What's new

Indira Gandhi planned a mass invasion of Pakistan | CIA Records

Ganga

FULL MEMBER
Joined
May 19, 2010
Messages
777
Reaction score
0
A minister of Indira Gandhi's cabinet betrayed India's "war objectives" to the Central Intelligence Agency in December 1971, causing an abrupt end to the Bangladesh war under vicious US armtwisting.

This is the highlight of the book CIA's Eye on South Asia by journalist Anuj Dhar. Published by Delhi-based Manas Publications, which is facing government's ire for coming out with a book on the R&AW, the book compiles declassified CIA records on India and her neighbours. It specifically spotlights what arguably has been India's biggest spy scandal.

In the run up to the 1971 India Pakistan war over what was then East Pakistan (now Bangladesh), The New York Times first hinted at the presence of a CIA operative in the Indian government. By December The Washington Post had reported that US President Richard Nixon's South Asia policy was being guided by "reports from a source close to Mrs. Gandhi."

Records and telecons declassified recently - but not properly explained up till now - show that a dramatic turnaround came on December 6 when a CIA operative, whom Dhar pins down as a minister of the Indira Cabinet, leaked out India's "war objectives" to the agency. Prime Minister Gandhi told Union Cabinet that apart from liberating Bangladesh, India intended to take over a strategically important part of the Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and go for the total annihilation of Pakistan's armed forces so that Pakistan "never attempts to challenge India in the future."

When he came to know of the CIA report, a furious Nixon blurted out that "this woman [Indira Gandhi] suckered us," thinking that Mrs. Gandhi had promised him that India won't attack East Pakistan - not to speak of targeting West Pakistan and ***. "But let me tell you, she's going to pay," he told his National Security Advisor Dr Henry Kissinger even as he tried to leak out the CIA report to give her bad press.

The CIA went on assess that fulfillment of India's "war objectives" might lead to "the emergence of centrifugal forces which could shatter West Pakistan into as many as three or four separate countries."

As a direct result of the operative's information, the Nixon administration went on an overdrive to save West Pakistan from a massive Indian assault. Because the President felt that "international morality will be finished - the United Nations will be finished - if you adopt the principle that because a country is democratic and big it can do what the hell it pleases."

Nixon personally threatened the USSR with a "major confrontation" between the superpowers should the Soviets failed to stop the Indians from going into West Pakistan. Kissinger secretly met Chinese Permanent Representative at the UN to apprise him of the CIA operative's report and rub in that what India was planning to do with Pakistan with the Soviet backing could turn out to be a "dress rehearsal" of what they might do to China.

Dhar quotes in the book the official records showing that USSR's First Deputy Foreign Minister Vasily Kuznetsov visited Delhi after Nixon's threat and told the "Indians to confine their objectives to East Pakistan" and "not to try and take any part of West Pakistan, including Azad Kashmir" as "Moscow was concerned about the possibility of a great power confrontation over the subcontinent." Kuznetsov also extracted a guarantee from Prime Minister Gandhi that India will not attack West Pakistan. This decision was promptly conveyed to Nixon. On 16 December 1971 when Nixon was told that India had declared a ceasefire, he exulted: "We have made it… it's the Russians working for us." Kissinger congratulated him for saving West Pakistan - India's main target, as per the operative's report to the CIA.

Dhar repudiates recent assertion by a former Indian Navy chief that showing up of America's biggest nuclear powered carrier into the Bay of Bengal during the war had something to do with the accidental destruction of a US plane in Dhaka during an Indian strafing. "Declassified records make it unambiguously clear that the month-long show of strength by the USS Enterprise and accompanying flotilla was a byproduct of the CIA operative's reports," he writes, reproducing chunks from official records detailing how Nixon ordered a naval task force towards the subcontinent to "scare off" India from attacking West Pakistan.

In subsequent years, former Prime Minister Morarji Desai, and two deputy PMs - Jagjivan Ram and Y B Chavan - were alleged to be the CIA operative active during the 1971 war. However, all such charges lacked any substantiation because there was no confirmation whether or not such an operative ever existed. As such no constructive discussion on the issue ever took off. This has changed now given the unassailable evidence in the form of US records making it clear that the CIA had a "reliable" agent operating out of the Indian cabinet in 1971.

In declassified records the name of the operative has been censored because the CIA Director has "statutory obligations to protect from disclosure [the Agency's] intelligence sources." Dhar writes: "Naming the Indian operative even after so many years will adversely impact the Indo-US relations, and hit the Agency's prospects of recruiting new informants."

However, he suggests that Indian government may have known the identity of the operative. "R&AW under the most capable R. N. Kao could not have missed the reference to the 'source close to Mrs. Gandhi' and must have dug deeper," he writes, adding that in 1972 Mrs. Gandhi herself charged that "she had information that the CIA had become active in India".

More pertinently, Dhar quotes from the declassified record of a 5 October 1972 meeting between Indian Foreign Minister Swaran Singh and US Secretary of State William Rogers. During the meeting, Singh asserted that "CIA has been in contact with people in India in 'abnormal ways.'" and that India had information that "proceedings of Congress Working Committee were known to US officials within two hours of meetings".

End the secrecy: CIA Records Take Lid Off High Treason By Indira Cabinet Minister
 
.
Well the show is out for the whole world to see what Pakistan did with Indian allies they were blindly riding. Indian ambitions for past 63 years have been total anhillation of Pakistan because they cannot beat down anyone into submission as long Pakistan sticks like a thorn in their policies. Imagine with no Pakistan all the small south asian countries like Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan and Kashmir will not dare oppose a word against India.

