1965 War

There are so many wrong points in your post.

1) The UN never passed any resolution on Kashmir until after the 1947-48 war was over, so an Indian would not have been against any official UN position at the time.

2) The Indian Army in 1948 consisted almost entirely of highly trained combat veterans, both in terms of its enlisted men, and in terms of the British and Indian officers who led it. It was, if anything, much more combat-proven and capable than any Indian army since as it still adhered completely to the British military doctrine that had brought it victory after victory in World War 2 against Japan.
While Pakistan's soldiers were similarlt experienced and led, they were grossly outnumbered.

3) Aside from numbers, in 1948 Pakistan's army shape was terrible. It lacked both equipment, as many of the tanks, artillery, ammunition and supplies it had been allocated to receive on paper remained stuck in former British bases in India, which refused to hand them over.

^^^Alright. But I am still sticking to my post. The basis of partition was all muslim majority areas were to become part of Pakistan. Later India did not accept that and not only Kashmir but other areas were also denied to become part of Pakistan. And I am still saying that capturing of Sri Nagar airport would make India extremely difficult to flush out mujhiden and Pakistani troops. Can you provide link, source what you are saying. I am sure neither you nor I was born during that period.

By the way how are you so positive about Indians that after getting strategic advantage by capturing siri nagar airport, Pakistan army fully supported by local population which I assume were majority Muslims would have defeated by Indians? I don’t agree with you.

UN resolution of August 13, 1948, Quaid was also alive, indicated that Pakistani troops were inside Jammu and Kashmir. Read the resolution. Either it was not planned as AP said, or somebody betrayed Quaid-e-Azam to humiliate him.

*RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION FOR INDIA AND PAKISTAN ON 13 AUGUST 1948. (DOCUMENT NO. S/1100, PARA 75, DATED THE 9TH NOVEMBER, 1948)
THE UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION FOR INDIA AND PAKISTAN

Having given careful consideration to the points of view expressed by the Representatives of India and Pakistan regarding the situation in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, and

Being of the opinion that the prompt cessation of hostilities and the coercion of conditions the continuance of which is likely to endanger international peace and security are essential to implementation of its endeavors to assist the Governments of India and Pakistan in effecting a final settlement of the situation.
Resolves to submit simultaneously to the Governments of India and Pakistan the following proposal

PART I
CEASE-FIRE ORDER

A. The Governments of India and Pakistan agree that their respective High Commands will issue separately and simultaneously a cease- fire order to apply to all forces under their control in the State of Jammu and Kashmir as of the earliest practicable date or dates to be mutually agreed upon within four days after these proposals have been accepted by both Governments.
**B. The High Commands of Indian and Pakistan forces agreed to refrain from taking any measures that might augment the military potential of the forces under their control in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. (For the purpose of these proposals "forces under their control shall be considered to include all forces, organized and unorganized, fighting or participating in hostilities on their respective sides). **
**C. The Commanders-in-Chief of the Forces of India and Pakistan shall promptly confer regarding any necessary local changes in present dispositions which may facilitate the cease-fire. **
**D. In its discretions and as the Commission may find practicable, the Commission will appoint military observers who under the authority of the Commission and with the co-operation of both Commands will supervise the observance of the cease-fire order. **
**E. The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan agree to appeal to their respective peoples to assist in creating and maintaining an atmosphere favorable to the promotion of further negotiations. **

PART II
TRUCE AGREEMENT
Simultaneously with the acceptance of the proposal for the immediate cessation of hostilities as outlined in Part I, both Governments accept the following principles as a basis for the formulation of a truce agreement, the details of which shall be worked out in discussion between their Representatives and the Commission.
A. (l) As the presence of troops of Pakistan in the territory of the State of Jammu and Kashmir constitutes a material change in the situation since it was represented by the Government of Pakistan before the Security Council, the Government of Pakistan agrees to withdraw its troops from that State.
**(2) The Government of Pakistan will use its best endeavor to secure the withdrawal from the State of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistan nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the State for the purpose of fighting. **
(3) Pending a final solution the territory evacuated by the Pakistan troops will be administered by the local authorities under the surveillance of the Commission.
B. (1) When the Commission shall have notified the Government of India that the tribesmen and Pakistan nationals referred to in Part II A 2 hereof have withdrawn, thereby terminating the situation which was represented by the Government of India to the Security Council as having occasioned the presence of Indian forces in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, and further, that the Pakistan forces are being withdrawn from the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the Government of India agrees to begin to withdraw the bulk of their forces from the State in stages to be agreed upon with the Commission
(2) Pending the acceptance of the conditions for a final settlement of the situation in the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the Indian Government will maintain within the lines existing at the moment of cease-fire the minimum strength of its forces which in agreement with the Commission are considered necessary to assist local authorities in the observance of law and order. The Commission will have observers stationed where it deems necessary.
(3) The Government of India will undertake to ensure that the Government of the State of Jammu and Kashmir will take all measures within their power to make it publicly known that peace, law and order will be safeguarded and that all human and political rights will be guaranteed.
C. (1) Upon signature, the full text of the Truce Agreement or communiqué containing the principles thereof as agreed upon between the two Governments and the Commission, will be made public.

