Our Announcements

Not Found

Sorry, but you are looking for something that isn't here.

Archive for category Pakistan’s Strategic & Security Focus

Mountbatten, Sikhs and Massacres of Muslims at Partition – Commodore Tariq Majeed PN (Retd)

Awareness Brief-AB-04-18-Tuesday, 14 August 2018, Zilhaj 2, 1439

If you desire to refresh the wounds of the heart,

Recall now and then this story of the days past

Mountbatten, Sikhs and Massacres of Muslims at Partition

Commodore Tariq Majeed PN (Retd)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   Partition of the Subcontinent in August 1947 on withdrawal of British colonial power and emergence of Pakistan and Hindu India as independent states was a most momentous event of the 20th century. It was accompanied by immense social turmoil, uprooting of millions of people and horrific bloodshed—in which Muslims were the main victims.

         It is often said that enormous sacrifices were made in attaining Pakistan. This paper gives a glimpse of these sacrifices.

Many books were written about the Partition, mostly by western writers and Indians. Very few of these books can be considered as depicting the facts correctly. Yet, it is rare to find a book which does not hide those facts which go against the thesis of the book’s author. Besides, a subject that these books gloss over or evade altogether is the planned bloodshed of Indian Muslim population by Sikhs and Governor General Mountbatten’s role in it.

In the literature on the Partition, an outstanding book is Disastrous Twilight—A Personal Record of the Partition of India by Major-General Shahid Hamid, published in 1986 by Leo Cooper. The author was Private Secretary, 1946-47, to Field Marshal Claude Auchinleck who was the last Commander-in-Chief in British India from 20 October 1943 to 26 September 1947. Shahid Hamid saw the unfolding of critical events from close quarters as the C-in-C’s office was privy to all matters, military, political or administrative. He kept a record of all important happenings, which is valuable material for history on all vital aspects of the Partition. What is more valuable is the record of striking revelations on sensitive issues. A top issue in this regard is Mountbatten’s role in the carnage of Muslims by Sikhs. His actions that provoked this carnage included deceitfully making changes in the Boundary Commission’s Award and intentionally delaying the announcement of the Award.

Image result for Mountbatten, Sikhs and Massacres of Muslims at Partition

Master Tara Singh -Promotor of Muslims Refugees migrating to Pakistan

 

 

 

 

 

The facts recorded in Shahid Hamid’s book are reproduced here. Headings have been added for quick grasp of contents. All dates pertain to the year 1947.

Author’s Introduction—in his own words. I had never met Field Marshal Sir Claude Auchinleck before I was selected to be his first Indian Private Secretary. Why I was selected for the post I do not know… I was fortunate to witness many historic events, and also to meet the men who made them possible. This gave me a unique insight into the character of the leaders and their approach to the national problems that were facing them. I was able to record their opinions, expressed both privately and in the open… I saw small men entrusted with great jobs, playing with the destiny of millions. This book has been written incorporating the diary I kept diligently in those days. It is not just a record of events but includes my reactions to what I saw, what I heard and what came across my desk.                                                [p. vii]

            I have come to the conclusion that someday I may publish my diaries as a book, for in it there will be certain facts brought to the light of which few people have knowledge.                                                                                                [p. 240]

The Sikhs’ Reaction to the Partition Plan. 4 June: When Mountbatten announced his (June 3) Plan, the Sikhs promptly perfected their plan for revenge. Led by their warrior class and assisted by their leaders, they have organized themselves into ‘Jathas’ (gangs). They have adopted force and terror tactics. They are now preparing their followers physically and psychologically for the brutalities to be inflicted on the Muslims. The Congress High Command is encouraging them and calls them the ‘sword arm of the Congress’.

