Myth about winning 1965 War

Right from beginning we were taught lies about creation of Pakistan particularly in our text books. In 1965 war we celebrated for winning the war for many years. But after so many decades it proved that Pakistan lost the war terribly. Aren’t military rulers were responsible for bringing this moral bankruptcy to Pakistanis by distorting the facts and history? I wonder how in the hack other civilized countries tolerate such an army? It is a fact 95% of army is from Punjab and Punjab has always supported this incompetent army who has a great part in destroying the country. But they always blame to non-Punjabi civilians for their own fups. It is a matter of great shame.

‘History in Pakistan has been badly treated’ - Pakistan - DAWN.COM](http://www.dawn.com/news/1204953)

KARACHI: With Pakistan just two days away from observing Defence Day and marking the 50th anniversary of the 1965 war, historian and political economist Dr S. Akbar Zaidi dispelled ‘the victory myth’, saying that there can be no a bigger lie, as Pakistan lost terribly.

People are unaware of this fact because the history that is taught in Pakistan is from an ideological viewpoint, said Dr Zaidi during his thought-provoking lecture titled ‘Questioning Pakistan’s history’. “Students are not taught the history of the people of Pakistan rather it is focused on the making of Pakistan,” he said.

The event was organised by the Faculty of Social Sciences, Karachi University.

Dr Zaidi who also teaches history at the Institute of Business Administration, Karachi, began his lecture by raising a couple of questions: what is Pakistan’s history and is there a need to question Pakistan’s history. And when was Pakistan formed? Aug 14, 1947 or Aug 15, 1947? For him the fact we are still talking about historical events 68 years later that are apparently settled is interesting. “These events and questions have not been settled. They are constantly being reinterpreted, this is because history does not die, it keeps reliving by questioning facts and truths.”

Coming to the question when was Pakistan created, he said one obvious answer is it did so on Aug 14, 1947 but he read out an excerpt from a Pakistan Studies textbook in which it was claimed it came into being in 712AD when the Arabs came to Sindh and Multan. “This is utter rubbish!” he exclaimed, rejecting the textbook account. He said the first interaction with Muslims and Arabs occurred in Kerala in South India for trading purposes.

Some historians claim the genesis of Pakistan lie in the Delhi Sultanate or the Mughal Empire. He, however, reminded everyone that the India as we know today did not exist during the Mughal era. It was during the 19th century the concept of nation-state was formed. There are others who state Sir Syed Ahmed Khan laid the foundation for Pakistan. Dr Zaidi felt this statement was partially true, because Sir Syed always maintained that Muslims should get their rights but he had also said: “Hindus and Muslims are the two eyes of the beautiful bride that is Hindustan. Weakness of any of them will spoil the beauty of the bride.”

The 1940 Pakistan Resolution called for the recognition of Muslims within Hindustan and not for a separate entity, Dr Zaidi added.

Social history

He then led the debate towards the questions: “Is the history of Pakistan, a history of the people of Pakistan or is it the making of Pakistan?”As far as he knew everyone is taught a history that includes the Mughals, freedom movement, the Quaid-i-Azam leading the All India Muslim League etc but was completely unaware about the history of the Baloch and the Pakhtun. “I cannot understand Pakistan’s history without knowing the history of the Baloch, Pakhtun, Punjab, Shah Abdul Latif and his relationship with the land.”

He said he was ashamed as a Karachiite that he had been unaware of Sindh’s history. It was important to know about indigenous histories because the “issues we are confronted with, we would have a better understanding in dealing with them”. He gave the example of East Pakistan to illustrate this point. “East Pakistan has been erased from memory. The Bengalis of East Pakistan have been reduced to they were traitors, India interfered and East Pakistan decided to separate. But what about Pakistan Army’s role in its separation?”

According to Dr Zaidi, history in Pakistan has been badly treated due to several reasons. Students are forced to study history or Pakistan Studies as a compulsory subject and hence the focus is just to pass the exam and get over with it. It is focused on rulers and generals and not on the social history. He highlighted another important reason for history getting a step-motherly treatment, citing that it is a subject that is taken when a student is unable to get admission in other departments in universities.