Because the President felt that "international morality will be finished - the United Nations will be finished - if you adopt the principle that because a country is democratic and big it can do what the hell it pleases."

Back then the United States was popular due to its fair play policy and Soviets were the evil repressive forces. Its clear to see that they did not jump to protect Pakistan for its mistakes. Yes East-Pakistan was being repressed and yes they launched a rebellion and this was all internal matter of Pakistan. The Americans did not approve of Pakistani attrocities or took sides no matter how strong the alliance was. However the words in bold are ironic as America is totally doing the opposite right now. Invading Iraq and Afghanistan to install democracy.
 
Last edited:
.
i seriously believe if we had one more leader like Indira Gandhi.. all our neighbors would have sat quietly...but we would have had to pay price for that with something as Pakistan now doing because of her mistake during soviet war.i would like to take example from china.. because whenever they had any objective they always took that to a logical end.. which we haven't been able to do because we lacked leaders with guts..
i am not telling here that we had to occupy Pakistan.. that was never our objective.. but as this article points out .. we could have taken *** .. that would have sent right signals to them... now they consider we cannot do anything .. so they export terrorism even though whole world know about it but still we are targeted... we simply do nothing..this is where our leaders guts can be questioned... and Pakistan always had leader who had guts... means mainly military which holds Pakistan's foreign policy for most part of it's life.
 
.
If India had another leader like Indra it would lead no where but self destruct and balkanized. Sooner or later it would grow weakers, sanctioned and every neighbouring state jumping in for a pie. Indra by herself had no balls..she borrowed them from Russians..with Russian gone it was saga of impotency once again. On the flip side what did India do to protect their all weather friends in Afghanistan??
 
. .
Indira Gandhi was strong and brave, not ruthless.

Er...........1984,election emergency etc are certainly not examples of a kind person.Lets agree she had her share of wrongdoings.


Indira Gandhi was most impacted by the criticism of her father Nehru being very soft and naive,hence it in way tailored her character.She certainly outdid her father,

Also gave us a picture of the fact had Nehru been a realist what impact it would"ve had on India.(Hint:not necessarily positive)

I'm proud of her for her actions in 1971.
Also aware of her share of blunders.

According to the book :The clash of fundamentalisms
After the fall of Dhaka Indian generals planned for an invasion of West Pakistan with the so called agenda of "finish off the enemy".But luckily Indira Gandhi never approved so because she believed military should be firmly under civilian control and also there is a chance that we may lose what we"ve earned so far.
 
Last edited:
.
i seriously believe if we had one more leader like Indira Gandhi.. all our neighbors would have sat quietly...but we would have had to pay price for that with something as Pakistan now doing because of her mistake during soviet war.i would like to take example from china.. because whenever they had any objective they always took that to a logical end.. which we haven't been able to do because we lacked leaders with guts..
i am not telling here that we had to occupy Pakistan.. that was never our objective.. but as this article points out .. we could have taken *** .. that would have sent right signals to them... now they consider we cannot do anything .. so they export terrorism even though whole world know about it but still we are targeted... we simply do nothing..this is where our leaders guts can be questioned... and Pakistan always had leader who had guts... means mainly military which holds Pakistan's foreign policy for most part of it's life.
No I think I must disagree with u here. It is old story what Nixon thought about Mrs Gandhi, now dont compare the leaders based on guts. Their system is different and ours is as well.
Look where we stand now in the global stage,despite the struggle what you mentioned. War was never answer.
Regards.
 
.
with out Indra India will not be selfsufficent in Atomic, Missiles, Green revolution, Space research & even in IT field
 
. . .
Indira was 'Scorpio', may sting you, if you mess with them. Commitment and power… these two are the major keywords, which describe a Scorpio the best. When they love someone, they do it from the core of their heart and when they hate someone, they are extremely loyal to their hatred.
 
.
i seriously believe if we had one more leader like Indira Gandhi.. all our neighbors would have sat quietly...but we would have had to pay price for that with something as Pakistan now doing because of her mistake during soviet war.i would like to take example from china.. because whenever they had any objective they always took that to a logical end.. which we haven't been able to do because we lacked leaders with guts..
i am not telling here that we had to occupy Pakistan.. that was never our objective.. but as this article points out .. we could have taken *** .. that would have sent right signals to them... now they consider we cannot do anything .. so they export terrorism even though whole world know about it but still we are targeted... we simply do nothing..this is where our leaders guts can be questioned... and Pakistan always had leader who had guts... means mainly military which holds Pakistan's foreign policy for most part of it's life.

In short, we do things half-heartedly
 
.
No mention of US Seventh Fleet at all. I doubt if Soviets would give in to US pressure so easily.

Nonsense.

and the biggest joke is this (that too after what China did to India in 1962):-

Kissinger secretly met Chinese Permanent Representative at the UN to apprise him of the CIA operative's report and rub in that what India was planning to do with Pakistan with the Soviet backing could turn out to be a "dress rehearsal" of what they might do to China.
 
.
best example was hijack of plane... and advani in recent election started telling that he wasn't aware of the situation that time and all was done by jaswanth singh ..
i always thought if we had first prime minister subhash chandra bose or lal bahadhur shastri we would have been different country.(both were killed and we never how they were killing..i still don't understand how our great personalities like vikram sarabhai or subhash chandra bose or lal bahadhur shastri or homi jahangir bhaba got killed we still dono any thing about it). and we would have not seen family politics that is done like now..
 
Last edited:
.
No mention of US Seventh Fleet at all. I doubt if Soviets would give in to US pressure so easily.

Nonsense.

and the biggest joke is this (that too after what China did to India in 1962):-

Read the article carefully again.It mentions the US aircraft carrier and the accompanying flotilla.
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom