Free Essay

Kargil War

In: Business and Management

Submitted By network
Words 4137
Pages 17
The Kargil War (Hindi: करगिल युद्ध kārgil yuddh),(Urdu: کارگل جنگ kārgil jang), also known as the Kargil conflict,[note (I)] was an armed conflict between India and Pakistan that took place between May and July 1999 in the Kargil district of Kashmir and elsewhere along the Line of Control (LOC). The conflict is also referred to as Operation Vijay (Victory in Hindi) which was the name of the Indian operation to clear the Kargil sector.[12]

The cause of the war was the infiltration of Pakistani soldiers and Kashmiri militants into positions on the Indian side of the LOC,[13] which serves as the de facto border between the two states. During the initial stages of the war, Pakistan blamed the fighting entirely on independent Kashmiri insurgents, but documents left behind by casualties and later statements by Pakistan's Prime Minister and Chief of Army Staffshowed involvement of Pakistani paramilitary forces,[14][15][16] led by General Ashraf Rashid.[17] The Indian Army, later on supported by theIndian Air Force, recaptured a majority of the positions on the Indian side of the LOC infiltrated by the Pakistani troops and militants. With international diplomatic opposition, the Pakistani forces withdrew from the remaining Indian positions along the LOC.

The war is one of the most recent examples of high altitude warfare in mountainous terrain, which posed significant logistical problems for the combating sides. This was only the second direct ground war between any two countries after they had developed nuclear weapons; it is also the most recent. (India and Pakistan both test-detonated fission devices in May 1998, though the first Indian nuclear test was conducted in 1974.)

Location

Before the Partition of India in 1947, Kargil was part of the Baltistan district of Ladakh, a sparsely populated region with diverse linguistic, ethnic and religious groups, living in isolated valleys separated by some of the world's highest mountains. The First Kashmir War (1947–48) concluded with the LOC bisecting the Baltistan district, with the town and district of Kargil lying on the Indian side in theLadakh subdivision of the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir.[18] After Pakistan's defeat in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, the two nations signed the Simla Agreement promising not to engage in armed conflict with respect to that boundary.[19]

The town of Kargil is located 205 km (120 miles) from Srinagar,[20] facing the Northern Areas across the LOC. Like other areas in the Himalayas, Kargil has a temperate climate. Summers are cool with frigid nights, while winters are long and chilly with temperatures often dropping to −48 °C (−54 °F).[21]

An Indian national highway (NH 1D) connecting Srinagar to Leh cuts through Kargil. The area that witnessed the infiltration and fighting is a 160 km long stretch of ridges overlooking this only road linking Srinagar and Leh.[13] The military outposts on the ridges above the highway were generally around 5,000 metres (16,000 ft) high, with a few as high as 5,485 metres (18,000 ft).[22] Apart from the district capital, Kargil, the populated areas near the front line in the conflict included the Mushko Valley and the town of Drass, southwest of Kargil, as well as the Batalik sector and other areas, northeast of Kargil.

One of the reasons why Kargil was targeted was that the terrain surrounding it, lent itself to pre-emptive seizure of unoccupied military positions.[23] With tactically vital features and well-prepared defensive posts atop the peaks, a defender of the high ground would enjoy advantages akin to a fortress. Any attack to dislodge a defender from high ground in mountain warfare requires a far higher ratio of attackers to defenders,[24] and the difficulties would be exacerbated by the high altitude and freezing temperatures.[25]

Kargil is just 173 km (108 mi) from the Pakistani-controlled town of Skardu, which was capable of providing logistical and artillery support to Pakistani combatants.

Background

town of KargilAfter the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, there had been a long period with relatively few direct armed conflicts involving the military forces of the two neighbors - notwithstanding the efforts of both nations to control the Siachen Glacier by establishing military outposts on the surrounding mountains ridges and the resulting military skirmishes in the 1980s.[26] During the 1990s, however, escalating tensions and conflict due to separatist activities in Kashmir, some of which were supported by Pakistan[citation needed], as well as the conducting of nuclear tests by both countries in 1998, led to an increasingly belligerent atmosphere. In an attempt to defuse the situation, both countries signed the Lahore Declaration in February 1999, promising to provide a peaceful andbilateral solution to the Kashmir conflict.

During the winter of 1998 -1999, some elements of the Pakistani Armed Forces were covertly training and sending Pakistani troops and paramilitary forces, some allegedly in the guise of mujahideen, into territory on the Indian side of the LOC. The infiltration was code named "Operation Badr";[27] its aim was to sever the link between Kashmir and Ladakh, and cause Indian forces to withdraw from the Siachen Glacier, thus forcing India to negotiate a settlement of the broader Kashmir dispute. Pakistan also believed that any tension in the region would internationalise the Kashmir issue, helping it to secure a speedy resolution. Yet another goal may have been to boost the morale of the decade-long rebellion in Indian Administered Kashmir by taking a proactive role. Some writers have speculated that the operation's objective may also have been as a retaliation for India's Operation Meghdoot in 1984 that seized much of Siachen Glacier.[28]