Mountbatten at no stage encouraged the Sikhs to come to a settlement with the Muslim League which would have partially avoided the massacre. In fact, he encouraged them to stay with the Congress. When the Sikhs became violent he arrested none.                                                                                      [p.180,181]

Radcliffe’s Appointment. 28 June 1947: It had been decided to ask Sir Cyril Radcliffe to be the head of the Punjab and Bengal Boundary Commissions. I think that it is a great mistake as he can be influenced by Mountbatten. It would have been far better to have selected a man from a country outside the Commonwealth. [p.194]                                                                                           

Boundary Commission. 22 July: The Boundary Commission has been set up and has started its deliberations.                                                                         [p.208]  

24 July: The Punjab Boundary Force has been positioned. It is too small a force to be effective. The Sikhs have decided to ignore it and put their plan of vengeance into operation. There have been riots in Dehra Dun, Meerut, Pilibhit, Alwar and Bharatpur. Many Muslims are being massacred.                                    [p.209, 210]

Efforts to Influence the Boundary Commission. 21 July 1947: Baldev Singh* has asked Major Short** to fly out to India and use his influence to get the Boundary Line drawn as much to the West as possible.                                                      [p. 208]

* A top Sikh leader; Mountbatten knew Baldev Singh was the treasurer of a fund that

  the Sikhs were collecting for buying arms.                                                      [p.163]                                                     

**Major Short, an old officer of XI Sikh Regiment and a great Sikh enthusiast; arrived on 28 July, stayed with Baldev, attached to Mountbatten’s staff and was their unofficial adviser on Sikh affairs. [p.211]. Short had been introduced to Mountbatten by Cripps as the authority on Sikh affairs.                                                    [p.180]

Hindus also for Killing Muslims. 4 August: Evan Jenkins, the Governor of Punjab, says that when the Hindus mention that ruthless action must be taken to restore law and order they mean that every Muslim should be killed.                               [p.219]

Boundary Award Delayed. 9 August 1947: Everyone is talking about the impending Boundary Award. On many occasions, Radcliffe, supported by his secretary, Beaumont, had said that the Muslim Majority Tehsils of Ferozpore which include the Canal Headworks, Zehra and Moga, will form part of Pakistan. It is said that yesterday (8 August) Radcliffe had finalised the Award. He has now submitted it to Mountbatten, who is trying to keep it a closely guarded secret. Many of its salient points have already leaked out through the staff of the Boundary Commission and through his own staff.

            A copy of the Award, unwittingly, and unknown to Mountbatten, has been sent by George Abell* to the Secretary of the Governor of Punjab and is known to many. It is common talk that Mountbatten is busy changing it – giving India a corridor to Kashmir through Gurdaspur as well as the Ferozpore Headworks. The Muslims are very jittery. Radcliffe originally said that he would require one to two years to establish the Boundary Line but Mountbatten has over-ruled him. He wants him to base it on the ‘rule of thumb’. There is continuous consultation between the  Congress, the Sikhs, the Princes and Mountbatten. Something is cooking. Nobody knows the date of the announcement of the Award. It is up to Mountbatten.

            Governor of Punjab has been asked by Mountbatten for advice as to the date of the announcement. It is also said that the Viceroy will not be issuing the Award in the form of a communiqué from the Viceroy’s House. It will be published as a Gazette Extraordinary under the instructions of the Boundary Commission. Mountbatten wants to give the impression to the world that he had nothing to do with it.      [p.222]

*George Abell entered the ICS in 1928; Private Secretary to the Viceroy 1945-47.

Rioting by Sikhs. 9 August 1947: Rioting by Sikhs has started. This is in accordance with their plan.                                                                           [p.223]

C-in-C Pakistan Army—on the Delay in the Award. 11 August: General Frank Messervy is of the opinion that the postponement of the Boundary Commission Award is causing uncertainty and immense bloodshed.                                  [p.224]

Shocking Report of the Boundary Force. 11 August: A report has been received from the Punjab Boundary Force which says that:

■ The refugee problem, mainly from Eastern Punjab to Western Punjab is becoming increasingly difficult.

■ The disturbances are producing an average of two hundred to five hundred killings a day. Raids are organized and usually carried out by well-armed gangs of Sikhs.

■ Derailment of trains is a common occurrence. The Maharajah of Faridkot himself is known to be organizing the operations.

■ On arrival in Amritsar to take over their duties, the non-Muslim Police disarmed the Muslim members of the Police Force.                                                           [p.224]

Messervy’s Alarming Report. 11 August: General Messervy has also reported that the situation in Punjab is really bad. The Sikhs are operating large numbers of gangs and timely information about their movement is impossible. The situation in Amritsar is fast deteriorating as a result of the disarming of the Muslim Police by the Hindu Superintendent of Police.                                                                             [p.224]

The Sikhs’ Ghastly Behaviour. 13 August: In a conference in Lahore, Jenkins, the Governor, and Pete Rees, Commander of the Boundary Force, gave their views on the prevailing situation. They painted a very gloomy picture. They said that the Sikhs were behaving with ‘pre-medieval ferocity’, and felt the worst had still to come.

            The C-in-C made a note. ‘The delay in announcing the Award of the Boundary Commission is having a most disturbing and harmful effect.’                          [p.225]

Late Announcement of Award led to the Storm of Killings.  16 August: There was a meeting of the Joint Defence Council under the chairmanship of Mountbatten. It was attended by Nehru, Vallabhai Patel, Baldev Singh and Liaquat Ali Khan. Auchinleck gave his views on what he had seen in the last few days and on the discussion he had with Governor Jenkins and Major-General Thomas Rees. He emphasized that the delay in announcing the Award of the Boundary Commission had resulted in the wildest rumours, even to the extent, for example, that Lahore will be part of India. This has given fresh impetus to the killings by the Sikhs. The Award should have been announced on 9 August, as Jenkins had suggested earlier.

Patel said rioting at Rawalpindi started a chain reaction. He admitted that Tara Singh had made indiscreet and inflammable speeches, which had added fuel to the fire. Liaquat openly said that the whole thing had been carefully engineered by the Sikhs under the guidance of Baldev. Nehru sat depressed and in a daze. He asked whether there was a military escort on every train. If so, why did the massacres take place? He was told that the gangs got on to the train with their arms concealed. Once on, they then attacked suddenly.

Mountbatten tried to humour everyone and admitted that he hoped he had not made too big a mistake by not announcing the Award on 9 August. He said that the storm was not unexpected, but its extent could not have been anticipated. He said he now realized that if he had rounded up the Sikh trouble-makers, including Tara Singh, he would not have had to face this day.                                              [p.234]

Mountbatten’s Underhand Alterations. 16 August: The Award has been shown to the leaders. It is a black day for Pakistan. All the rumours were true about Mountbatten amending the findings, and that he has destroyed the proof. What he did not realize was that, by mistake, a copy was sent to the Secretary of the Governor of Punjab which Jenkins gave to his successor, Francis Mudie, who handed it over to Liaquat. This has horrified Mountbatten.

The amendments Mountbatten made were common knowledge. The Canal Headworks at Ferozepore have been awarded to India on the instigation of his great friend, the Maharajah of Bikaner who, on 11 August, sent his Prime Minister, Sirdar Pannikar, and his Chief Engineer, Kanwar Sain, to see him. It has convinced the Muslims that Mountbatten altered the Award. Finally, Nehru was instrumental in getting the Award altered. A corridor has been provided to Kashmir.               [p.235]

The Treacherous Alterations in the Boundary Award. The Pakistan Times, 18 August 1947, reported, ‘In Punjab, the notional division had been unfair but the final Award has gone much further and hacked off some of our richest tracts of land. The blow has been the hardest in Gurdaspur where the two Muslim Tehsils of Gurdaspur and Batala with a Muslim majority have been thrown into Hindustan along with the Pathankot Tehsil, taking away from Pakistan the rich Muslim industrial area of Batala. A part of Lahore has been broken off. Radcliffe has gone to the trouble of drawing a village to village boundary but the Ajnala Tehsil of Amritsar District with a 60 per cent Muslim majority and contiguous to the District of Lahore has been completely forgotten. The Tehsils of Zehra and Ferozepore with a clear Muslim majority have been dismissed with talk of “disruption of communication”.’       [p.236]

