The military Role of "East Pakistan"-Bangladesh in 1965 against India

[Saiful Islam]

Actually, my Grandad was stationed in Pakistan during the 1965 war. East Bengal Regiment was awarded for their bravery in the '65 war.

 

[livingdead]

Yes, east Pakistan was defenseless in the 1965 war. But, east was not supposed to be a contested land between the two countries as it was Kashmir in the west.

However, people here were quite motivated and all the news of battle field victories in the west overjoyed them. Presence of large troops or not, people were ready to fight an Indian attack with whatever weapons they could take hold of. But, India itself was not that strong in 1965 to wage a two front war against Pakistan.

Moreover, it was always military-run Pakistan govt which started trouble and war against India and then against east Pakistan in 1971. Indian generals did not have any doctrine to invade east. They simply did not have the resources to mobilize in both west and east.

I believe, it is still true for India, today. This is the reason why India wants a friendly or anti-Pakistan Party in power in Dhaka.

We should not see 1965 in the light of 1971. The time, place and occasion all were so different in the two wars. People in the east were equally motivated here and the East Bengal Regiment troops in the west saved Lahore from being occupied by the IA troops by giving their lives while destroying Indian tanks.

in 65 India was attacked and had to mobilize troops to west. Attacking east would have given no benefit, simply because east pakistan was not considered a prized possession by either side. (cant be used as bargaining chip)
which is why, when attacked in kashmir we attacked punjab. That is what will have the maximum impact on psyche of pakistan punjabi dominated army.

71 was different, although officially pakistan was agreessor, the plan for war was going on in India for quite some time. And yes, 71 saw two front war, east pakistan was already weakened by muktis but they saw reverses in west pakistan too.

India is ill prepared for two front conventional war, but bangladesh is hardly of any significance, Its china and pakistan which we take into calculation now.

 

[eastwatch]

in 65 India was attacked and had to mobilize troops to west. Attacking east would have given no benefit, simply because east pakistan was not considered a prized possession by either side. (cant be used as bargaining chip)
which is why, when attacked in kashmir we attacked punjab. That is what will have the maximum impact on psyche of pakistan punjabi dominated army.

71 was different, although officially pakistan was agreessor, the plan for war was going on in India for quite some time. And yes, 71 saw two front war, east pakistan was already weakened by muktis but they saw reverses in west pakistan too.

India is ill prepared for two front conventional war, but Bangladesh is hardly of any significance, Its china and pakistan which we take into calculation now.

Bold Part: Yes, but you may not be completely right about BD. BD is neither a war monger country and nor its military generals. But, it is certainly good for India if the Dhaka govt is friendly to it. A two front war is certainly feared by Indian generals.

India is just no match against China however you guys try to portray your country's military muscle. China is not an aggressive country like Pakistan is, although PLA troops regularly enter Indian occupied territories for picnic. Usually, they love not to vacate those picnic spots.

While China alone is sufficient against India, Pakistan and BD together can be quite a match against Indian troops. If not yet today, a tomorrow is coming when BA can get strength with the country's stronger economic muscle. Even with a weak BD military, a joint BD-Pakistan front will not certainly be cherished by the IA generals.

But, why should I talk about a future possible war when the topic is about 1965 war?

 

[livingdead]

Bold Part: Yes, but you may not be completely right about BD. BD is neither a war monger country and nor its military generals. But, it is certainly good for India if the Dhaka govt is friendly to it. A two front war is certainly feared by Indian generals.

India is just no match against China however you guys try to portray your country's military muscle. China is not an aggressive country like Pakistan is, although PLA troops regularly enter Indian occupied territories for picnic. Usually, they love not to vacate those picnic spots.

While China alone is sufficient against India, Pakistan and BD together can be quite a match against Indian troops. If not yet today, a tomorrow is coming when BA can get strength with the country's stronger economic muscle. Even with a weak BD military, a joint BD-Pakistan front will not certainly be cherished by the IA generals.