According to India's then army chief Ved Prakash Malik, and many other scholars,[29][30] much of the background planning, including construction of logistical supply routes, had been undertaken much earlier. On several occasions during the 1980s and 1990s, the army had given Pakistani leaders (Zia ul Haq and Benazir Bhutto) similar proposals for infiltration into the Kargil region, but the plans had been shelved for fear of drawing the nations into all-out war.[31][32][33]

Some analysts believe that the blueprint of attack was reactivated soon after Pervez Musharraf was appointed chief of army staff in October 1998.[27][34] After the war, Nawaz Sharif, Prime Minister of Pakistan during the Kargil conflict, claimed that he was unaware of the plans, and that he first learned about the situation when he received an urgent phone call from Atal Bihari Vajpayee, his counterpart in India.[35] Sharif attributed the plan to Musharraf and "just two or three of his cronies",[36] a view shared by some Pakistani writers who have stated that only four generals, including Musharraf, knew of the plan.[31][37] Musharraf, however, asserted that Sharif had been briefed on the Kargil operation 15 days ahead of Vajpayee's journey to Lahore on February 20.[38]

Occupation by Pakistan

[pic]

[pic]

Infiltration and military build-up.

During the winter season, due to extreme cold in the snow-capped mountainous areas of Kashmir, it was a common practice for both the Indian and Pakistan Armies to abandon some forward posts on their respective sides of the LOC and to reduce patrolling of areas that may be avenues of infiltration. When weather conditions became less severe, forward posts would be reoccupied and patrolling resumed.

During February 1999, the Pakistan Army began to re-occupy the posts it had abandoned on its side of the LOC in the Kargil region, but also sent forces to occupy some posts on the Indian side of the LOC.[41] Troops from the elite Special Services Group as well as four to seven battalions[42][43] of the Northern Light Infantry (a paramilitary regiment not part of the regular Pakistani army at that time) covertly and overtly set up bases on the vantage points of the Indian-controlled region. According to some reports, these Pakistani forces were backed by Kashmiri guerrillas and Afghan mercenaries.[44]

Pakistani intrusions took place in the heights of the lower Mushkoh Valley, along the Marpo La ridgeline in Dras, in Kaksar near Kargil, in the Batalik sector east of the Indus River, on the heights above of the Chorbatla sector where the LOC turns North and in the Turtok sector south of the Siachen area.

India discovers infiltration and mobilizes

Initially, these incursions were not detected for a number of reasons: Indian patrols were not sent into some of the areas infiltrated by the Pakistani forces and heavy artillery fire by Pakistan in some areas provided cover for the infiltrators. But by the second week of May, the ambushing of an Indian patrol team led by Capt Saurabh Kalia,[45] who acted on a tip-off by a local shepherd in the Batalik sector, led to the exposure of the infiltration. Initially, with little knowledge of the nature or extent of the infiltration, the Indian troops in the area assumed that the infiltrators were jihadis and claimed that they would evict them within a few days. Subsequent discovery of infiltration elsewhere along the LOC, and the difference in tactics employed by the infiltrators, caused the Indian army to realize that the plan of attack was on a much bigger scale. The total area seized by the ingress is generally accepted to between 130 km² - 200 km²;[37][42][46]

The Government of India responded with Operation Vijay, a mobilisation of 200,000 Indian troops. However, because of the nature of the terrain, division and corps operations could not be mounted; subsequent fighting was conducted mostly at the regimental or battalion level. In effect, two divisions of the Indian Army,[47] numbering 20,000, plus several thousand from the Paramilitary forces of Indiaand the air force were deployed in the conflict zone. The total number of Indian soldiers that were involved in the military operation on the Kargil-Drass sector was thus close to 30,000. The number of infiltrators, including those providing logistical backup, has been put at approximately 5,000 at the height of the conflict.[13][37][44] This figure includes troops from Pakistan-administered Kashmir who provided additional artillery support.

The Indian Air Force launched Operation Safed Sagar in support of the mobilization of Indian land forces, but its effectiveness during the war was limited by the high altitude and weather conditions, which in turn limited bomb loads and the number of airstrips that could be used.

The Indian Navy also prepared to blockade the Pakistani ports (primarily Karachi port)[48] to cut off supply routes.[49] Later, the then-Prime Minister of Pakistan Nawaz Sharif disclosed that Pakistan was left with just six days of fuel to sustain itself if a full-fledged war had broken out.[13]

India attacks Pakistani positions

|[pic] |It has been suggested that Operation Vijay (1999) be merged into this article or section. (Discuss) Proposed since October |
| |2009. |

The terrain of Kashmir is mountainous and at high altitudes; even the best roads, such as National Highway 1D from Leh to Srinagar, are only two lanes. The rough terrain and narrow roads slowed traffic, and the high altitude, which affected the ability of aircraft to carry loads, made control of NH 1D (the actual stretch of the highway which was under Pakistani fire) a priority for India. From theirobservation posts, the Pakistani forces had a clear line-of-sight to lay down indirect artillery fire on NH 1D, inflicting heavy casualties on the Indians.[50] This was a serious problem for the Indian Army as the highway was its main logistical and supply route.[51] The Pakistani shelling of the arterial road posed the threat of Leh being cut off, though an alternative (and longer) road to Leh existed viaHimachal Pradesh.

The infiltrators, apart from being equipped with small arms and grenade launchers, were also armed with mortars, artillery and anti-aircraft guns. Many posts were also heavily mined, with India later stating to having recovered more than 8,000 anti-personnel mines according to an ICBL report.[52] Pakistan's reconnaissance was done through unmanned aerial vehicles and AN/TPQ-36 Firefinder radars supplied by the US.[53] The initial Indian attacks were aimed at controlling the hills overlooking NH 1D, with high priority being given to the stretches of the highway near the town of Kargil. The majority of posts along the Line of Control were adjacent to the highway, and therefore the recapture of nearly every infiltrated post increased both the territorial gains and the security of the highway. The protection of this route and the recapture of the forward posts were thus ongoing objectives throughout the war.

The Indian Army's first priority was to recapture peaks that were in the immediate vicinity of NH 1D. This resulted in Indian troops first targeting the Tiger Hill and Tololing complex in Dras, which dominated the Srinagar-Leh route.[54] This was soon followed by the Batalik-Turtok sub-sector which provided access to Siachen Glacier. Some of the peaks that were of vital strategic importance to the Pakistani defensive troops were Point 4590 and Point 5353. While 4590 was the nearest point that had a view of NH 1D, point 5353 was the highest feature in the Dras sector, allowing the Pakistani troops to observe NH 1D.[55] The recapture of Point 4590 by Indian troops on June 14 was significant, notwithstanding the fact that it resulted in the Indian Army suffering the most casualties in a single battle during the conflict.[56] Though most of the posts in the vicinity of the highway were cleared by mid-June, some parts of the highway near Drass witnessed sporadic shelling until the end of the war.

[pic]

[pic]

IAF MiG-21s were used extensively in the Kargil war.

Once India regained control of the hills overlooking NH 1D, the Indian Army turned to driving the invading force back across the Line of Control. The Battle of Tololing, among other assaults, slowly tilted the combat in India's favor. The Pakistani troops at Tololing were aided by Pakistani fighters from Kashmir. Some of the posts put up a stiff resistance, including Tiger Hill (Point 5140) that fell only later in the war. Indian troops found well-entrenched Pakistani soldiers at Tiger Hill, and both sides suffered heavy casualties. After a final assault on the peak in which 10 Pakistani soldiers and 5 Indian soldiers were killed, Tiger Hill finally fell. A few of the assaults occurred atop hitherto unheard of peaks – most of them unnamed with only Point numbers to differentiate them – which witnessed fierce hand to hand combat.

As the operation was fully underway, about 250 artillery guns were brought in to clear the infiltrators in the posts that were in the line-of-sight. The Bofors FH-77B field howitzer played a vital role, with Indian gunners making maximum use of the terrain that assisted such an attack. However, its success was limited elsewhere due to the lack of space and depth to deploy the Bofors gun.

It was in this type of terrain that aerial attacks were used with limited effectiveness. French made Mirage 2000H of the IAF were tasked to drop laser-guided bombs to destroy well-entrenched positions of the Pakistani forces.[13] However, The IAF lost a MiG-27 strike aircraft which it attributed to an engine failure as well as a MiG-21 fighter which was shot down by Pakistan; initially Pakistan said it shot down both jets after they crossed into its territory.[57] One Mi-8helicopter was also lost, due to Stinger SAMs.

[pic]

[pic]

During the Kargil conflict IAF Mirage 2000Hs carried out strike missions.

On May 27, 1999, Flt. Lt. Nachiketa developed engine trouble in the Batalik sector and bailed out of his craft. Sqn Ldr Ajay Ahuja went out of his way to locate his comrade but was shot down by a shoulder-fired Stinger missile. According to reports, he had bailed out of his stricken plane safely but was apparently killed by his captors as his body was returned riddled with bullet wounds.[13]

In many vital points, neither artillery nor air power could dislodge the outposts manned by the Pakistani soldiers, who were out of visible range. The Indian Army mounted some direct frontal ground assaults which were slow and took a heavy toll given the steep ascent that had to be made on peaks as high as 18,000 feet (5,500 m). Since any daylight attack would be suicidal, all the advances had to be made under the cover of darkness, escalating the risk of freezing. Accounting for the wind chill factor, the temperatures were often as low as −15 °C to −11 °C (12 °F to 5 °F) near the mountain tops. Based onmilitary tactics, much of the costly frontal assaults by the Indians could have been avoided if the Indian Military had chosen to blockade the supply route of the opposing force, virtually creating a siege. Such a move would have involved the Indian troops crossing the LoC as well as initiating aerial attacks on Pakistan soil, a manoeuvre India was not willing to exercise fearing an expansion of the theatre of war and reducing international support for its cause.

Two months into the conflict, Indian troops had slowly retaken most of the ridges that were encroached by the infiltrators;[58][59] according to official count, an estimated 75%–80% of the intruded area and nearly all high ground was back under Indian control.[27]

Withdrawal and final battles

Following the outbreak of armed fighting, Pakistan sought American help in de-escalating the conflict. Bruce Riedel, aide to then President Bill Clinton reported that the US intelligence had imaged Pakistani movements of nuclear weapons to forward deployments for fear of the Kargil hostilities escalating into a wider conflict between the two countries. However, President Clinton refused to intervene until Pakistan had removed all forces from the Indian side of the Line of Control.[60] Following the Washington accord on July 4, where Sharif agreed to withdraw Pakistani troops, most of the fighting came to a gradual halt, but some Pakistani forces remained in positions on the Indian side of the LOC. In addition, the United Jihad Council (an umbrella for extremist groups) rejected Pakistan's plan for a climb-down, instead deciding to fight on.[61]

The Indian army launched its final attacks in the last week of July; as soon as the Drass subsector had been cleared of Pakistani forces, the fighting ceased on July 26. The day has since been marked as Kargil Vijay Diwas (Kargil Victory Day) in India. By the end of the war, India had resumed control of all territory south and east of the Line of Control, as was established in July 1972 as per the Simla Agreement.

World opinion

Pakistan was criticised by other countries for instigating the war, as its paramilitary forces and insurgents crossed the Line of Control.[62] Pakistan's primary diplomatic response, one of plausible deniability linking the incursion to what it officially termed as "Kashmiri freedom fighters", was in the end not successful.[63] Veteran analysts argued that the battle was fought at heights where only seasoned troops could survive, so poorly equipped "freedom fighters" would neither have the ability nor the wherewithal to seize land and defend it. Moreover, while the army had initially denied the involvement of its troops in the intrusion, two soldiers were awarded the Nishan-E-Haider (Pakistan's highest military honour). Another 90 soldiers were also given gallantry awards, most of themposthumously, confirming Pakistan's role in the episode. India also released taped phone conversations between the Army Chief and a senior Pakistani general where the latter is recorded saying: "the scruff of [the militants] necks is in our hands,"[64] although Pakistan dismissed it as a "total fabrication". Concurrently, Pakistan made several contradicting statements, confirming its role in Kargil, when it defended the incursions saying that the LOC itself was disputed.[65] Pakistan also attempted to internationalize the Kashmir issue, by linking the crisis in Kargil to the larger Kashmir conflictbut, such a diplomatic stance found few backers on the world stage.[66]

As the Indian counter-attacks picked up momentum, Pakistani prime minister Nawaz Sharif flew to meet U.S. President Bill Clinton on July 4 to obtain support from the United States. Clinton rebuked Sharif, however, and asked him to use his contacts to rein in the militants and withdraw Pakistani soldiers from Indian territory. Clinton would later reveal in his autobiography that "Sharif's moves were perplexing" since the Indian Prime Minister had travelled to Lahore to promote bilateral talks aimed at resolving the Kashmir problem and "by crossing the Line of Control, Pakistan had wrecked the [bilateral] talks."[67] On the other hand, he applauded Indian restraint for not crossing the LoC and escalating the conflict into an all-out war.[68]

G8 nations supported India and condemned the Pakistani violation of the LOC at the Cologne summit. The European Union also opposed Pakistan's violation of the LOC.[69] China, a long-time ally of Pakistan, insisted on a pullout of forces to the pre-conflict positions along the LoC and settling border issues peacefully. Other organizations like the ASEAN Regional Forum too supported India's stand on the inviolability of the LOC.[66]

Faced with growing international pressure, Sharif managed to pull back the remaining soldiers from Indian territory. The joint statement issued by Clinton and Sharif conveyed the need to respect the Line of Control and resume bilateral talks as the best forum to resolve all disputes.[70][71]

WMDs and the nuclear factor

Since Pakistan and India each had weapons of mass destruction, many in the international community were concerned that if the Kargil conflict intensified, it could lead to nuclear war. Both countries had tested their nuclear capability in 1998 (India conducted its first test in 1974 while it was Pakistan's first-ever nuclear test). Many pundits believed the tests to be an indication of the escalating stakes in the scenario in South Asia. When the Kargil conflict started just a year after the nuclear tests, many nations desired to end it before it intensified.

International concerns increased when Pakistani foreign secretary Shamshad Ahmad made a statement on May 31 warning that an escalation of the limited conflict could lead Pakistan to use "any weapon" in its arsenal.[82] This was immediately interpreted as a threat of nuclear retaliation by Pakistan in the event of an extended war, and the belief was reinforced when the leader of Pakistan's senate noted, "The purpose of developing weapons becomes meaningless if they are not used when they are needed."[83] Many such ambiguous statements from officials of both countries were viewed as warnings of an impending nuclear crisis where the combatants would consider use of their limited nuclear arsenals in 'tactical' nuclear warfare in the belief that it would not have ended in mutual assured destruction, as could have occurred in a nuclear conflict between the United States and the USSR. Some experts believe that following nuclear tests in 1998, the Pakistani military was emboldened by its nuclear deterrent to markedly increase coercion against India.[84]

The nature of the India-Pakistan conflict took a more sinister turn when the U.S. received intelligence that Pakistani nuclear warheads were being moved towards the border. Bill Clinton tried to dissuade Pakistan prime minister Nawaz Sharif from nuclear brinkmanship, even threatening Pakistan of dire consequences. According to a White House official, Sharif seemed to be genuinely surprised by this supposed missile movement and responded that India was probably planning the same. In an article in May 2000 Dr Sanjay Badri-Maharaj claimed that India too had readied at least five nuclear-tippedballistic missiles, but could not back up this claim with any official proof.[85]

Sensing a deteriorating military scenario, diplomatic isolation, and the risks of a larger conventional and nuclear war, Sharif ordered the Pakistani army to vacate the Kargil heights. He later claimed in his official biography that General Pervez Musharraf had moved nuclear warheads without informing him.[86] Recently however, Pervez Musharraf revealed in his memoirs that Pakistan's nuclear delivery system was not operational during the Kargil war;[42] something that would have put Pakistan under serious disadvantage if the conflict went nuclear.

The threat of WMD included chemical and even biological weapons. Pakistan accused India of using chemical weapons and incendiary weapons such as napalm against the Kashmiri fighters. India, on the other hand, showcased a cache of gas masks as proof that Pakistan may have been prepared to use non-conventional weapons. US official and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons determined that Pakistani allegations of India using banned chemicals in its bombs were unfounded.[87][dead link]

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Two Voices

...Two voices Kashmir can join Hands with Pakistan or It can choose To be independent Kashmir is one of the most disputed issue of the world since the partition of the Subcontinent. At the time of partition, Kashmir was under the control of Hindu Dogra and for this reason this area was considered as a princely state. According to partition act of law that all princely states would be given full opportunity to join any country or be independent. So it makes sense that Kashmir can still join hands with Pakistan or choose to be independent. Kashmir can join Pakistan, the reason why Kashmir should is that this would be beneficial for both the countries. First the advantages Kashmir would get are industrial revolution, freedom to follow any religion, and defense system. Kashmir has no industries at all so it would be beneficial to the people of Kashmir to get jobs and alleviate their poverty. Pakistan is an Islamic state but it has freedom to follow any culture, religion, or any ideology so it would enable Kashmiri people to practice any religion. Kashmir has no defense system so joining hands with Pakistan (Seventh Atomic Nation) can provide it defense. The advantages Pakistan would get when Kashmir is in its premises are rivers, Siachen Glacier, tourism, and agriculture. Rivers are the most important of all, Pakistan needs water to fertile its lands to escalate its agriculture and this would surge the building of dams. Siachen Glacial is Pakistani military based area......

Words: 484 - Pages: 2

Free Essay

A Descriptive Title

...Committee: United Nations General Assembly Topic: Kashmir- Is it a symbol of failure of United Nations Machinery Country: Germany Delegate: Ruchi Gupta Since the partition of British India into India and Pakistan in 1947, the Kashmir conflict between them has become intractable. India first referred the case of Pakistani aggression in Kashmir to the United Nations Security Council under Article 35 of the UN Charter on January 1, 1948. This move was directed towards protecting India’s territorial integrity. United Nations was involved in mediating the Kashmir conflict from 1948 through 1965. Later, at the end of the Third Pakistan- India war of 1971, Pakistan and India signed the Simla Agreement in 1972 which emphasized the adoption of a bilateral framework to solve the crisis. UNSC resolution 47 of 1948 recommended Pakistan to withdraw all its tribesmen and Pakistani nationals. It also recommended Indian forces to be reduced to minimum strengths to maintain law and order so as to later hold a UN supervised plebiscite in the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir to determine the aspirations of her people. But Pakistan never vacated and later India also backed out. As a result the referendum never went through and UN declaration could not be implemented. Germany agrees that the Kashmir issue should be undertaken bilaterally as “one spark” could be disastrous for the entire region. Germany has always supported negotiated settlement of the Kashmir issue between Pakistan and...

Words: 313 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Kashmir Issue at Un

...Committee: United Nations General Assembly Topic: Kashmir- Is it a symbol of failure of United Nations Machinery Country: Germany Delegate: Ruchi Gupta Since the partition of British India into India and Pakistan in 1947, the Kashmir conflict between them has become intractable. India first referred the case of Pakistani aggression in Kashmir to the United Nations Security Council under Article 35 of the UN Charter on January 1, 1948. This move was directed towards protecting India’s territorial integrity. United Nations was involved in mediating the Kashmir conflict from 1948 through 1965. Later, at the end of the Third Pakistan- India war of 1971, Pakistan and India signed the Simla Agreement in 1972 which emphasized the adoption of a bilateral framework to solve the crisis. UNSC resolution 47 of 1948 recommended Pakistan to withdraw all its tribesmen and Pakistani nationals. It also recommended Indian forces to be reduced to minimum strengths to maintain law and order so as to later hold a UN supervised plebiscite in the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir to determine the aspirations of her people. But Pakistan never vacated and later India also backed out. As a result the referendum never went through and UN declaration could not be implemented. Germany agrees that the Kashmir issue should be undertaken bilaterally as “one spark” could be disastrous for the entire region. Germany has always supported negotiated settlement of the Kashmir issue between Pakistan and...

Words: 651 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

Silvia

...from the Indian subcontinent, divides it into secular (but mainly Hindu) India and Muslim Pakistan on August 15 and 14 respectively. The partition causes one of the largest human migrations ever seen, and sparks riots and violence across the region. 1947/48 - The first Indo-Pak war over Kashmir is fought, after armed tribesmen (lashkars) from Pakistan's North West Frontier Province (now called Khyber-Pakthunkhwa) invade the disputed territory in October 1947. The Maharaja, faced with an internal revolt as well an external invasion, requests the assistance of the Indian armed forces, in return for acceding to India. He hands over control of his defence, communications and foreign affairs to the Indian government. Both sides agree that the instrument of accession signed by Maharaja Hari Singh be ratified by a referendum, to be held after hostilities have ceased. Historians on either side of the dispute remain undecided as to whether the Maharaja signed the document after Indian troops had entered Kashmir (i.e. under duress) or if he did so under no direct military pressure. Fighting continues through the second half of 1948, with the regular Pakistani army called upon to protect Pakistan's borders. The war officially ends on January 1, 1949, when the United Nations arranges a ceasefire, with an established ceasefire line, a UN peacekeeping force and a recommendation that the referendum on the accession of Kashmir to India be held as agreed earlier. That referendum has yet......

Words: 2494 - Pages: 10

Premium Essay

The Kashmir Issue: Some Options Towards Solution

...The Kashmir Issue: Some options towards solution By Dr. Misbah Islam As we all know the Kashmir issue has been has been a perennial problem ever since the birth of Pakistan. Kashmir is one of the two most intractable problems that have stymied the world for so long resulting in horrendous loss of life and negative impact on the development of the belligerants. Nature of the Problem: The origins of the Kashmir issue lie in the illegal instrument of accession to India signed on October 26, 1947 by Raja Hari Singh that violated the rights and hopes of 77% Muslim population of Kashmiris to join Pakistan. It has resulted in or associated with at least four major wars: 1948, 1965, 1971 and 1999. Besides loss of liberty for 10 million people it has entailed loss of lives (more than 102,000), in the form of executions, bombardment and disappearances, horrendous tortures, injuries, crimes against women, destruction of property, businesses and the list goes on [Ref 1]. No value can ever be assigned to the psychological losses. So far India has refused visits by Amnesty International to investigate and report impartially. We have also to take into account other costs. The purpose of this exercise is to highlight the seriousness of the issue and to prove Pakistan’s commitment to the cause. The Kashmir issue has involved direct expenditure in terms of resources: military, diplomatic, journalistic and so on. Resources, that could have been better spent for mitigating and......

Words: 4182 - Pages: 17

Premium Essay

Kashmir

...Where Does Kashmir Belong? Avneel M, Gurleen D, Harshdeep P, Tajbir D WHAT IS KASHMIR? * Kashmir is a Himalayan region that borders India, Pakistan and China * India's side of Kashmir includes Jammu, Kashmir Valley, and Ladakh * Pakistan side of Kashmir includes the areas known as Azad (Free) Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan * The territory under dispute lies in India's Kashmir Valley, separated from Pakistan by the 450-mile Line of Control (border line) * Indian Kashmir is mostly Muslim; Jammu is Hindu * 65% of Kashmir is located in India while the other 35% is in Pakistan WHAT IS KASHMIR? * Kashmir is a Himalayan region that borders India, Pakistan and China * India's side of Kashmir includes Jammu, Kashmir Valley, and Ladakh * Pakistan side of Kashmir includes the areas known as Azad (Free) Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan * The territory under dispute lies in India's Kashmir Valley, separated from Pakistan by the 450-mile Line of Control (border line) * Indian Kashmir is mostly Muslim; Jammu is Hindu * 65% of Kashmir is located in India while the other 35% is in Pakistan HOW IT STARTED * India's Muslim leaders demanded a Muslim homeland as a condition for independence in 1947 * The British surrendered their hold on the Indian subcontinent, giving way to a predominantly Hindu India and a Muslim Pakistan * Kashmir was free to accede to either nation * Maharaja Hari Singh, the ruler of the kingdom, initially......