A robust question and answer session followed the talk during which students and teachers wanted to know why they were being taught distorted version of history, why the contribution of religious minorities to cities such as Karachi, Lahore and Peshawar was not mentioned in their textbooks, why does one have to wear separate identities and how can identification crisis be resolved to make Pakistan into one nation.

Dr Zaidi responded to these queries, explaining that Parsis and Hindus contributed hugely in the educational development of Karachi and in a similar manner the Sikhs in Punjab. “History in Pakistan is taught from an ideological viewpoint. Pakistan needs to be seen as a geographical entity.”

Referring to the distorted history, he said: “With the celebration of the victory in the 1965 war round the corner, there can be no bigger lie that Pakistan won the war. We lost terribly in the 1965 war.”

He appealed to the attendees to read Shuja Nawaz’s book Crossed Swords that exposed the reality of the war.

As for wearing separate identities, he replied there was no need to do so. “I can be a Sindhi, Hindu and Pakistani simultaneously.” He added that the diversity of nations should be acknowledged, since nationalities could not be imposed on people.

Published in Dawn, September 5th, 2015

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Pakistan did not lose the 60’s war! The 70’s war was lost however. :chupki:

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Do not feed the troll.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Who won or lost is always a subjective opinion.

The surrender of tens of thousands of troops in the last war 1971 show's how the army would do in any future wars.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

We faced a country seven times our size, even captured their terrority and defended our land all while being outnumbered. Our airforce smashed theirs, today their general claims they even nearly surrendered Amristar.

At worst it was a stalemate.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Pakistan today is much more capable than India.

Hindu stands no chance against the brave musalman

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

PAF has always been very professional and competent.

The same cannot be said for the Army - history shows this.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

LOL, read history before you make stupid statements.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

What are you smoking. name any main city that the Indian army captured despite them heavily outnumbering Pak army both in terms of numbers and armaments. Even Lahore where they opened up the front to relive the pressure on Chamb and jorian sector they were unable to come anywhere near the outskirts. I lived 14 miles form wagah border and they never even reached my place. India's big attack on Sialkot was repulsed and they beat retreat from there as well. At best it was a draw.

badly lost? you need to read history properly.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

For some self proclaimed intellectuals, anything negative about Pakistan is god's revealation...and shall not be disputed...plz let them live in their fantasy world...

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Another case of "enlightened moderation". I wish i could all ISIS on the asses of these xenophobic "Pakistani".

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Ridiculous... 1971...

Do you realize that the Pakistan Army was separated from West Pakistan by over a thousand miles, surrounded by Indian troops on all side and a hostile populace within ? There was no way they could have won given the circumstances. And the reason they had to surrender is because they had no place to retreat too...

1971 is by no means an accurate assessment of the capacities of the Pakistan Army. Any future war, if there ever is one would be along the present border of Pakistan and her seas. Now that is a different situation all together.

Whether Pakistan won or lost is up to debate, but one thing is certain.. The country withstood an assault by a force that greatly outnumbered its own. Given that India is nearly ten times the size, that they could hold out against them and not allow the Indians to overwhelm them is an accomplishment worthy of respect, and speaks volume for the quality of the Pakistan forces.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

If the Pak army were equivalent in size to India's, the result of the war would likely have mirrored the Sino-Indian war. The Indians are lucky they have hordes of men to hurl at the border... Considering the size difference, its shameful they weren't able to win outright.

Aik babay ne kaha aur hum maan jayen ?? :halo:

:chai:

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Yaar, yeh lok kamaal neh! Constructive criticism is ok, but I see no positives in trying to convince people they lost the war in the 60’s when this was not the case at all. They write negative articles against their own country because they have become too ‘intellectual’ for their own good. They need to be brought back to reality in my opinion. A couple of sandeh should pay writers like this a visit and set them straight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_3YIaYuDc8

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

An utterly pathetic article. What a way to dumb down the readers.

In the whole article, there's only one sentence that says that 1965 was a 'lie' and 'we lost terribly', and that's it! This academic gives absolutely zero evidence, zero explanation, zero argument, zero assessment to back up his trollish comment. Where are his facts? And such half baked inflammatory commentary is qualified as 'history' and 'facts'? Wow. Not surprised at all that Dawn decided to post this a day before the Defence Day - as always, they write for their hippie Indian counterparts, not for Pakistanis.

