What's new

SPIEGEL Interview with Pervez Musharraf

Please correct your history, Op Grand Slam failed because Gen Akhtar Hussain Malik was replaced with Yahya.

Otherwise, it is a noted and well known fact that Indian forces were in disarray and losing confidence. Your own soldiers have written about this and the other famous general Iftikhar Janjua and the Rann of Kutch affair.

Had Gen Malik been allowed to progress forward into Akhnoor, things would be much different.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-history/59694-maj-general-akhtar-malik-1965-debacle.html

...and who was the Boss in Pindi .. Ayub who promoted himself to Field Marshal for no accomplishment.
 
.
...and who was the Boss in Pindi .. Ayub who promoted himself to Field Marshal for no accomplishment.

It was on Ayubs orders that prompted Musa Khan to replace Malik with Yahya, so it was Ayub's fault.

Malik even asked to serve under Yahya but was sent packing.

The time spent on this allowed India to regroup and launch a surprising attack towards Lahore, thus ending any hope for capturing Kashmir. It was a brilliant move by the Indian to say the least.

Ayub was partying in Swat Valley with Bhutto who had stated that the war would not spill over onto other regions.

It was Gen Akhtar Hussain Maliks brother who then fought at Chawinda, saving Pakistan, his name is Abdul Ali Malik.

Such generals were later chased away from the army but that is a different story.
 
.
It was on Ayubs orders that made Musa Khan replace Malik with Yahya, so it was Ayub's fault.

Malik even asked to serve under Yahya but was sent packing.

The time spent on this allowed India to regroup and launch a surprising attack towards Lahore, thus ending any hope for capturing Kashmir. It was a brilliant move by the Indian to say the least.

Ayub was partying in Swat Valley with Bhutto who had stated that the war would not spill over onto other regions.

It was Gen Akhtar Hussain Maliks brother who then fought at Chawinda, saving Pakistan, his name is Abdul Ali Malik.

Such generals were later chased away from the army but that is a different story.

I agree with the part that there was some tactical mistakes. Things would be certainly different for moment if they were not there. Parhaps Pakistan might have captured Kashmir.

However, it is impossible that the ultimate goal of taking over Kashmir could be achieved. It is understandable that India would have launched massive counter-attacks in case Kashmir is captured by Pakistan. True, India would suffer more damage but it is highly unlikely India would not succeed considering numerical superiority and local conditions. So operation would prove harmful for India but it is no way benefecial for Pakistan.

In short the operation was not supposed to succeed.
 
.
It was on Ayubs orders that made Musa Khan replace Malik with Yahya, so it was Ayub's fault.

Malik even asked to serve under Yahya but was sent packing.

The time spent on this allowed India to regroup and launch a surprising attack towards Lahore, thus ending any hope for capturing Kashmir. It was a brilliant move by the Indian to say the least.

Ayub was partying in Swat Valley with Bhutto who had stated that the war would not spill over onto other regions.

It was Gen Akhtar Hussain Maliks brother who then fought at Chawinda, saving Pakistan, his name is Abdul Ali Malik.

Such generals were later chased away from the army but that is a different story.

Thats just the point TF.

In all military decisions contingency planning is the second step after any plan is made. If untenable the plan must be scrapped.How could a General not expect his counterpart not to exercise his options and not cater for them?

In all conflict they say plans do not survive the first contact with the enemy.

Mush did the same in 99. The advantage always lies with the attacker, even if he attacks second.
 
.
I agree with the part that there was some tactical mistakes. Things would be certainly different for moment if they were not there. Parhaps Pakistan might have captured Kashmir.

However, it is impossible that the ultimate goal of taking over Kashmir could be achieved. It is understandable that India would have launched massive counter-attacks in case Kashmir is captured by Pakistan. True, India would suffer more damage but it is highly unlikely India would not succeed considering numerical superiority and local conditions. So operation would prove harmful for India but it is no way benefecial for Pakistan.

You are correct in stating that if Kashmir was captured, the Indian army would have steamed ahead with full force to capture Pakistan territory and they did never forgot this adventure of ours. They knew our weakness lied in the weakly defended East Pakistan region where the people were very discontented with the rulers in West Pakistan.

As Gen Akhtar Hussain Malik wrote to this brother in a letter.

I have little doubt that the Indians will never forgive us the slight of 65 and will avenge it at the first opportunity. I am certain they will hit us in E. Pak [East Pakistan] and we will need all we have to save the situation.

Thats just the point TF.

In all military decisions contingency planning is the second step after any plan is made. If untenable the plan must be scrapped.How could a General not expect his counterpart not to exercise his options and not cater for them?

In all conflict they say plans do not survive the first contact with the enemy.

Mush did the same in 99. The advantage always lies with the attacker, even if he attacks second.

Operation Grand Slam was a series of plans that were implemented. Initially Operation Gibraltar failed as the PA soldiers infiltrating Kashmir were caught out as expected. Then the plan was to keep the Indian forces engaged in Kashmir through Op Grand Slam. It was successful until the afore mentioned change in command and the 48 hours that India got to reassemble and change their direction towards Lahore.
 
.
You are correct in stating that if Kashmir was captured, the Indian army would have steamed ahead with full force to capture Pakistan territory and they did never forgot this adventure of ours. They knew our weakness lied in the weakly defended East Pakistan region where the people were very discontented with the rulers in West Pakistan.

As Gen Akhtar Hussain Malik wrote to this brother in a letter.

Operation Grand Slam was a series of plans that were implemented. Initially Operation Gibraltar failed as the PA soldiers infiltrating Kashmir were caught out as expected. Then the plan was to keep the Indian forces engaged in Kashmir through Op Grand Slam. It was successful until the afore mentioned change in command and the 48 hours that India got to reassemble and change their direction towards Lahore.

Another tactical error based on wrong intel. The infiltrators were not welcomed with open arms as was expected. The op was doomed from the start.

Yet.. he was promoted FM.
 
.
Another tactical error based on wrong intel. The infiltrators were not welcomed with open arms as was expected. The op was doomed from the start.

Yet.. he was promoted FM.

Many were expecting the operation to fail as it was just not realistic. It wasn't a shock for many when the infiltrators were reported by the citizens themselves. However, truth be told, Kashmiri's very much wanted to join Pakistan in those days, we were doing very well as a nation. The west part only, east Pakistan was suffering from day one.

As for promotion to FM, he went on to become a PM and the rest is history. :undecided:
 
.
Many were expecting the operation to fail as it was just not realistic. It wasn't a shock for many when the infiltrators were reported by the citizens themselves. However, truth be told, Kashmiri's very much wanted to join Pakistan in those days, we were doing very well as a nation. The west part only, east Pakistan was suffering from day one.

As for promotion to FM, he went on to become a PM and the rest is history. :undecided:

Military plans are not to be based on emotion but cold facts.

Yes, Pak was doing well then. It had all the advantages which association with the west then could give to a developing nation. The 65 war told on the economy and an issue like the price of sugar saw off the FM.

BTW, its a pleasure to discuss with you.
 
.
Military plans are not to be based on emotion but cold facts.

Well the Martial race theory disintegrated into thin air but some still hold it dear for some odd reason. There were many meetings before the 1965 war and though the operations were very well thought out and planned, incorrect implementation and various circumstances hurt us negatively.

Yes, Pak was doing well then. It had all the advantages which association with the west then could give to a developing nation. The 65 war told on the economy and an issue like the price of sugar saw off the FM.

Absolutely correct, we enjoyed immense development and respect with our characteristics back then but we did not concentrate on future aspects that could be affected by our actions.

It was an unnecessary war that led to further problems for us.
 
.
I will let Karan take care of his part....For now let me try and show some flaws in your assesment....

The matter of China-India relations is a whole other subject and, despite initial misgivings, I am convinced that Pakistan has absolutely nothing to worry about. The China-India relationship will never achieve the kind of quality that permeates the China-Pakistan relationship.

And i never said that India-China relationship has anything to do with Pakistan...What i am trying to convey is that we(read india and china) are not selling out on our border dispute by improving relationship....Apart from minor bickerings here and there both the countires give enough respect to each other sensitivites and ignore things which can easily be consider very provocative...This is not sell out, right???

I don't think India is in the mood for friendship, but rather dada giri. Not saying Pakistan is innocent either, but I don't see friendship on the cards in the near future.
No offence but if you closely monitor events in the last decade there are many instances where you find GOI going out of the way for friendship..this is certainly not dada-giri. Anyways as said it doesn't look friendship is on the cards..

This is precisely why I am against legitimizing the status quo. It gives the win to India and turns the Kashmiri separatists into refugees. They have to leave their land and their possessions and flee to Pakistan. They can do that now anyway, what do they gain by such a 'solution'?
Then you have not understood the solution well....There is a reason border is soft and more autonomy is proposed for Kashmir...In other words Kashmiris who are not happy with either GOI or GOP can use these soft borders on their will(a sense of Azaadi) and with more autonomy there is no reason to feel like refugee....In short it do not give clear win to any body yet everyone can feel being a winner.