Words: 764 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

Wars – Destructive for Humanity

...War is, without argument the worst collective experience of humanity. It has created new nations on the rubbles of destroyed cities and humans dead. It involves mass killing without humane feelings even if short and swift. Our recent experience with Kargil, which was not even not even a full-fledged war, reopened the sordidness of military action. Wars, when prolonged like the World Wars, result in human brutality, mass extermination of races and intolerable atrocities on innocent civilians. All rules are kept on the backburner and what matters is victory or defeat. The 21st Century has seen the development of weapons, controlled by computerized systems, with pin-point accuracy and a million-fold increase in powers of destruction compared to our previous wars. Weapons and tactics have undergone total transformation in the last millennium but no deterrent has managed to quell human conflict. It may look totally different has managed to quell human conflict. It may look totally different for the war-mongers but no the common man it gives the same results – death and destruction. The totally of wars since 1945 right from Nagasaki and Hiroshima to iraq and Afganistan continue to grow without respite. The irony of the new millennium is that improvement in technology and scientific advancement have given us more options, leaving us with our major drawback, our primitive human failing – the fear of the other. The core reasons for fighting wars are about proving......

Words: 991 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Case Study Surecut

...| The Role of Media in War | | | “Journalists will say that war is too important to be left to generals. Reporting of war is too important to be left to reporters. Soldiers need to get involved in this.” | -Maj Gen Patrick Brady - 1990 | (former Public Relations Chief of US Army) | The revolution in information technology, from the transistor through widespread digitisation, deeply networked communications, as well as, the revolutionary changes in the employment of airpower have profoundly influenced analysts and planners and has completely changed the conduct of war.The Gulf War afforded the world its first glimpse of the future of warfare. Millions around the globe were treated to precision-guided bombs annihilating targets in downtown Baghdad, learned of satellite uplinks from the battlefield that provided real-time connectivity, and applauded the ability of Stealth aircraft to ensure aerial dominance. Everyone seemed to understand that something was different about this “Video-game war”. There was much more to the spectacle than the one provided by previous wars. How much of it was real and how much rigged, are discussed below. More recently India’s use — or rather abuse — of the media to dupe its own people during the Kargil Crisis is a case in point. The important thing to note is that the revolutions in the field of information technology have caused the media to have a much greater impact on operations. Thus it is imperative to take a closer look at the......

Words: 2238 - Pages: 9

Premium Essay

Sdfsdfhnikjvnfhfjffcv

...candidate has to pass theory and practical separately. Total passing percentage (aggregate) to obtain the degree shall be 36%. 6. In the part I and II, there shall be two theory papers and one practical. Maximum marks shall be 35/50 for B.A. and B.Sc. respectively. For practical, it shall be 30/50 marks for BA and B.Sc. respectively. 7. In Part III there shall be three theory papers and one practical maximum marks shall be 35/50 for B.A. and B.Sc. respectively. For Practical, its shall be 45/75 marks for B.A. and B.Sc. respectively. PAGE 2 DR. BHIM RAO AMBEDKAR UNIVERSITY, AGRA . B.A. (MILITARY STUDIES) COURSE STRUCTURE FIRST YEAR PAPER – 101 : Art of war in India (upto 1947) PAPER – 102 : Evolution of Armament and Western Art of Warfare PAPER – 103 : Practical- Map Reading SECOND YEAR PAPER – 201 : Art of war in India (after 1947) PAPER – 202 : National Security PAPER – 203 : Practical - TEWT THIRD YEAR PAPER – 301 : Evolution of Strategic Thought PAPER – 302 :...

Words: 2442 - Pages: 10

Free Essay

A Future to Imagine

...to cope with life’s tragedies? Religion in some ways gives us the answers to the ‘why ‘questions for instance, like death. First of all I do understand what message he was trying to spread. I feel that message he was trying to send to us, was for us to imagine a place where things like religion and countries for instance did not exist. He felt this would make a better place for all of us to live in peace.”Imagine all the people Living life in people” (Lennon, “Imagine”) I can relate with this statement. I remember when this song came out in the early 70’s. Times were tough during those years; the Vietnam War was still going on so there probably was a bit of a political message being sent as well. Either way I think the true message he was to trying to bring was for the world to come together as one. This to me is a great message, but I don’t think realistically the wars would stop because there was no religion. We have far too many issues in the world to think that having with no religion and living as one country would solve all of our problems....

Words: 837 - Pages: 4

Free Essay

War and Capitalism Violation of Humans Rights

...War and Capitalism violation of Human Rights Capitalism is a form of government that promotes globalization, in it thoughts is Support the Military Industrial Complex, this term is related with government, Economy, army and war; most of the people think that this ideal develop peace And make all the countries that are in way of development or just not develop Better, but no, none of the thing is how they tell, sell or advertise. There are so Many Cases that shows all the madness and contradictory purposes that Powerful Countries are doing just for their country profit and government Interest. One example of the advantage that some countries take in military army is the Human shield, in most of the cases they use child to carry out target purposes, They use civilians to avoid combats attacks; this is a clear representation of Violation of human rights, this technique was start to be used in the II world War, but nowadays is also used in some conflicts like in Afghanistan, Israel- Palestinian, Iran, Syrian, Libyan and other countries on war, they use children as A shield, these children are considering soldier children. There are a lot of Civilians dyeing in this conflicts because of the arms and weapons that the Military industrial complex provides, and this king of deal between countries is Costing human lives and most of them are children. Another issue related to this topic, is the ideal of......

