exactly what happened,” she said to a television channel.

Farooque goes to the extent of saying that the Kargil war was started so that the general with a “weak profile” and an average track-record would attain some sort of “prestigious military award,” in order to strengthen his case. However, another point of view is that the Kargil front was opened to attract the international community’s attention toward the Kashmir issue with the hope that “huge losses” might be inflicted on India and that the United Nations may step in to put an end to the war.

The impression given revealed that Pakistani troops did not initiate the attack and that it was actually the mujahideen who started it. However, another point of view says that the weapons and technology used against India “could never be in possession of the mujahideen.” The political wing of the government of Pakistan was then requested to devise some way out of the looming full-scale war with India and find a “diplomatic solution” to the crisis. This lead to talks with China and foreign minister’s level talks with India on June 12, 1999 where Sartaj Aziz was given a cold shoulder. The following day the prime minister was told as how the situation was deteriorating further as a result of which the leadership began to work on a “withdrawal plan.”

Farooque also quotes the editors of various newspapers to substantiate his claim on how mounting pressure from the United States led to the withdrawal of the troops. One of the editors said in his report: “On June 27, General Musharraf broke this news to the nation that a Nawaz-Clinton meeting was about to take place, meaning that he [the general] was trying to reach this target through the good offices of the Centcom chief … had already been worked out during the Musharraf-Zinni meeting in Islamabad.”

Pakistan was thus dragged into the most awkward of situations by seeking negotiations and a diplomatic solution while at the same time imposing war on India: “He (Nawaz Sharif) refused to accept the allegation of the Indian prime minister that Pakistan has back-stabbed India,” and instead urged “the Indian leadership to respond to our efforts of peace so that there is no more bloodshed and there is no more bloodshed of the Kashmiris” as “dialogue was the only way out to resolve differences between the two countries,” (Dawn, July 13, 1999).

A report in another local newspaper said that not only was Pakistan facing imminent political isolation from the United States but the Pakistan Embassy in Paris “was told that because of the perception in the French government that Pakistan was responsible for backing intruders in Kargil, France may not be able to fulfil its commitment for the delivery of Mirage III jets that were to be delivered to the Pakistan authorities in the next few days.” Along with the G-8 states and Japan, China also hoped that “India and Pakistan will respect the LoC and resume negotiations at an early date in accordance with the spirit of the Lahore Declaration,” the then Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Zhang Quiye said in Beijing.

Regarding the dark in which the public was kept as far as Pakistani casualties were concerned, Farooque quotes Dr Shireen Mazari, who said that “the information war was lost from the start because of the decision of not informing the public at home … clearly the lack of coordination at the highest level of decision making was the major factor.”

The book also contains a chapter titled ‘Coup d’etat’, which gives the writer’s perspective as to what led to the October 12 coup that toppled the Nawaz Sharif government, and somewhat predictably throws a negative light on the course taken by Pervez Musharraf and the alleged reasons at the back of that course: “General Musharraf feared court martial … decided to topple the government. This was the only course of action to save their skin.”

Understandably so, Farooque’s analysis holds a soft corner for Sharif’s “attempts” at bringing forth lasting peace between India and Pakistan. He also quotes former Naval Chief Admiral Fasih Bokhari, who resigned a week before October 12, saying to a US-based investigative news website: “I resigned … because I had come to know that he had decided to topple the Sharif government … because he feared he will have to face a court martial for masterminding the Kargil,” while on the other hand the then Director ISPR, Major General Rashid Qureshi said that Nawaz showed his ignorance toward the decision-making that lead to the Kargil Operation just when “he was sentenced to life imprisonment and his other accounts” were opened.

The book also refers to what General Anthony Zinni wrote in his book Battle Ready that Pakistan’s civilian leadership did not wish to withdraw as that would have meant complete humiliation — nothing less than political suicide.

Also included in the book is ‘American Diplomacy and the 1999 Kargil summit at Blair House’, a paper by Bruce Reidel, Clinton’s Secretary on South Asian Affairs who also happened to attend the July 4 meeting between Clinton and Sharif. The paper reveals that Sharif, who desperately wanted to save Pakistan’s face, was left with no choice but to withdraw troops from the Kargil front.

Since Kargil, the relations between India and the United States became increasingly cordial and Pakistan was alienated. However, relations improved with the US as Pakistan emerged as a crucial ally in the war against various disruptive forces in the South Asian region.

The book also contains an abridged version of the Kargil Committee report issued by the Indian government along with contents of five historic and most crucial agreements signed between India and Pakistan since 1947.

Kargil: Adventure or Trap! is based on a particular bias and the author is entitled to his subjective perception of the events and the political dynamics that led to them. However, despite the devotion to his own point of view, he does not refrain from raising the most essential of queries and, even if reluctantly so, leaving it open ended: “Why did Pakistan open this front after the signing of the Lahore Declaration?”