But, why should I talk about a future possible war when the topic is about 1965 war?

well, you are the one who started it, I did not say future possible wars. But now, a joint bd-pakistan front is neither expected nor too much difficult to deal with than a fight with pakistan. Most of our forces are near to western border for a reason. even when a hostile bd govt was in power.

It might make you feel better by showing your country as important, and important it is but not from military, but from geostrategic point of view. Exactly the reason why we want lanka and maldives on our side.
India is no match for china in conventional weapons, the very reason to go nuclear is because we cant possibly do an arms race with a bigger country.(economy wise)
IA also has shown no agression against china, myanmar or bangladesh, it depends on history of the border and our response originates from that. When is the last time IA killed a bangladeshi or myanmar troop (if you are implying china is given a free ride)
It seems you are using usual bangladeshi argument of 'china great, India sh*t' to feel good. Its not necessary as I already agreed china is great.

 

[ExtraOdinary]

Bold Part: Yes, but you may not be completely right about BD. BD is neither a war monger country and nor its military generals. But, it is certainly good for India if the Dhaka govt is friendly to it. A two front war is certainly feared by Indian generals.

India is just no match against China however you guys try to portray your country's military muscle. China is not an aggressive country like Pakistan is, although PLA troops regularly enter Indian occupied territories for picnic. Usually, they love not to vacate those picnic spots.

While China alone is sufficient against India, Pakistan and BD together can be quite a match against Indian troops. If not yet today, a tomorrow is coming when BA can get strength with the country's stronger economic muscle. Even with a weak BD military, a joint BD-Pakistan front will not certainly be cherished by the IA generals.

But, why should I talk about a future possible war when the topic is about 1965 war?

Yup and the joint BD-Pak front will be met with a joint Indo-Myanmar-Afg front. Aah i love armchair generalling

 

[arp2041]

Yup and the joint BD-Pak front will be met with a joint Indo-Myanmar-Afg front. Aah i love armchair generalling

If you don't know than let me tell you BD is the NEXT Supapowa of this world!!!

 

[The_Sidewinder]

well, you are the one who started it, I did not say future possible wars. But now, a joint bd-pakistan front is neither expected nor too much difficult to deal with than a fight with pakistan. Most of our forces are near to western border for a reason. even when a hostile bd govt was in power.

It might make you feel better by showing your country as important, and important it is but not from military, but from geostrategic point of view. Exactly the reason why we want lanka and maldives on our side.
India is no match for china in conventional weapons, the very reason to go nuclear is because we cant possibly do an arms race with a bigger country.(economy wise)
IA also has shown no agression against china, myanmar or bangladesh, it depends on history of the border and our response originates from that. When is the last time IA killed a bangladeshi or myanmar troop (if you are implying china is given a free ride)
It seems you are using usual bangladeshi argument of 'china great, India sh*t' to feel good. Its not necessary as I already agreed china is great.

The main problem is that people other than Indians believe that Indian army is a coward force. The same army which soldiers didn't even retreat against overwhelmed Chineese forces in 1962. Most of our soldiers fought till the last bullet before being put to death against overwhelming enemy. We respect China, they are powerfull neighbour, with 2nd largest economy, advanced armed forces. But reasons for conflict are minimal. Even if a war breaks out between two countries, it wont gona last long. At the moment even if Pakistan and Bangladesh starts a two front war, IAF will prove again why air superiority and air dominance is most vital factor in modern warfare.

 

[eastwatch]

The main problem is that people other than Indians believe that Indian army is a coward force. The same army which soldiers didn't even retreat against overwhelmed Chineese forces in 1962. Most of our soldiers fought till the last bullet before being put to death against overwhelming enemy. We respect China, they are powerfull neighbour, with 2nd largest economy, advanced armed forces. But reasons for conflict are minimal. Even if a war breaks out between two countries, it wont gona last long. At the moment even if Pakistan and Bangladesh starts a two front war, IAF will prove again why air superiority and air dominance is most vital factor in modern warfare.