Words: 365 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

101 Competition

...“Competition is now a war of movement on which success depends on anticipation of market trends and quick response to changing customer needs....Therefore, the essence of strategy is not the structure of companies products and markets but the dynamics of it's behavior.” (Stalk, Evans and Schulman 1992, Harvard Business Review.) Explain this statement, using a company of your choice, in terms of what the above authors termed 'capability based competition', Use the 'capability based competition' concept to identify how the company of your choice can either maintain and grow their successfulness or become successful in the long term. The market place is an ever changing place. Companies have to be quick on their feet and innovative to maintain and keep up with the shifting market trends. They must be able to cater for customer needs, foresee and predict upcoming changes in customer wants and do all this in the long run rather than the short term. This is why it is important to put emphasis on the companies manners and conduct rather than the make-up of companies products and services. In essence that is what Stalk, Evans and Schulman are trying to convey when they say “Competition is now a war of movement on which success depends on anticipation of market trends and quick response to changing customer trends....Therefore, the essence of strategy is not the structure of companies products and markets but the dynamics of its behavior.” The distinctive competence of a firm......

Words: 291 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Video Games and Youth Violence

...Video games, amongst other forms of media, are being blamed for the violent actions of children and adolescence. “Movies and television entertain with realistic and bloody dramatizations of murders, beatings and tortures. Warlike video games have become a popular part of culture, and children routinely watch cartoons that depict violent events” (Earles, Alexander, & Johnson, 2002). The controversy and debate argues whether or not this claim is true. One side of the claim states that video games are genera lly harmless, a popular form of entertainment enjoyed by individuals of varied ages and origi ns. Regardless the popularity or the nature of the game, the individuals playing the game should understand that it is a fictitious scenario and should be treated as such. In addition, cens orship ratings have helped identify the appropriate audience for each individual game but as is the case with cigarettes and alcohol, it is not always adhered. Opposition claims state the cruel and bloody dramatizations have instilled images that have affected the minds of children. These effects have influence children to act violently often reenacting scenes and scenarios from certain video games. In addition, supplemental claims state that the lack of parental supervision and presence adds to the extremity of the violent acts. In terms of research analysis, quantitative statistics claims, “Youth violence results in considerable physical, emotional, social,......

Words: 424 - Pages: 2

Free Essay

How War Is Presented Between Empire of Youth and Testament of the Sun

...“Compare how Vera Brittain and JG Ballad present the theme of ‘WAR’ in Testament of youth and Empire of the Sun” Both the novel and the memoir are set during a war that disrupts the main characters life in a way that allows the reader to experience the raw brutality of war, whether that is physical or emotional. Testament of Youth (ToY) is set in WWI and Empire of the Sun (EotS) in WWII, the 27 year gap between the wars meant there were technological differences such as communication, aircraft and weapon advances. These factors highlight that the later war would have been more sophisticated in both ground and air defence/fighting techniques. This could possibly be why both characters envision the war differently, although there are other factors such as gender, geographical location and political positioning to consider. Ballad writes in a 3rd person emotionally detached manner whereas Brittain’s first person perspective allows us to empathise with her situation. The extracts I will be using to explore the way in which war affects the thoughts and feelings of each protagonist are page 30-33 from EotS where on the eve of pearl harbour Jim investigates Hungjao aerodrome and comes across an old fighter plane. This is when we see his fascination with warfare technology. I will compare it to pages 67-72, chapter 8, in ToY when Vera sees her future fiancé, Roland, receive his awards on speech day at her brothers school and both Roland and her brother are appropriately attired in...

Words: 1730 - Pages: 7

Free Essay

Child Soldiers

...I. Introduction: a. Opening Device- There are a few words that just don’t belong together such as Child Soldiers. Every child has the right to live a normal life, grow up an experience the things kids are supposed to, like, going to school, playing kick ball outside, enjoying the company of friends and developing in a normal way both physically and mentally. However, not all children get to have this simple luxury that many take for granted. Child Soldiers are a fast growing problem in third world countries and need to be stopped. It’s horrible to think that a child’s life can be devastated and ripped apart by a war that they had no part in starting, but they are forced to fight in combat anyway, causing life long lasting psychological and physical damage. b. Thesis: Worldwide, tens of thousands of children ranging from the young age 6-19 are recruited into government organizations and a variety or armed groups. These children are robbed of the chance to have a normal childhood but in exchange are exposed to horrendous hazards and are psychologically and physically scarred for life and suffer a tremendous amount abuse. c. Preview: In this speech I will explain what a Child Solider is, the normal development of a child and how the development of a child is impacted when they become a child solider. II. Body: d. Ethos- Citation 1: Web Site Ethos- Citation 1: Web Site What is a Child solider? According to child-soldiers.org, a child......

Words: 505 - Pages: 3