Mountbatten Lied about the Alterations. 16 August: Mountbatten says that he received the Award on 13 August and signed it on the 15th. Everyone knows this is not correct. The late announcement has caused havoc because of the uncertainty of which areas would finally belong where.  Mountbatten wanted the bloodbath to happen when the two Governments had been established so that the responsibility would not be his.                                                                                         [p.235]

Award Published. 17 August: The Boundary Award was published today.    [p.236]

Sikhs on the Rampage. 17 August: A meeting of the Joint Defence Council has been held in Ambala. Rees told the meeting that without the Punjab Boundary Force the slaughter would have been far greater. The Sikhs are burning the country from Lahore to Julundhur and turning it into a battlefield.

            Percy Howard wrote in The Sunday Express, ‘It was really the movement of the Sikh community out of the new Pakistan which sparked off the great killings in Punjab and they acted like savages.’                                                       [p.236]

 

Sikhs’ Private Army. 19 August: Situation in Punjab, especially Amritsar, is bad. Sikh personnel of the (disbanded) Indian National Army (of Subhas Chandra Bose) have formed a Private army for the slaughter of the Muslims. They want to ensure the elimination of Muslims from the Sikh areas of Punjab. The Indian Government is incapable of controlling the Sikhs. Trains to Pakistan are being looted each day and their occupants slaughtered.                                                   [p.237]

 

Appalling Situation in Delhi. 5 September: Situation in Delhi is extremely critical. Muslims are being hunted and butchered in the streets, and the bodies lie rotting. Arson and looting are the order of the day.                                                   [p.246]

 

Bloodshed was Pre-Planned. 8 September: Sikhs in Simla have been slaughtering the Muslims according to a pre-arranged plan. The civil administration in east Punjab is practically non-existent. There too the Muslims are being slaughtered according to a concerted plan.                                                                                        [p.246]

 

The ban on ‘Kirpans’ Withdrawn. 13 September: (From a letter to Mountbatten by Auchinleck). “I feel I must tell you of my fears about the present situation. I see in today’s newspaper that the ban placed on ‘Kirpans’ has been virtually withdrawn. The general public, here and all over India, can place one interpretation only on this action, which is that the Government does not really mean to grasp this problem of asserting its authority over the forces of disorder. The inference is that it is afraid to deal with the Sikhs as they should be dealt with.”                                          [p.249]

 

Governor Jenkins’ Official Records were Burnt. Once when I met Jenkins and pressed him to write his memoirs, he replied that ‘It is not in the interest of the Commonwealth.’ It is known that at the time of his departure from India he was warned by Mountbatten not to speak out. He was ordered to burn all his official papers, which included many connected with the Boundary affair, but still, a few papers including the original sketch map demarcating the boundaries between the two Dominions before it was altered by Mountbatten fell into the hands of Francis Mudie, the Governor, who gave them to Liaquat.                                           [p.300]

 

Clear-Cut Conclusions. Among the several conclusions from the given facts, two must be highlighted. Mountbatten knew the consequences of delaying the Boundary Award, that when announced it will absolutely shock and stun the Muslims in the Muslim-majority Areas, which by the rules of the Boundary Award were to be part of Pakistan, but which he had given to India. The Muslims will be seized with panic and fright and will be powerless against the Sikhs’ onslaught. This is what happened.

Secondly, the plans of the intended massacres that had been made in advance were known to Baldev Singh and Major Short, Mountbatten’s adviser on Sikh affairs. And Nehru and Mountbatten were aware of the coming bloodshed by the Sikhs but did not try to prevent it.

 

The writer is an analyst of national and global issues and is dedicated to exposing the issues harmful to Pakistan’s security and sovereignty.     

 

 

Tariq Majeed

Cell: 0301-438-6267

Email: dilbedar@Yahoo.com

 

 

 

,

No Comments

Hawkish US Think Tanks By Brig(R) Asif Haroon Raja

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hawkish US Think Tanks

 

​​

Brig(R) Asif Haroon Raja​

​………….​

asifharoonraja@gmail.com

(War veteran, defence analyst, columnist, author of five books, Vice Chairman Thinkers Forum Pakistan,DG Measac Research Centre.​)​

​  ​

 

The two leading US think tanks namely ‘Hudson Institute’ and the ‘Heritage Foundation’ have advised the Donald Trump administration to adopt tough measures against Pakistan.