Bold Part: In a two front war Pakistan will dominate the western front and IAF in the east. However, a total victory requires a military to win in the land. It will not be easy for IA troops in the marshland east. IA cannot just commit an offensive huge number of troops to win a battle here on the ground. It will result in the advance of PA troops in the west of India. IA generals will certainly evade a two-front war.

 

[ExtraOdinary]

Bold Part: In a two front war Pakistan will dominate the western front and IAF in the east. However, a total victory requires a military to win in the land. It will not be easy for IA troops in the marshland east. IA cannot just commit an offensive huge number of troops to win a battle here on the ground. It will result in the advance of PA troops in the west of India. IA generals will certainly evade a two-front war.

In this hypothetical 2 front war, what makes you think IA troops will invade east in the first place? They just need to sit back and blockade your country from 3 sides, while the IN's eastern fleet does the job in the BoB. How many days do you reckon the BD military machine would last without oil supplies. And the IAF does'nt need to get involved, Mig-29's/Harriers of the Naval air-arm should suffice?

 

[Amolthebest]

1971 war goes in the history as one of the effortless war won by India.One of biggest war wins after second world war. Period. This war has given eternal edge to Indians on this forum too

 

[UKBengali]

In this hypothetical 2 front war, what makes you think IA troops will invade east in the first place? They just need to sit back and blockade your country from 3 sides, while the IN's eastern fleet does the job in the BoB. How many days do you reckon the BD military machine would last without oil supplies. And the IAF does'nt need to get involved, Mig-29's/Harriers of the Naval air-arm should suffice?

Supplies could easily be stockpiled so that BD could on for many weeks, even months as BD is pretty much self-sufficient in food grains now.

You are right that currently India does not even need to invade BD as it can just use it's Navy to blockade BD from the Bay of Bengal. If Myanmar does not help then BD will have lost without a single shot being fired.

BD military is way too weak currently to even think of a military confrontation with India. As an example, the air-wing from the aircraft-carrier vikramaditya will be much more powerful than the whole of the BD air-force.

 

[Android]

Yes, east Pakistan was defenseless in the 1965 war. But, east was not supposed to be a contested land between the two countries as it was Kashmir in the west.

1965 conflict didn't remained confined to just Kashmir dispute it turned into an All Out War with fighting taking place all across the International Border in Punjab, Sindh, Rajasthan and Gujarat not just confined to Kashmir capturing any territory belonging to enemy nation including east bengal was completely justified in this case

 

[livingdead]

1965 conflict didn't remained confined to just Kashmir dispute it turned into an All Out War with fighting taking place all across the International Border in Punjab, Sindh, Rajasthan and Gujarat not just confined to Kashmir capturing any territory belonging to enemy nation including east bengal was completely justified in this case

what is the point of attacking a piece of land that your enemy does not consider worth defending. We attacked in other places in west to release pressure from kashmir, and also to pakistanis, land in west pakistan was worth more.

 

[Inception-06]

Yup and the joint BD-Pak front will be met with a joint Indo-Myanmar-Afg front. Aah i love armchair generalling

You did forget China . . . . . . ...... 

1971 war goes in the history as one of the effortless war won by India.One of biggest war wins after second world war. Period. This war has given eternal edge to Indians on this forum too

with the held of the Bengals folk, but without any Mukti who knows how many indians soldiers would have been killed. . . . ...........

 

[eastwatch]

1971 war goes in the history as one of the effortless war won by India.One of biggest war wins after second world war. Period. This war has given eternal edge to Indians on this forum too

Yes, 1971 win was effortless for IA only because there were lacs of efforts and sacrifices from our side. Usually, Indians like to forget this factor. So, if India is so sure about its strength, it should wage and win another effortless war against Pakistan. I think, my comment is fair enough.