- GOI won because LOC has been converted to IB and bickering issue of Kashmir is resolved
- GOP won because even though LOC has been converted to IB yet it is soft/invisible and with greater autonomy to Kashmir GOI doesn't have direct control over it.
- Kashmiris won because all those who want to be part of current regime will find them alligned to same govt, those who are not happy will find greater sense of Azaadi because borders are invisible and they have larger say because of Autonomy provided to them


Now i can see this is not an ideal solution from any single party POV however one has to be realistic and understand that only peaceful solution would be when we cater to sensitivities of all parties....I don't mind if there is any other solution on board as long as it caters to all parties...If you are not happy with this one, do you have any suggestions???


Not ignoring. That is why I prefixed my comment with "As India opens up to the world". India cannot sustain itself long term purely on a domestic market. It has to enmesh itself into the global economy at some point. You feel it doesn't need to for decades. I don't know if it can, or want to, remain insulated for so long.
See, i said decades because a domestic driven economy cannot suddenly become a export oriented market...That's why we could sustain the recent recession...Obviously we cannot be totally insulated but were able to bear the shock because of domestic market. Anyways i even said if i take your argument on face value even then it will be of no/little problem. Just think why China who is an export economy was able to grow even when west was collapsing in recession???? Reason is pure and simple....China is a cost effective solution and more people will cater to cost effective solution especially during recession, no??? The biggest gaines in US during recession was companies like Walmart....

India is a democracy. Will the voting businessman in Gujarat or Kerala care about Kashmir if he loses a global business deal because the international client didn't want to alienate their (important) Pakistani customers? What is more important to him: Kashmir or his business?
Pakistan has fought 4 wars with India and three of them were purely for Kashmir. 71 war also had it roots in Kashmir because it's kashmir which has pitted us against each other....Even now when Pakistan is devastated with flood your foreign minister is busy talking about Kashmir in UN......The whole pakistan society is suffering from radical islam which again has its roots in Kashmir problem yet people of Pakistan are supporting Kashmir cause, no??? I hope i have answered your query...if not then please let me know....


They wouldn't do it out of love for Pakistan but for themselves. Right now, for many countries, the choice between India and Pakistan is a no-brainer. One is growing in power, while the other is mired in problems so they support the Indian position on Kashmir, just to stay on India's good side. There is no penalty for alienating Pakistan.
You cannot be more wrong on this...Let me show you how

- India started opening up her markets in 1991-92 era...Today is 2010(almost two decades) and Pakistan is still fighting WOT, suffering from terrorism and devastated with floods. Now don't you think we are atleast talking about couple of decades before Pakistan can become self-sufficient and become an alternative investment for west, no??? Are you fine for this issue to carry on for couple of more decades and hope that Pakistan will end up winner thus reject something proposed above which can end suffering right now???

- Let's say pakistan did become a strong economy but there is no way you can surpass India in any way. India is huge and so is the resources as compared to pak...We have twice more youths then your whole population, how on this earth you can surpass us and become our competitor??? In short India will still be a preferred destination for west. Yes they might not like to allineate Pak but will not allineate India either, in short status quo will not change and Kashmir will still be considered as internal issue...so now my friends what's the gain???


An economically powerful Pakistan would change all that. It would make countries think twice before supporting India blindly.All the more reason for Pakistan to develop its economy so the economic contrast doesn't become stark.

Explained above...Economically strong Pakistan is good for Pakistani's and i wish you best of luck. However it will not have any leverage on Kashmir issue...period.
 
.
You are correct in stating that if Kashmir was captured, the Indian army would have steamed ahead with full force to capture Pakistan territory and they did never forgot this adventure of ours. They knew our weakness lied in the weakly defended East Pakistan region where the people were very discontented with the rulers in West Pakistan.

I was trying to point out towards Kashmir only.
I was not referring to Pakistan mainland (undisputed as you call). If India tried to take over Pakistani land, it would meet the same fate as Pakistan would meet in Kashmir.

Anyways. I guess we are going a bit offtopic here.
 
.
Well the Martial race theory disintegrated into thin air but some still hold it dear for some odd reason. There were many meetings before the 1965 war and though the operations were very well thought out and planned, incorrect implementation and various circumstances hurt us negatively.

Absolutely correct, we enjoyed immense development and respect with our characteristics back then but we did not concentrate on future aspects that could be affected by our actions.

It was an unnecessary war that led to further problems for us.


.. and the next in 71 and the next in 99.

Another example of poor planning was the attack on Laungewala in Dec 71.

