EDITOR'S NOTE
An interesting piece by Col NN Bhatia with above title was published by Mission Victory India on 21 May 24. Since the BJP has been widely publicising the merger of PoK with J&K for the current elections for parliament this timely article attracted wide reader's attention leading to several varied views, opinions and recommendations from knowledgeable veterans with rich military experience of service in J&K ,adjoining the PoK region. A few select responses published below will further enhance awareness and insight of readers.
Maps and Images for symbolic representation only .
Link of Col Bhatia' s article below will enable readers to connect with this subject -
COL RAJINDER KUSHWAHA
Why would you like to repeat 1947 folly ?
Do you think adding of POK would lead to peace in Kashmir ?
It is only empty stomachs that levitate people of POK towards India ?
Once hunger gets satisfied , religion would take over, and they would chant slogans of independence and joining Muslim majority Pakistan .
One must not forget that people of POK had opted for Pakistan in 1947.
Indian part of Kashmir, under the spell of Sheikh Abdulla, whatever his later rants , had opted for India. Recollect as to how Gilgit scouts had revolted against Maharaja Hari Singh .
It is with great difficulty. Now, after 75-76 years, you have been able to turn the tables in Kashmir Valley since August 2019. But there are still bad elements who harbor desires to join Pakistan . The addition of POK would multiply anti- India forces in due course of time.
India must learn from the experience of France, England, Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands, whose liberal policies of allowing Muslim refugees from the Middle East have created social and security problems.
It is said that whenever the Muslim population goes beyond 15% or so , it seeks implementation of Shariah laws . In such a scenario, democracy and Secularism cease to exist. Dreams of UCC would get shattered , which is a must for a real secular and Democratic state.
Division of J&K in 1947 was the best solution. In fact , strategically speaking, POK with Pakistan serves the best security interests of India . Keep the POK pot boiling like Pakistan has been hitherto doing about Kashmir valley . “NO WAR; NO PEACE” - type condition in POK and Balochistan serves Indian security interests the best . This is the essence of modern strategies of war .
Let me caution you that the addition of POK to Indian Union would not only upset your dream of becoming THIRD LARGEST ECONOMY but it will revive multifaceted social and security problems.
It will be good - riddance for Pakistan and a perpetual headache for India , nay a worst kind of brain tumour. Rhetoric to annex is good , as a threat -in - being but physical acquisition is best avoided.
MAJ GEN SURESH MAMGAIN
I would like to suggest the following:
Having closely interacted with a number of residents of POK , who have seen changes in the LOC now called LC and having been intermittent citizens of India and Pakistan, territory having changed hands - I have my doubts that the predominant Muslim population will have any faith in Modi's hindutva agenda to seek support for an uprising. We can continue to be a disruptive element but that would be all. Like you said the sabre rattling is a vote gathering emotive jumla , and Modi or any one else is unlikely to change the status and believe it just because Art 370 was abrogated.
COL TK TIKOO
You have brought out a few of the many difficulties likely to arise from this enterprise of translating political rhetoric into a military operation. There are many more which you have overlooked. This is because you brought in irrelevant political bombast because of your views on Modi; Modi's unfulfilled promises, etc. As if Modi has done no good work in ten years of his rule !
Incidentally, the ethnic composition of people living in PoK is quite different from ethnic Kashmiris living in Kashmir. Therefore, relatives wanting to meet each other across the LC is figment of ill-informed imagination. Also, Gilgit Baltistan is very much part of PoJK. It has not been given to China, though its showpiece of CPEC passes through it. It is only Shaksgam (5300 sq M) which was given to China in 1963 or actually was taken away by China without Pakistan's consent but was presented to it as a fait accompli.
LT GEN RAKESH SHARMA
“Since LoC is porous and many cross-over meeting relatives across, they are visibly and emotionally shocked and surprised seeing enormous progress made in J&K demanding merger with the mainstream brutally suppressed by Pakistani armed forces. We need to support their movement with discreet physical and emotional support for the merger and joining the mainstream of J&K that will act as catalyst for Aksai Chin to follow on.”
How do many cross over LOC to meet relatives? Is the LOC such porous? It means troops deployed on LOC are sleeping or conniving! That's not true!
Anyone crossing is deemed a terrorist!
Catalyst to POK to join us? Is the POK population keen to join India? They may be disenchanted with POK, but not to join us. As it is, most are not Kashmiris but rehabilitated Punjabis. Aksai Chin has no population. How will it follow suit?
BRIG SANJAY SANGWAN
POK has become part of the current new global big game by virtue of CPEC passing through it and all major global powers facing a macro churn. Pak is itself on a precarious edge but currently Chinese presence there is a major concern. However, China's economic and global position is declining at a fairly rapid pace because of its competition with USA and efforts at economic hegemony to become the strongest global power which has dented its acceptability especially after the pandemic. CPEC is also likely to fade away with IMEEEC becoming functional. India's position, economy and military on the other hand are becoming stronger with Africa and Middle East wanting to co-operate with India. It may take upto a decade for the global power play to stabilize,however, simultaneously a shift in power play to the Indian Ocean is also emerging. Relations in this era are likely to be issue based and most countries need good relations with India. India is already strong enough to block any Chinese misadventures though they are not likely as per China's state and priority.
Politically POK is part of India and it is a recorded commitment of the parliament to regain POK. However, there is no tearing hurry and India could support the movement in POK for merger with India and wait for the global turmoil to stabilize and then seek options. Military option is neither desired nor would it be necessary.
COL SHIVAJI RANJAN GHOSH
The comments on the issue of India liberating POK are largely more political than military. I think the purpose of this debate was to examine its feasibility and its desirability from the military point of view, leaving aside the political rhetoric.
The problem arises from the fact that we don’t seem to be having a clearly defined strategic directive from the government, and the military is generally kept out of deliberations when (and if) a doctrine is discussed. Deciding a military objective without consulting the main stakeholder is nothing short of disastrous. And of course, the million-dollar question is, will the military leadership have the moral courage to nix any proposals that may not be militarily sound? The honourable Chief Minister of UP may bravely announce that POK will be liberated within six months, but he probably is not aware of the difference between razing a house with a bulldozer and razing enemy defences with a tank! The basic difference, of course being that the house will not fight back, but the enemy defences will. And just as there is a difference between a bulldozer and a tank, so also is there a difference between bombast and bombardment, and between bravado and bravery.
Our national attitude of bullying a perceived weaker opponent is so clearly visible in the “liberation of POK” issue. If not, then why is there no talk of liberating the Aksai Chin? And what are our plans for those parts of POK that Pakistan has ceded to China. Are we going to leave those alone, or are we ready to awaken the sleeping dragon?
I have used the term “perceived” to define a weaker opponent. Somehow, we seem to have developed a perception that a war with Pakistan will be a cakewalk. Let us not fool ourselves. Leave the over-the-top nationalism to TV primetime anchors and their guests. They are not the ones who will be fighting a battle. Nor will it be the politicians, the bureaucrats, or their kin. Let us also not equate Pakistan’s failing economy with the ability or the motivation of their soldiers to fight. They come from the same stock as us, so let us give the devil his due. There can be nothing more dangerous than underestimating the enemy. The world thought that the Russia-Ukraine war would be over in a few days. So also the current conflict in Gaza.
One thing that scares me personally, and I may be wrong here, is the fact that any war in the near future is likely to be a testing ground for the sudden spate of “make in India” military hardware that is untested in battle and has been inducted in haste. Are we so confident of the capability of these weapons, ammunition and equipment that we can talk so glibly of pushing our troops into a battle that involves one, and maybe two well-equipped and formidable foes? Let me repeat what I has recently stated in a different post: “The late Gen Rawat's words haunt me still: “We should boost ‘Make in India’ by hand-holding our domestic industry even if they deliver weapons with only 70% of the GSQRs (general staff qualitative requirements) in the beginning…given the opportunity, they will eventually deliver cutting-edge technology,” I would certainly not like my boys to go into battle with a rifle that has a 30% chance of failing!”
Comments