Kargil: Adventure or Trap! (White Paper) By M. Siddique-ul-Farooque Sagar Publishers. Available with Mr Books, 10-D Super Market, F-6/2, Islamabad Tel: 051-2278843-5 mrbooks@isb.comsats.net.pk www.mrbooks.com.pk 263pp. Rs400

The view from Pakistan: 2

Kargil war

Dawn

Ex-general for making an example of Musharraf

Tuesday, June 03, 2008

RAWALPINDI: Lt Gen (Retd) Jamshaid Gulzar Kiyani has stressed the need for making an example of President Pervez Musharraf to block the emergence of future dictators in the country.

Talking to Dr Shahid Masood in the Geo TV programme Meray Mutabiq, he said General Musharraf had committed basic mistakes such as the Kargil debacle, surrender to the US threat of pushing Pakistan into the Stone Age and the Lal Masjid destruction.

He said no power could stay in the face of the power of the people. He said he had seen the period of Ayub Khan, who could not face the wrath of the people. When asked whether the Army was with Musharraf, he said the armymen would never say anything about it and such things were never discussed in the Army.

He ruled out the imposition of martial law, saying that the president could not use Article 58-2(b). Gen Gulzar said Musharraf's departure from power was close at hand. He said the president should not have given in to the US threat in the wake of the 9/11 tragedy. He said the Pakistan Army was the best professional Army in the world. He said Musharraf had options at that time and he should have held a referendum to ascertain the will of the people.

Gen Gulzar said the referendum Musharraf held for himself was a fake exercise as Gen Zia did the same during his rule. He said Musharraf was clearly told about this mistake and afterwards he accepted his mistake.

He said today everybody believed that Gen Musharraf was fighting the American war on the soil of Pakistan and "we are paying for that today." departure from power was close at hand. He said the president should not have given in to US threat in the wake of the 9/11 tragedy.

He said the threat to push Pakistan into the stone age was delivered by the then secretary of state Colin Powel and not by the American president. He said the president arrested and handed over Pakistanis to the US. Where have these unknown people gone? he asked.

He asked what was the crime of Mullah Zaeef and as a diplomat did he deserve such insulting behaviour? He said the ISI was used to commit wrong acts. He said he was in the ISI and advised against such acts but his advice fell on deaf ears. As a result today Musharraf was the most unpopular president. If he had accepted the advice, he would have been the most successful president of Pakistan today.

He said suicide attacks that were beyond imagination before 9/11 are difficult to control now, he said. He said he was not a supporter of suicide attacks but these reflect an easy reaction that cannot be stopped by anyone.

He said there were suicide attacks one after the other in the wake of the Lal Masjid and the Jamia Hafsa operation. He said if there were foreign elements in Lal Masjid, where did they go? He said innocent students were targeted with phosphorus grenades, that he added come in the fold of chemical weapons.

He said he had never seen such an act of tyranny. He said when a bullet crosses the body it is not a wrong use of power but that is a tyrannical act. It tantamounts to killing an ant with a hammer.

He said ex-servicemen should have come forward a long time ago but they have not been an organized body that could be activated on one call. About the economic situation, General Gulzar Kiyani termed the present period the worst when it was difficult for the poor to get even one meal.

When asked about his appointment and expulsion as Chairman Federal Public Service Commission, Gen Kiyani said the real differences started after the 9/11 episode. “After retiring from the Army on Oct 14, 2004, when I reminded General Saheb his commitment to doff his uniform during a meeting, he said that the nation needed him.”

He said it was a reaction to his policies that suicide attacks started in the country. He said force was used in South and North Waziristan and 80 students were killed in a Bajaur Madrassa in an American operation. What was the crime of these students, he asked.

He said he remained Chairman of the Public Service Commission for three years. At that time the prime minister was Jamali whose first demand was to give power of appointments in CBR and FIA to ministers. He said if this power was given to ministers they would have gotten their own way.

He said one of the two officers approved by former prime minister Shaukat Aziz faced a NAB corruption case while the other had no chance of promotion. “I requested them that this would cause great demoralisation among the bureaucracy. I humbly submitted to them that this was a wrong step but in a short period the chairman’s tenure was reduced from five to three years under the PCO to remove me.”

He expressed regret over the suicide attack outside the Danish embassy in Islamabad adding there was no conception of suicide bombings before 9/11. The policies of President Pervez Musharraf in the post-9/11 scenario led to suicide attacks in Pakistan.

Pulling the curtain off past events, Lt Gen (Retd) Jamshed Gulzar Kiyani denied a hand in the removal of Nawaz’s government on October 12, 1999. “I was major general then and I was promoted on November 1, 1999. After that I took the responsibility of corps commander Rawalpindi and successfully held the post for two years.”

Commenting on the 9/11 events of 2001, he said undoubtedly a hell was unleashed on New York but he never reconciled with the practical course President Pervez Musharraf adopted after the incident.

To a question, he said no aspersion could be cast on the loyalty of the Army and so on the corps commander. A corps commander also remains loyal to the army chief. However, different views came up at the corps commanders meetings in the wake of 9/11. Big differences emerged then. When General (Retd) Musharraf asked as to what were their views to the threats of pushing Pakistan into the stone age, a difference of opinion emerged in the views of the corps commanders. It was three to four days after 9/11.