Honestly, PPP supporters should just stop defaming the Army. You lot had miserably failed in last 40 years. Your only agenda is to create divisions and turn people against their own army. Thankfully, the young generation is not going to fall for your anti Pak Army tirade which is basically an extension of your anti Punjab racism.

Punjabis love & support their Army because they know Army is their first and last defence against the enemy who if she could, would not spare any moment to take over, and this is exactly what they attempted to do in 1965!

Even today, the elders living by the border, and near battle lines and ground fondly recall the jazba of soldiers, the trust and support and gratitude community felt for the true sons of soil.

1965 is a celebration of remarkable community spirit, and it's an occasion to mark Pakistan's unflinching resolve and staggering defence when assaulted by aggression of Army 7xs time their size. If Pakistani Army was so inept, why didn't India conquer couple of villages and a city or two. Their General wanted to have breakfast in Lahore with his troops, what happened?

Maybe racist non Punjabis need to stop being so bitter and scornful of Pakistan Army - find a new hobby or get a life. Why all these Tarek Fateh haters are mainly found in PPP?

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Satah marniyeh chaiyeh evo jyeh loka nu. :gizzy:

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

A lame attempt by the OP to vent his frustration against Punjab and Punabis.

Punjabis, Sikhs and Pashtoons are known for their valour and courage. Hence these races dominate the armed forces not just in Pakistan but also the other side of the border. Who is stopping other races from joining the army in greater numbers? The indian army chief is usually a Singh, Kapoor, Sharma or Malik. Yet I have never heard South Indians etc. complaining about it or making an issue out of it. Why does this pathetic mentality only exist among certain Pakistanis.

I know you are frustrated at the pathetic governance of your incompetent CM in Sindh. Stop seeing everything through the lens of provinicial and ethnic prejudice and hold your useless and incompetent blood-sucking feudal politicians (who you have been blindly voting for decades) to account for the pathetic state of inner Sindh if you have courage. Look at the state of the roads in Sukkur for instance. Get your own house in order. Blaming establishment (admittedly they are not saints) for all your ills is nothing but a lame excuse.

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Exactly!

Heavy recruitment from Punjab in professional Army was one the biggest reasons behind diluting the feudal system in Punjab. It created a new educated and professional class which achieved geographical, social and economic mobility and this ultimately helped urbanise the most agrarian province of the country.

So there is a food for thought for provinces plagued by Wadera/Sardar enslavement of local communities.

Merit, discipline, physical and mental strength, and highest level of loyalty of the state is required to to earn the khaki uniform. If 95% of Punjabis make up the Pakistan Army, clearly Punjabis are passing all those tests. :D

Re: Myth about winning 1965 War

Well, india never had had martial laws and the central govt failed to impose hindi as one language so lets accept some Pakistani positives.

As far as 65, there were blunders in army and ISI like isi having no clue about indian troop movenents until PAF (cecil choudhry?) saw ut in one of their flyovers. The OP might be over the top, but lets look at facts.

You have to remember that PAF was on a war footing after Ran of Kutch skirmishes, sO it was highly incompetent of the army tO not be PREPARED for war footing with oPeration gibraltor and its aftermath. I wOuld really want to see the suveniors as sOme indian veterans claimed that they had taken railway station cutting off sialkot and rawalpindi in Islamabad. I know of one instance where indian army captured but withdrew from pakistan thinking it was a pakistani trap when there was no pakistani unit aroubd to defend the area.

I would call it a draw as everyone went back to borders though indian allegedly captured 1200 miles of pakistani territory while 400 or so miles for pakistanis.

Of course; there is the infamous pattonnagar victory of indians over pakistani army in punjab (claimed to have captured 100 pattons). As for OP, Sindhi hurs were instrumental working with pakustani army to penetrate deep into rajisthan and even took over forts. I think that majority of pakistani gains were in the rajisthan sector.

All in all, india learned and became better while PAF still went and bought sabres when americans had embargoed them in 65. The real disgrace was 1971 where west pakistani army didn't give a rough time to indians. I remember reading from a brigadiars book on how he was told not to care if indians came and took over parts of punjab