 

In their view Pakistan is not doing enough in controlling terrorism and is making its soil available for export of terrorism into Afghanistan, thereby threatening the US vital security interests in the region. They have suggested a critical review of intelligence on Pakistan’s involvement in supporting terror since in their view the previous administrations have been taking a lenient view. In their estimation, Pakistan is not an American ally and has been playing a double game by cooperating occasionally and partially.

In their recommendations they have stated that Pakistan must be firmly asked to fully share the US counterterrorism objectives, end its support to the Afghan Taliban and Haqqani network (HN) and given stern warning that failure to do so would deprive it of the status on non-NATO ally within six months and result in declaring Pakistan as a State sponsor of Terrorism. In their assessment, China and Gulf Arab States share the US concern about Pakistan’s tolerance of terrorist organizations/individuals. They hasten to add that Pakistan being an important country should also be induced by offering a mutually beneficial trade and investment package, while continuing humanitarian and social assistance programs.  

It is a well-known fact that there are 1984 think tanks in USA with 350 in Washington. Both Heritage and Hudson are among the 50 most influential think tanks. Other important ones are American Enterprise Institute, Centre for Security Policy, Foreign Policy Research Inst, Institute of Foreign Policy Analysis, Brookings Inst etc.  These institutes are required to provide research solutions to a variety of world problems and then lobbying for policy changes. Perceptions are built and the US policy makers influenced to formulate foreign policies or make changes in policies, and frame responses to external challenges. 

These intellectual institutes are however mostly controlled by the Far-Right Zionist lobby which is pro-Israel and guided by American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPIAC). Of the 30 top executives of the major think tanks, 19 are Jews (63%), whereas Jews are mere 2% of the total population. 94% of American Jews live in 13 key Electoral College State, who play a predominant role in the election of US president. Zionist lobby is closely aligned with Indian lobby in USA. The two lobbies besides having influence over think tanks and media, also have strong influence over the US Congress and play a big role in the election of each member. It is therefore quite logical to assume that like hundreds of anti-Pakistan reports dished out by the US think tanks, US Congress, New York Times, Washington Post and Voice of America, this report was also manufactured by these lobbies that are hostile to Pakistan. Purpose is to influence the new administration to pursue old policies to keep Pakistan in the dock.

Rather than focusing on foreign policy and security issues, these think tanks work on tutored themes and burn midnight oil in justifying the crimes of USA, Israel and India against humanity, painting the targeted Muslim countries particularly the radical groups in black and blaming the victims of aggression as terrorists or sponsors of terrorism. Pakistan has been the biggest victim of Indo-US-Israeli propaganda since 2005. Since none of the sinister objective against Pakistan could be accomplished through covert means, the propaganda continues unabated and this report is in continuation of the malicious campaign. 

I may like to ask the wise guys of the two think tanks some probing questions:

Whether their counsels helped USA in winning the war on terror, or at least in improving their image. If not, have they ever prepared a paper highlighting why the US has failed to achieve its stated and hidden objectives after fighting the longest war in its history and spending over $ 1 trillion, where the US went wrong and how could it make amends to restore its lost prestige. (I have). 

Instead of the next door neighbor Pakistan feeling insecure, how come the US located 7000 miles away and across the seven seas feel threatened by the chaos in Afghanistan which it had intentionally created? 

I want to know as to what are the accomplishments of the US-NATO forces and in what way they have fared better than Pakistan to ask it repeatedly to do more? In my reckoning, the US need to do a lot more. 

Can the US deny that CIA in league with RAW, NDS, MI-6, Mossad and BND been exporting terrorism into Pakistan since 2003 with the help of its proxies created in FATA, Swat, Baluchistan and Karachi? Can it deny that RAW and NDS are still supporting them?