Some commanders openly told Chief Executive Pervez Musharraf that they had reservations. These pertained to an outright and open support to the US. They believed that the US should not be extended support blindly. The corps commander is a professional soldier and ignoring his advice leads to losses.

Regarding the 1971 war, he said he was on the eastern border but never became a prisoner of war. He said there is no doubt that excesses were committed against the people of Bengal. He held then General Yahya Khan responsible for the same. General Niazi totally failed in East Pakistan and his role was very embarrassing which is a matter of regret.

General (Retd) Jamshed Gulzar Kiyani said according to his information Nawaz Sharif did not know anything about the Kargil episode. He was never thoroughly briefed on the same. He supported holding of a probe into the Kargil fiasco, adding factors behind the scene, about which people do not know, would also come into the limelight.

Asked what was his plan, General Kiyani said he had briefed Nawaz Sharif and told him that it was a very sensitive issue and he could not unveil all the details to him. He was only apprised of the ongoing situation. Nawaz time and again asked about the truth from senior officials including Sartaj Aziz who was the foreign minister. He also tried to persuade the chief of army staff. General Majid spoke in detail on the issue. General Mahmood was the corps commander then.

Kiyani said our Jawans (soldiers) bravely fought the Kargil War. I think they revived the memories of the 1965 war. Our officers fought more fiercely than in the 1965 War and repulsed enemy attacks time and again. Despite the fact that supplies were disrupted due to extreme cold, the Jawans continued the war. He repeated that arguments will come up when there will be a probe.

He termed Nawaz’s travel to the US a bid to save the prestige of the Pakistan Army. He said in the meeting of May 17 Nawaz gave a green signal to the operation. He assured conditional support to General Musharraf that the government would back the operation when he successfully moved forward. If unfortunately the same failed, he would not be in a position to support him (Musharraf). When the army was caught in an awkward situation, he again travelled to the US to save the symbol of the country, the Pakistan Army.

To a question about the use of nuclear weapons in the war, General Kiyani said the war could have not been kept limited to the Kargil sector or a particular front particularly when the two countries possessed nuclear weapons.

Referring to the book authored by General Musharraf, Jamshed Gulzar Kiyani said whatever has been written there is against logic. If you catch your enemy by the jugular vein he would react with full force. If you cut enemy supply lines, the only option for him will be to ensure supplies by air.

That situation the Indian Army was unlikely to confront and it had to come up to the occasion. It is against wisdom that you dictate to the enemy to keep the war limited to a certain front.

After that Nawaz went to the United States. But an attempt was made to create the impression in the print media that Nawaz Sharif was at fault to surrender there. He said this impression was created by General Pervez Musharraf which was totally wrong.

Gen. Kayani kept in the dark

Musharraf kept Kayani in dark about Kargil plan, book claims

PTI | Mar 5, 2015 The Times of India

Pakistan's [then] army chief Gen Pervez Musharraf kept [then Lt?] Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani in the dark about the Kargil operation in 1999 despite the latter heading forces responsible for guarding Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, according to a new book by a former general.

In his book 'Ham Bhi Wahan Mojod Thay', former minister Lt Gen (retd) Abdul Majeed Malik asserts that Kayani headed the 12 Division that was responsible for guarding Kashmir (PoK) but he was not taken into confidence over the operation which brought Pakistan and India on the brink of a nuclear war.

Kayani was later handpicked by Musharraf as his successor in 2007 as the army chief and he served for six years as head of army.

In his book, Malik said that Gen Musharraf did not keep Kayani in the loop, who later opposed the operation.

Malik said only Musharraf was entirely responsible for the operation and even Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was not told about the complete Kargil plan.

Sharif maintains that he was cheated by his army chief over Kargil. But Musharraf has repeatedly denied it and said that the prime minister was properly briefed before operation.

In the book, Malik claimed that Musharraf called on the phone his chief of general staff from China to discuss the Kargil operation which was tapped by Indian intelligence agencies.

It was a grave breach of security to discuss such a sensitive issue on a telephone call, Malik said.

He also criticized Sharif for appointing General Ziauddin Butt after dismissing General Musharraf in 1999 who refused to step down and removed Sharif instead and grabbed power.

The book also shares how Pakistan conducted atomic tests.

Malik has given full credit to Nawaz Sharif, who, according to him, was mentally ready to go for atomic tests despite opposition from certain close cabinet members.

Malik was once very close to Sharif but later switched sides to join Musharraf after the 1999 coup.

Nawaz says position on Kargil vindicated

By Dawn Staff Reporter

LAHORE, June 3: PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif claimed that his position had been vindicated by Lt-Gen (retd) Jamshed Gulzar Kyani’s assertion that he had not been taken on board on the Kargil operation.

Talking to the media at Lahore airport before leaving for London, he said he had always maintained that he was not fully informed about details and possible repercussions of the operation and he had rushed to the US to save the army from humiliation.

“Now even an army general is backing up my claims of not being fully informed about the operation and I demand an inquiry into the matter,” he said.

About the proposed constitutional package, he said his party would respond in two or three days.

“The party firmly believes that judges should be reinstated through an executive order, instead of a constitutional package.”