An audacious plan poor executed. Even a cadet at kakul would know the relevance of logistics & air cover. To send tanks into the wild blue yonder sans air cover & logistics was suicidal .

Same point - plans do not survive the 1st contact. the IAF played hell into the tanks some of which still stand where they were hit . Surely someone ought to have considered option to enemy ( IA) in this case.
 
.
First you say...
We need to, we must, counter that clout by becoming an economic powerhouse ourselves.
Then declare...
You are saying we should sell out Kashmir for economic gain. Ain't gonna happen!
You want to make 'economic gains' for Kashmir as well as sacrifice 'economic gains' for Kashmir? How do you propose to make these mutually exclusive acts possible.

A side note. India is where it is, in spite of Kashmir. Pakistan is where it is, because of Kashmir. I am beginning to understand why.
 
.
Please correct your history, Op Grand Slam failed because Gen Akhtar Hussain Malik was replaced with Yahya.

Otherwise, it is a noted and well known fact that Indian forces were in disarray and losing confidence. Your own soldiers have written about this and the other famous general Iftikhar Janjua and the Rann of Kutch affair.

Had Gen Malik been allowed to progress forward into Akhnoor, things would be much different.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/military-history/59694-maj-general-akhtar-malik-1965-debacle.html
If Gavrilo Princip hadn't shot dead Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria there wouldn't have been a WWI. Had there been no WWI there wouldn't have been a Treaty of Versailles. Had there been no treaty of Versailles, there wouldn't have been a rise of certain Hitler.

See where I'm going with this.
 
.
It works both ways, there are many who call for destruction or end of some western countries and Israel. If we were to go by such a method of punishment for such a small matter, there wont be anyone left because everyone harbors such thoughts for one country or another. The response should be calm and collective, to remove the problems that would allow for someone to come up to such a conclusion.


Israel is a state that has been created in Palestine thru brutality and military might... The European Jews migrated there with the help of the British... Last I checked we are not allies with Israel... We do not recognize that illegal state at all... Are you proposing that we should recognize Israel now?

America claims to be our ally... The map was one thing, even their media outlets like CNN have promoted nobodies like Syed Jamal ud Din's book called "Divide Pakistan to eliminate terrorism"... With friends like the US do we really need enemies? They have gone down to the level of killing our own soldiers now... that is if we disregard the civilian casualties that their drone attacks have caused... which we owe to Musharaf again!!!

No one is saying we should punish people for thought crimes... The maps published in the armed forces journal however are a proposal that are a clear threat to our country...


Though there have been discussions on whether the economic lift during his tenure was only possible because of aid and loans. No one can deny that foreign investments were an all time high, we were making advancements in many fields and economic indicators are testament to that. We were listed in Next 11 economies, major financial outlets opened their offices in Pakistan and the economic condition of Pakistan was profoundly positive. Perhaps you should browse the Economy & Development section of this website and look at the articles being posted in the years of Musharraf. You will notice how positive they are in their outlook and how we were actually being commended for something which has been a rarity.

Bhai Faz... nothing has changed in Pakistan under Musharaf... such achievements are nothing compared to what we are capable of achieving in reality... The only point where I would agree with you perhaps is that Musharaf may have been a little better than that other Zia ul Haq creation called Nawaz Sharif and the wife of our current President (you know what he is known as)...


As for our natural reserves in Reko Diq, Thar and other places. We lack the machinery and industry to utilize them and elevate our economy. We do not know how to extract gold from Reko Diq, we do not have the expertise on refining them and we do not have the companies who can market our products.


This is no excuse to sell them for a cheap price... How long are we going to keep hearing this same excuse... Can we not make machines now? Who makes such machines? Do those people who have this technology have access to some aliens? With all due respect this is very shallow... When Pakistan can build JF17 and Al Khalid, why cant we get some help from another country which does have this technology to extract Gold and make the best use of it? Selling off the nation's assets as if they are ones personal property... a dignified nation would hang the culprits upon finding out about this scandal...

You yourself acknowledge that Musharaf forgave the debts of his friends in the military... Why would you then support such a person?


The thing about implementing Islamic laws is that it would be irrelevant in a society like ours where knowledge of religion is very low and it is used as a political tool. You can implement Sharia overnight but it will not end corruption, tyranny or ill practices of our society. Things will continue on the same path because when the people are not the ones who bring about change, how can any law compel them to change their ways. When there is limited understanding of Islam and religious leaders who use religion as a means for gains for themselves and corrupt leaders. We would still suffer from same problems and more because our religious clergy is one major part of the mess we are in.