Why the ISAF withdrew bulk of 1, 30, 000 troops from Afghanistan in December 2014 without eliminating its principal objective of eliminating terrorism?

Was it because of resurging Taliban power which it couldn’t defeat, or the sagging morale of ISAF soldiers due to mounting war casualties, suicides, in-house attacks, huge number of post stress disorder cases and uninspiring military leadership?

Isn’t it true that the morale of occupying forces drawing handsome salaries drooped because they had no cause and that they were fighting a wrong war for selfish motives of the elites?    

When the US accepted in principle that the Taliban could neither be defeated on the battlefield nor cowed down and decided to quit Afghanistan by December 2014, what was the need for keeping behind a token force along with airpower? Did it really expect that what the combined military force of 48 countries couldn’t achieve, would be accomplished by ANSF rived in so many discipline problems?

Isn’t it a fact that rather than accepting defeat in good grace and quitting honorably, the US military brazenly blamed Pakistan for all its failures? Can the prestige and honor of the sole super power be restored by making Pakistan a scapegoat?

Pakistan security forces and ISI on the other hand successfully broke the back of terror network and demolished all the sanctuaries, communication and command infrastructure from FATA and settled areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, enfeebled foreign backed separatist movement in Baluchistan and demolished the militant structure of MQM in Karachi. All this was done single-handed against all odds and astounded the world. USA is among the ones acknowledging Pakistan’s spectacular successes.

If Pakistan had fought the war with ill-motives and without a genuine cause, could it have achieved the miracle? 

It is now an open secret that the US had occupied Afghanistan under a preconceived design and with sinister objectives against Pakistan and other regional countries. It has been calculatingly inflaming terrorism in the region and particularly in Pakistan and at no stage made any sincere effort to quash terrorism.

Had the US been sincere and serious in eliminating terrorism as professed by George W. Bush and his successor Barak Obama, it would have made Pakistan its strategic partner and banked upon it based upon its astounding performance in the war against the Soviets in the 1980s.

The US relied upon India which has nothing in common with Afghans and is a far distant neighbor. Driven by acute animosity against Pakistan, India kept pressing US military to focus on Pakistan rather than on consolidating its gains in Afghanistan. Gen Mc Chrystal, Gen Petraeus and former Secretary Defense Chuck Hegel publically declared India as a problem child. 

Wasn’t it a big mistake on part of the US to sideline the Afghan Pashtuns that are in big majority, and instead rely upon minority Tajiks, Uzbeks and others in Northern Alliance and unpopular and inefficient regimes of Karzai and of Ghani?

One may ask as to why the US has been striving hard since 2011 to have dialogue with the Taliban who are supposed to be the foes and are still vying to make them agree to talk? And why Pakistan is being asked to stay away from them? Concept of good and bad Taliban is the brainchild of USA and not of Pakistan. In its view, all those agreeing to talk are good and those refusing to talk are bad.

Since 2008, the Taliban are constantly gaining ground in Afghanistan and are striking targets in all parts of the country including Kabul and northern and western parts. Their resurgence became menacing after 2014 and coming spring offensive will prove highly perilous for the unity government in Kabul and for the 3, 50,000 ANSF supported by 12000 Resolute Support Group that have failed to stem the tide. So how come Pakistan is responsible for their dismal performance particularly after it cleared the last stronghold of North Waziristan in 2014 where HN was based?    

The US has been suspecting and distrusting Pakistan from the outset since it was never made an ally. Marked as a target, friendship was a ruse to deceive Pakistan, make it complacent, weaken it from within through covert operations and then extract its nuclear teeth at an opportune time. This feat if achieved would have justified its most expensive Afghan venture. So who has been playing a double game?? 

Rather than learning lessons from past mistakes and blunders and taking corrective measures by working out a face saving formula, the two think tanks have suggested the same old remedy which will prove counterproductive.

Pakistan has been kept on the leash all these years. So, what tough measures are now being suggested? The threat of declaring Pakistan a terrorist state, or to make the financial assistance condition based, or drone war are coercive tools in use for over a decade.