PART III
The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan reaffirm their wish that the future status of the State of Jammu and Kashmir shall be determined in accordance with the will of the people and to that end, upon acceptance of the Truce Agreement both Governments agree to enter into consultations with the Commission to determine fair and equitable conditions whereby such free expression will be assured.

*The UNCIP unanimously adopted this Resolution on 13-8-1948.
Members of the Commission: Argentina. Belgium, Columbia, Czechoslovakia and U.S.A.

While you might present some historical facts correctly, your post is quite misleading.

  • Are you denying that coward Gracey's defiance of Quaid-e-Azam's orders to send in the regular troops? The initial incursions were done by Pakhtun tribesman, Potwari Azad Kashmiris, and irregular Pakistani military men. Yet we still extracted 1/3 of Kashmir. By the way, I'd like to see some non-biased sources chronicle the tribesman looting and pillage along the way? It's a bloody libelous that many so called Pakistanis accept this as fact. Where were the rest of Pakistani sherdils when it came crunch time?

  • Let's not forget the role of the coureagous Gilgit scouts that knocked out the Maharajah military in what is now Northern Areas. The Kashmiri Dogra (Hindu, Sikh, and Muslim) army was NO match for the Pro-Pakistani forces.

  • Every student of Pakistani Geopolitics knows that Pakistan could have choked the Indian advances as our Muzzaferabad-Srinagar and Sialkot-Jammu access was still better than the Indian Gurdaspur-Jammu access (which never should have been Inidan territory in the Radcliffe award, but I digress). Perhaps we would have lost the Hindu majority Jammu districts closer to what was then India, but no way would the Valley have been lost.

  • Regardless of the excuses you make about Indian superiority or lack Pakistani munitions the point is that is that we never fielded a true military in that region. If we had at least made the correct attempt to take on the state, there wouldn't be a Kashmir issue.

You make a valid case, Niden. I would add that: Had we stopped the Indian advance in the southern districts of Jammu (Kathua, Samba, Doda), there was no chance that the Valley would have been lost. An operation to airlift Inidan soldier would have a complete debacle if teh Pakistani military presence was posited in the capital.

I am sorry to read these quotes by Rao Rashid. I don't believe that he is totally unaware.Position was this that Some Pakistan regular army men were among the Qabaily Lashkar in civil dress but at the day of capturing Power House they were asked to come back and same evening Indian Army landed at Srinagar. Loot mar by Qabaily lashkar was perhaps done afer this.

Thanks for more insight on the subject. Something basically wrong happened otherwise as you said there would have been no conflict with India, had Kashmir become part of Pakistan in 1948. India basically usurp the right of Pakistan, unfortuanately Pakistan did not take that right. I think Major Tufail and Captain Sarwar Shaeed were awarded Nishan-e-Hyder for their bravery in that war.

Yes something wrong did happen - the rights of Kashmiris were denied and Pakistan was robbed. The blood of many brave soldiers and people was spilled to bring freedom to Kashmir.

We may have been robbed, but the truth will always prevail.

Due to lack of true official versions of historical facts of Pakistan since 1947, people have to rely on second hand subjective information. People lied in 1948 war, they lied in 1965 war and finally in 1971. The text books of history of Pakistan are full of lies and far from the realities. It is unfortunate; no Pakistani historian has recorded un-biased versions of the events. You would find blaming people they hated to core of their hearts attributing major catastrophes to these hated persons and let Scot free actual culprits.

During the wars often these things happen to save themselves and for moral.This happened all over the world till now. But after some years every thing comes out. My father was a J.C.O. but he told me and every one when we grown up,

http://216.252.121.32/us.f431.mail.yahoo.com/ya/securedownload?mid=1_28371_2_40669_0_AD15%2FNgAAQQuSYSsqgT870HFCok&fid=%40S%40Search&pid=4&clean=0&inline=1&cred=hE86pl9IT6aj5N1VC19QQYWf3y8TGNG.50C9SD3qkQ5z.WvPIGRs2dXvN_FHaXgwzX3YdeG5s1zgLk0KLcb9zVkf.WqfHJz9TF8Af7a9&ts=1254619262&partner=ymail&sig=qr6480cWuwovdNx3h5SL5Q--

http://216.252.121.32/us.f431.mail.yahoo.com/ya/securedownload?mid=1_28371_2_40669_0_AD15%2FNgAAQQuSYSsqgT870HFCok&fid=%40S%40Search&pid=4&clean=0&inline=1&cred=hE86pl9IT6aj5N1VC19QQYWf3y8TGNG.50C9SD3qkQ5z.WvPIGRs2dXvN_FHaXgwzX3YdeG5s1zgLk0KLcb9zVkf.WqfHJz9TF8Af7a9&ts=1254619262&partner=ymail&sig=qr6480cWuwovdNx3h5SL5Q--

http://216.252.121.32/us.f431.mail.yahoo.com/ya/securedownload?mid=1_28371_2_40669_0_AD15%2FNgAAQQuSYSsqgT870HFCok&fid=%40S%40Search&pid=4&clean=0&inline=1&cred=hE86pl9IT6aj5N1VC19QQYWf3y8TGNG.50C9SD3qkQ5z.WvPIGRs2dXvN_FHaXgwzX3YdeG5s1zgLk0KLcb9zVkf.WqfHJz9TF8Af7a9&ts=1254619262&partner=ymail&sig=qr6480cWuwovdNx3h5SL5Q--

