Who really won Kargil war?

[MKF]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

perhaps we should see the Kargil conflict from Human angle, more than 1500 lives lost (Be Indian or Pakistani). Where did we start and where did we end, same place almost, Line of Control almost at the same place, Pakistan and India now again on a peace track, peace overtures again flowing so why was it necessary to fill this interlude with a brief piece of bloodshed. Did we solve the Kashmir Problem with this war, of course not, did we get more territory for Azad kashmir, of course not. what did we achieve?

I believe if we had placed our soldiers into the battle, we had to provide them adequate fire cover & logistic support. I do not believe on this not taking the bodies theory saying that they are mujahideens, there was no flag meeting, nothing. whatever bodies of Pakistanis were left were quickly buried under guidance of Muslim soldiers in Indian Army & they were very few in the case where whole detachment came under some direct artillery barrage otherwise Paistani soldiers carried their bodies along in most cases. The bodies were never offered initially because to offer you have to preserve them, transport them etc etc where there was shortage of coffins for Indian Army itself. (all this is first hand information coming from one of my friend who participated actively in the conflict in Indian Army). Pakistan's mistake which costed it war was simply trying to kill two birds with one stone. getting the military adavantage by improving the defensive posture without bearing the political cost.

Gen Musharraf is right that India could never have gone for an all out war because so many critical strike assets were deployed in Kargil. My friend told me that for one battalion attack on one post 100 guns were supporting instead of 6 according to doctrine. Hell must have broken loose over the personell on the tops who were denied their legitimate right, counterbombardment and air cover.

Truly some heads must roll for this faulty planning.

[garmihawathandapaani]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

MKF - those are good points about what has changed etc. Nothing has changed, just lots of soldiers gave their life ...and their families.

But one thing is difficult to understand. Even if no withdrawel happened, why India will not engage in other places if Kargil did not go well? My point is conventional wars depend a lot on numerical advantage, right?

[Guy1]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

american won the kargil war...

[Khushaalkhan]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

MKF, Kargil was never planned for any strategic gains but for vested interest to get promotion.
In the wake of Kargil war, it was also evident that one out of Musharraf and Nawaz Sharif has to pack up. Kargil was the most ill-planned and ill-timed operation. Nawaz Sharif was the weakest PM Pakistan ever had and therefore he was bound to suffer. And the main culprit took the rein of the states in his hand.

[MKF]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

Yes, your argument have got weight. i think both should have gone.

This withdrawl happened or not is a very interesting questions and i have personally asked it to both Pakistani & Indian officers. My Indian friend told me that they managed to get back almost 80% of the posts but he also said that mostly on completion of attack they found the posts already vacated.

The Pakistani officers have told that they got extremely short of rations and ammunition and multilayered attacks of Indians kept them on edge sometimes for days. They fought with their seniors back on Radio or Phone (whatever was available) that either give us logistics & fire support or call us back as there is no point now in staying on the posts. merely giving lives will not serve the purpose. However the reply usually came was typical of our narrow mindset, no withdrawal, last man last bullet etc etc. many died keeping the oath .

Still we promoted the Commander of the Pakistani side General Javed Hasan. He should have been the first person to be fired and sent home. We promoted the brigade commander Brigadier Safdar to Lieutenant General. But whosoever left the post to save his men from needlessly dying before formal withdrawl order came was charged with cowardice.

Interestingly the same thing happened on Indian side, Battalions were given no time to prepare their plans, were simply shown the objective and told to attack without wasting any time, numerous commanders were fired on cowardice charges who refused to put their men in harm's way without adequate preparation, some of these officer's cases became public and till date pending in Indian Supreme Court.

Kargil was nothing but a mass slaughter, Indians got their men slaughtered in the initial stages of the battle once they put their men without proper firesupport, we got our men slaughtered once we left our soldiers to fight the battle till last man, last bullet and refused their same firecover & logistics right.

many of you might not have heard the story of a pakistan Army officer, Captain Asjad who dared ask these questions to the president in open forum. Though at the time it was told to the media that look, we have justice system of Hazrat Umar in army that any junior can ask such questions to Chief in Public Gatherings, but the officer was later sent to baltoro glacier as a communication officer, a post which never existed before and till date does not exist (was created only for him). he refused and was later courtmartialled on cowardice charges and sent home after being kept in custody for one year.

[MKF]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

@garmihawathandapaani

MKF - those are good points about what has changed etc. Nothing has changed, just lots of soldiers gave their life ...and their families.

But one thing is difficult to understand. Even if no withdrawel happened, why India will not engage in other places if Kargil did not go well? My point is conventional wars depend a lot on numerical advantage, right?

i have not understood your question, can you elaborate?