What is so new suggested by the sages and that too at a time when Pakistan has weathered all the pains, its armed forces are fully battle inoculated and have proved their mettle, its nuclear and missile programs are vibrant and in safe hands, it has overcome its energy and economic crisis, it is no more isolated, it is a coalition partner of ascending power and has other options as well? On the other hand, USA is a declining power ruled by controversial, unpredictable and unpopular president, annoying everyone including the Americans other than the most detestable Israel and India. How has the Trump administration responded to Iran’s tough response? It is on a weaker wicket to threaten nuclear Pakistan.  

The writer is a retired Brig, war veteran, defence analyst, columnist, author of five books, Vice Chairman Thinkers Forum Pakistan, DG Measac Research Centre. asifharoonraja@gmail.com

No Comments

Indian interference in Balochistan proved with Modi’s statement: Zehri Courtesy:ARY News, Pakistan

Indian interference in Balochistan proved with Modi’s statement: Zehri

 

ARY News, Pakistan

 

 

 

QUETTA: Chief Minister Balochistan Sanaullah Zehri has slammed Baloch leader Barhamdagh Bugti, the exiled leader of Baloch Republican Party, for making anti-Pakistan statements and asserted that ‘those fuelling propaganda from foreign land’ have no support at home.

He was addressing a conference condemning Indian interference in Balochistan at Quetta Law College.

Mr. Zehri said Modi’s controversial claim that the Baloch people had thanked him for his support of the “so-called insurgency” in the province was senseless.
balochistan

The chief minister said no one could detach Balochs from their homeland. “A handful of people are shedding blood of their own brothers for the sake of some ‘peanuts’, said the CM.

Balochistan Home Minister Sarfaraz Bugti said Indian PM Narendra Modi was a murderer of thousands of innocent Kashmiris and Pakistanis.

balochistan-post-1

The conference was attended by a large number of students and civil society members.

Earlier in the day, the Indian premier’s speech on Aug 15, India’s Independence Day, triggered protests across Balochistan, with large numbers of tribesmen taking to the streets in protest in several parts of the province.

Political leaders, civil society members and citizens in large numbers took out rallies holding placards against Indian PM and their government.

In Chaman, protesters burnt effigy of Narendra Modi and Brahamdagh Bugti for their anti-Pakistan statements.

balochistan-post-2

They expressed their anger on campaign launched by the Indian premier and Baloch leader to defame Pakistan and project Balochistan in bad light at international level.

Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf workers led rallies in Dera Murad Jamali and raised slogans against India. Persistent protests blocked the main highway in Balochistan.


Chaman Rally against PM Narendra Modi by arynews
https://arynews.tv/en/protests-erupt-balochistan-india-modis-effigy-burnt/
[twitter-follow screen_name=’agamjd’]

No Comments

How safe are Pakistan’s nuclear assets:Israel thwarted By Shahid R. Siddiqi

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How safe are Pakistan’s nuclear assets

Israel Thwarted

 

 

By Shahid R. Siddiqi

Archive

Sunday, 14 Feb, 2010 | 01:00 AM PST |

INDIA’S explosion of its nuclear device in 1974 drew only a customary “show of concern” from the western powers. But Pakistan’s nuclear programme, initiated in response to the Indian acquisition of nuclear weapons, evoked immediate and “serious concern” from the same quarters. Ever since, Pakistan has been under immense pressure to scrap its programm while the Indians remain uncensored.

That western attitude was discriminatory can also be seen by the religious colour it gave to Pakistan’s bomb by calling it an ‘Islamic bomb’. One has never heard of the Israeli bomb being called a ‘Jewish Bomb’, or the Indian bomb a ‘Hindu Bomb’, or the American and British bomb a ‘Christian Bomb’ or the Soviet bomb a ‘Communist’ (or an ‘Atheist) Bomb’. The West simply used Pakistan’s bomb to make Islam synonymous with aggression and make its nuclear programme a legitimate target, knowing full well that it merely served a defensive purpose and was not even remotely associated with Islam.