Re: 1965 War

sorry I wanted to copy a photo here but failed

http://216.252.121.32/us.f431.mail.yahoo.com/ya/securedownload?mid=1_28371_2_40669_0_AD15%2FNgAAQQuSYSsqgT870HFCok&fid=%40S%40Search&pid=4&clean=0&inline=1&cred=hE86pl9IT6aj5N1VC19QQYWf3y8TGNG.50C9SD3qkQ5z.WvPIGRs2dXvN_FHaXgwzX3YdeG5s1zgLk0KLcb9zVkf.WqfHJz9TF8Af7a9&ts=1254619262&partner=ymail&sig=qr6480cWuwovdNx3h5SL5Q--

In 1948, Kashmiris were pre-dimenetly associated with the Muslim Conference, the political faction lead by Shiekh Abdullah against the oppression of the Dogra rule of Kashmir. Shiekh Abdullah was a popular leader and had rendered great sacrifices to secure political rights for his people. He had the support of Indian National Congress. After partition, Shiekh Abdullah sent a message to the "founding fathers" of Pakistan for a bargain but the founding fathers demanded he merge his party into Muslim League ....that repelled Shiekh Abdulla...

Another factor was the contradictary stance by Pakistani leaders ...they accepted the decisions of the rulers of Junagarh, Haiderabad, etc, of acceding to Pakistan despite the fact that 85% of the populations of these pricely states were Hindus but didn't concede such right to the Dogra Maharaja of Kashmir...This lead to anomolies...etc.

It does not make any sense. Why "founding fathers" of Pakistan were insisting Sheikh Abdullah to join Muslim League? Why couldn't they allow to whatever party Shiekh Abullah stick to it as long as Kashmir became part of Pakistan, though autonomous?

"Founding Fathers" committed many mistakes. Instead of immediate working on democracy, it started to unify provinces without taking into consideration of diversity, language and culture. East Pakistan ultimately parted away due to same reason.

You can call them mistakes but those were matter of principals and our Founding Father was a man of principals. His rivals were using all negative technics and they were little successful with doing their criminal acts.

The same demand was made from Abdul Ghaffar Khan the leader of Khudai Khidmatgars in Pukhtunkhwa and one of the foremost freedom fighter of the Subcontinent i.e. he should dissolve his political party and join Muslim League. No person of dignity could accept such a humuliating demand...and those too Shiekh Abdullah and Abdul Ghaffar khan who had suffered torture, incarceratin, persecution, etc. for their principles (in face of the fact that no leader of Muslim League from Nawab Salimullah Khan to Nawabzada Liaqat Ali khan had ever spent one second of imprisonment for demanding freedom from the British Empire...How is it possible that you demand freedom from one of the mightiest empire of history and it gives it to you in the plate).

But the arrogance of the founding fathers knew no limits...Once they claimed they alone have created Pakistan with the help of their stenographer as if the hundreds of miliions of Muslims were insects to count nowhere. Can popular/true leaders make such an arrogant claim?

That is why we are seeing Pakistan in such a miserable shape...dependent on Kerry Logar.

We don't see much of such analysis in our text books. No one has written book on Pakistan's history in such perspective. For many Liaqat Ali Khan was the best thing happened to Pakistan. By the way who were the stenographer and Kerry Logar?

So Pakistan’s so-called all weather friend doesn’t buy very much from Pakistan does he? He just gives alms to Pakistan.

Anything comming from you two
no one buys lolz i hope u do understand that.

A lot of things one doesn't find in history. Liaqat Ali Khan was a landlord (Nawab) from Karnal, Ambala and had fuedal propsensities. Having left his political constituency in India, he took measures to spur migration of Muslims from India-to build one for himself in the new country - on the one hand, and on the other, tried to divide Punjab by backing feudals like Daulatana, etc. to which Punjab's leaders like Madhot, Mushtaq Gurmani, etc. and Pubjab's bureaucratic elite responded almost violently. That togethor with other factors laid the foundation stone for future political instability in Pakistan.

Kerry Logar is the US senator that has chartered the recent bill for aid to Pakistan but with many strings attached.

LastOfTheDinosaurs,

Can you shade some light on 1965 war? In my opinion had this war continued to logical end, there would have been no Kashmir problem.