[Khushaalkhan]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

Thanks for giving us so valuable information.

@Mazhar-Kaleem-Fan

many of you might not have heard the story of a pakistan Army officer, Captain Asjad who dared ask these questions to the president in open forum. Though at the time it was told to the media that look, we have justice system of Hazrat Umar in army that any junior can ask such questions to Chief in Public Gatherings, but the officer was later sent to baltoro glacier as a communication officer, a post which never existed before and till date does not exist (was created only for him). he refused and was later courtmartialled on cowardice charges and sent home after being kept in custody for one year.

Thats true, I have also been told that in Army even in Staff College officers normally ask questions from the President, PM, COAS, VCOAS etc which we can only discuss in our rooms cant dare to talk in open even.
However, I dont understand the story of your friend, because what I know about Siachen, non-infantry officers are posted there to spend about six months on forward posts, so if at all your friend was to be penalized the best punishment would have been to send him on forward post rather than a signal officer who I think remain somewhere in the rear and not on forward posts.

[cheeku]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

what was the need for a kargil war. pakistan failed because it expected a kashmir revolt if war takes place, but nothing happened. the question, who won or lost is secondary. **idiots **won this war.

[MKF]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

well i do not know the person, but i was told the details by my friend, any way he was posted there in Gilgit and was sent to Baltoro glacier with immediate effect to rectify the communication problems or something to that effect. He took it as result of his questions and therefore refused and after a sensational drama he was formally charged and courtmartialled. He was never charged for questioning but his assignment was hardly after few days of questioning so he probably assumed something which may and may not have been true.

[Haris]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

^MKF, I too am quite surprized abt this Capt Asjad. Ive never heard of this episode. What happened exactly?
The Army has the right to send any soldier on any assignment or mission in land, air or water. All those joining take an oath to comply and serve.
Im not sure what Qs he may have asked and how, but surely while its good to follow Hazrat Umer's example and see a Capt question the Chief, there are military codes, protocols and discipline to be followed at all times.

[Khushaalkhan]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

@Haris Zuberi

Im not sure what Qs he may have asked and how, but surely while its good to follow Hazrat Umer's example and see a Capt question the Chief, there are military codes, protocols and discipline to be followed at all times.

Well, military codes, protocols and discipline never dissuade somebody from asking questions. What I heard, this is the brightest aspect in the army, where seniors are always answerable to their juniors, seniors can take the decision at their own, however they are not unquestionable to their junior officers.
This is what I have been told, may be the real situation is different.
As far as the result of Kargil war is concern, I think Nawaz Sharif is the loser and Musharraf is the winner being the sole Chief Executive of the country.

[MKF]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

Zuberi Sahab

i will have to check for more details, may be the real issue is not what i understood but what exactly he was court martialled was probably refusing to go to baltoro i believe.
will let you know more details about the person in some time

[5Abi]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

@Khushaalkhan

Well, military codes, protocols and discipline never dissuade somebody from asking questions. What I heard, this is the brightest aspect in the army, where seniors are always answerable to their juniors, seniors can take the decision at their own, however they are not unquestionable to their junior officers. This is what I have been told, may be the real situation is different. As far as the result of Kargil war is concern, I think Nawaz Sharif is the loser and Musharraf is the winner being the sole Chief Executive of the country.

@Mazhar-Kaleem-Fan

i will have to check for more details, may be the real issue is not what i understood but what exactly he was court martialled was probably refusing to go to baltoro i believe.

Questioning decisions taken by seniors is not the same as not following orders. When you are given an order by a senior officer, you are expected to follow it w/o question. This is true for any military in the world. Not following orders in military is insubordination and subject to court martial.

Staff College is a different situation. Its an academic institution where questions are ofcourse encouraged. Its part of the learning process. But in battlefield, lives are at stake and defense of the country is at stake and juniors are expected to follow orders w/o question. Militarires of the world are not a democracy or corporate offices.

This Captain Asjad refusing to go to his assignment in the boltoro region is showing insubordination and not setting a good example for his junior officers and if he was court martialed for it, so be it.

[Haris]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

^ Well put 5Abi:k:

MKF,
Sure, thanks!

[symk]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

The story that I have heard is that the captain was posted to Siachen for 6 months which is a routine posting for army officers but then it was extended 2 times in a row which was very unusual. This was his punishment for asking bold questions. This forced him to abscond, he was arrested and was courtmartialed

[system]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

@maihu_don

pakistani soldier, who died and there country refused to accept them, saying that they were freedom fighters and not pakistani soldiers ......

What a dodo. It was a suprise and secret mission. All the soldiers who volunteered to be Martyred knew what sacrifices were expected of them.