Similarly, the value of Islam will be negated if it is implemented because all our ills will then be associated with religion, as they are now by some people especially westerners.

Bro tell me this... Did our Master Muhammad not have problems when he implemented the rules of Islam... He even had Munafiqeen around him at one stage... Our Caliphs had problems that are unimaginable even today with two of the Rashideen, our very dear Usman and Ali RA assassinated!!! Were there not thefts, murders, social problems facing Muslims then? It was not a utopia for God's sake... Here in the west this very corruption goes to the top levels of governments... In the UK the MPs have used public money to buy things from Rubber Ducks to Book Shelves... Corruption in a society should not be given as a reason not to implement an economic solution to those problems... The west has progressed because they are true to their system i.e Capitalism/Secularism and Democracy... This is impossible for a highly conservative society such as ours!!!

Let me ask you then... If you disagree with the land reform and wealth distribution model that I touched on here... what would you propose instead?

Moreover you paint a totally negative and bleak picture of the situation... Bro you and I are very much part of Pakistani society... I have seen my parents all my life living an honest living doing the best for us... There is still good in us... infact if it had nt been for a corrupt system a lot of our people would automatically leave their wrong doings... As our economy improves, we will certainly find the best coming out in our people... Even here in the west we are noticing a small but visible increase in social problems and crime as their economies have taken a dip...

Another thing you should note is that Islam has multiple sects and many are found within Pakistan. There is no universal interpretation, what might be the correct interpretation for you may not be the same for a person from another sect. Zia's adapted Islamization was Wahabi friendly, Shia's protested heavily against it but could not stop the process from being implemented. As a result, sectarian violence grew and many sects ended up producing violent groups for harming each other.

The reason why we have sectarianism is because there has been little effort to reconcile these groups... If you look at certain details upon which these sects are based, you ll find that at the end of the day none of those issues have an impact on a societal level... If someone wants to pray in a certain way, there is no problem as long as he has reference for it in the Quran and Sunnah... but that is a personal thing... yes there are differences in personal matters in Fiqh which have nothing to do with the state... as for issues that have to do with governance, I dont see why someone would have objections to plans that deal with community issues based on Islam... A Shia uses public transport just like a Sunni does for example... If we have issues of different interpretation, we also have issues where there is no difference of opinion... why cant we start from there... For example there is no difference of opinion that we CANNOT be dealing in Riba!!!

Do you know that our religious leaders are closely allied with feudal lords and they twist religious scriptures to validate what the feudal lords get up to. We do not have the enlightened, modest and honest religious leaders to implement all this.

Faz bhai... We are as sick and tired of these religious leaders as we are of these feudal lords... I can understand though why you would show pessimism over this... I would rightly assume that you are linked to Pakistan's military considering you are a moderator here... I have this to say to you... Firstly... we dont need religious leaders... we need people who understand the model of economics/politics that the Islamic ideology offers to the world... and Secondly... such people are certainly around you... Go find one and feel free to have a verbal fist fight with him... that would be more enlightening than using this forum...


The problem is we play on another mans table and we have to play by their rules. If the Muslim world was strong and independent, we could have implemented these but as our economies are interlinked with western economies and they are our lifeline. We could not implement what would contradict the model that is set up. Our biggest export market is US, if we go against them or do not deal in their system, we are surely doomed.

I agree that we have to put a lot of thought into the alternative before implementing such a change... AA BAIL MUJHE MAAR would serve no one... Let us set up our own table then... at least let us start discussing about it


We are not a secular country, we have a much abused constitution which is contradictory and in effect negates the value of religion. We have certain aspects of Islamic laws, those too being torrid interpretations which have brought our people misery and Pakistan international shame.

We are in a mess because of half baked fusion of religion and democracy that is unworkable. We either set out to be as we were intended to be by our founding father or lest we conform to our messy state and continue to struggle.

Agreed to all of that... except one thing... With all due respect to Ali Jinnah... Our Quaid e Azam is our prophet Muhammad saw...

Bhai Faz I just had this idea... I m looking at this forum and wondering if you could setup a small Islamic section for discussions of Islamic topics... put some ground rules like no sectarian issues but only objective solution oriented discussion be allowed... Its upto you if you think such a section can be moderated... Considering this is a Pakistani forum such topics will arise from time to time??

InshaAllah the first step towards solving problems is thinking... The very fact that we as a nation are discussing about these issues makes me very pleased and hopeful...



As for 'Milbus', I am aware of it.[/QUOTE]

Is there truth in it then? Profit making by the Army that spreads quite deep instead of just a few Generals as you asserted in a previous post?
 
.
Back
Top Bottom