Pakistani soldiers are not coward soldiers like the Hindustani Army who regularly shoot their officers because they won't let them go home or because they don't want to fight.

[system]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

@shawaiz_K

I see more emotions than sense in your statement. The reality is what you win on the ground you later win on the table, what you lose on the ground you also lose on the table..

No, on the eve of President Musharraf's release of his book 'In the Line of Fire'... Hindustani news channel NDTV was interviewing several Hindustani Generals and intelligence officials who were involved in that war. The Generals all claimed that a few hundered Pakistani soldiers had confronted and fought alot better than the thousands of Hindustani soldiers.

The only reason why Pakistan lost was because there were communications problems from officers to commanders.

[garmihawathandapaani]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

@Mazhar-Kaleem-Fan

i have not understood your question, can you elaborate?

my question is this - regardless of result in kargil, before mounting this attack why there was assumption that India will not retaliate attack in kargil itself but also in all other fronts? if this was not expected then strategy was wrong, yes?

and if there were many fronts opened (which is what should be expected) then the side with most conventional force to deply will have advantage. and here also India has edge, right?

unless there was some qualitative assumption made that fewer troops can win over larger side?

I ask this because many people have said kargil was great strategy but bad execution or tactic etc

[PRNR]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

@Pakistani Dragon

No, on the eve of President Musharraf's release of his book 'In the Line of Fire'... Hindustani news channel NDTV was interviewing several Hindustani Generals and intelligence officials who were involved in that war. The Generals all claimed that a few hundered Pakistani soldiers had confronted and fought alot better than the thousands of Hindustani soldiers.

The only reason why Pakistan lost was because there were communications problems from officers to commanders.

They said that the Pakistani soldiers fought well and thats all that they said but your extrapolation abilities are amazing!!:D

[MKF]

Re: Who really won Kargil war?

@garmihawathandapaani

my question is this - regardless of result in kargil, before mounting this attack why there was assumption that India will not retaliate attack in kargil itself but also in all other fronts? if this was not expected then strategy was wrong, yes?

and if there were many fronts opened (which is what should be expected) then the side with most conventional force to deply will have advantage. and here also India has edge, right?

unless there was some qualitative assumption made that fewer troops can win over larger side?

I ask this because many people have said kargil was great strategy but bad execution or tactic etc

what i know about the whole issue is that Pakistan actually suffered from what is classically called, "maintainence of aim". The Pakistani aim was to overlook Indian National Highway 1A. The plan was limited incursion but during the course of execution, seeing the area void of enemy, Pakistan went deeper inside to have better and better terrain for doing so, i heard that maximum incursion was abut 12 Km across the line of control. The logistics were not planned that way, However initial Indian Attacks were literally butchered. This probably gave false hopes to the Pakistani commanders that they can sustain Indian attacks from these dominant positions and rather than calling their troops back to the points where the actual aim was they got carried away in the euphoria of victory. Indians had committed the same mistake which we had later on repeated. no or less fire cover. After about 10th of June Indian Army stopped attacking blindly and started pounding the posts with heavy artillery and PGM's by Airforce. The logistics were cut off as artillery fire forced the defenders to stay in the bunkers. between 10 june & 5 July all the attacks were under heavy artillery and air cover, still Indians managed to get few posts like point 5040 etc, However probably the sustenance of troops was getting more and more difficult. after 5 june the withdrawal was ordered definitely and Indian army started scaling the posts and by end july they had manged to take back all but few.

Gen Musharraf may have been right that India could not dare open a second front as they had moved their strategic artillery for this operation, however the troops which were comminted into the operation vijay (Indian name for this operation) were from 6 Mountain Division, 20 division and a third division which i am forgetting who have no active role in ground operations in the southern sectors. It is the disturbance of artillery balance that India could only open second front once they had finsihed this Kargil business.

However by restraining from crossing LoC and portraying themselves victims of aggression, they played their cards beautifully and Pakistan was forced to withdraw on their terms. Whether we withdrew becuase of political or military reasons is another debate, but we did and that is what matters in the end.

I hope you have got some thing on your first two questions, about third, i have no idea.

I think we should open another thread that what is strategy and what is tactics as( i am not an expert) and try to discuss if it was tactical victory or not. my opinion is that it was initially tactical victory but the tactical victory got nullified once we withdrew. about strategy i assume it was a failure, on the reasons that we were blamed as aggressors in the world, we did not achieve much in terms of bargaining power in future, Indian forces were made hero in their country by media, our military got blamed in our country etc etc.

I believe it was a case of bite as much as you can chew, our plan was sound, however in execution we bit more than we could chew and had to spit out all & made fun of ourselves.