With India going nuclear soon after playing a crucial role in dismembering Pakistan in 1971 and enjoying an overwhelming conventional military superiority over Pakistan in the ratio of 4:1, a resource strapped Pakistan was pushed to the wall. Left with no other choice but to develop a nuclear deterrent to ward off future Indian threats, Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto declared: “Pakistanis will eat grass but make a nuclear bomb”. And sure enough, they did it. Soon, however, both he and the nuclear programme were to become non-grata. Amid intense pressure, sanctions and vilification campaign, Henry Kissinger personally delivered to a defiant Bhutto the American threat: “give up your nuclear programme or else we will make a horrible example of you’.

And a horrible example was made of Bhutto for his defiance. But he had enabled Pakistan to become the 7th nuclear power in the world. This served Pakistan well. India was kept at bay despite temptations for military adventurism. Although there has never been real peace in South Asia, at least there has been no war since 1971.

Ignoring its security perspective, Pakistan’s western ‘friends’ refused to admit it to their exclusive nuclear club, though expediency made them ignore its ‘crime’ when it suited their purpose. But driven by identical geo-strategic interests in their respective regions and seeing Pakistan as an obstacle to their designs, Israel and India missed no opportunity to malign or subvert Pakistan’s programme.

Due to its defiance of Indian diktat, Pakistan is for India an obstruction in its quest for domination of South Asia and the Indian Ocean region. Israel’s apprehension of Pakistan’s military prowess is rooted in the strength Pakistan indirectly provides to Arab states with whom Israel has remained in a state of conflict. Conscious that several Arab states look up to Pakistan for military support in the event of threat to their security from Israel, it is unsettling for Israel to see a nuclear armed Pakistan.

Israel can also not overlook the fact that Pakistan’s military is a match to its own. The PAF pilots surprised Israeli Air Force, when flying mostly Russian aircraft they shot down several relatively superior Israeli aircraft in air combat in the 1973 Arab-Israel war, shattering the invincibility myth of Israeli pilots who believed themselves to be too superior in skill and technology. The Pakistanis happened to be assigned to Jordanian, Syrian and Iraqi air forces on training missions when the war broke out and, unknown to the Israelis then, they incognito undertook combat missions.

After successfully destroying Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1981, Israelis planned a similar attack on Pakistan’s nuclear facilities at Kahuta in collusion with India in the 1980s. Using satellite pictures and intelligence information, Israel reportedly built a full-scale mock-up of Kahuta facility in the Negev Desert where pilots of F-16 and F-15 squadrons practised mock attacks.

According to ‘The Asian Age’, journalists Adrian Levy and Catherine Scott-Clark stated in their book ‘Deception: Pakistan, the US and the Global Weapons Conspiracy’, that Israeli Air Force was to launch an air attack on Kahuta in mid-1980s from Jamnagar airfield in Gujarat (India). The book claims that “in March 1984, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi signed off (on) the Israeli-led operation bringing India, Pakistan and Israel to within a hair’s breadth of a nuclear conflagration”.

Another report claims that Israel also planned an air strike directly out of Israel. After midway and midair refueling, Israeli warplanes planned to shoot down a commercial airline’s flight over Indian Ocean that flew into Islamabad early morning, fly in a tight formation to appear as one large aircraft on radar screens preventing detection, use the drowned airliner’s call sign to enter Islamabad’s air space, knock out Kahuta and fly out to Jammu to refuel and exit.

According to reliable reports in mid-1980s this mission was actually launched one night. But the Israelis were in for a big surprise. They discovered that Pakistan Air Force had already sounded an alert and had taken to the skies in anticipation of this attack. The mission had to be hurriedly aborted.

Pakistan reminded the Israelis that Pakistan was no Iraq and that PAF was no Iraqi Air Force. Pakistan is reported to have conveyed that an attack on Kahuta would force Pakistan to lay waste to Dimona, Israel’s nuclear reactor in the Negev Desert. India was also warned that Islamabad would attack Trombay if Kahuta facilities were hit.

The above quoted book claims that “Prime Minister Indira Gandhi eventually aborted the operation despite protests from military planners in New Delhi and Jerusalem.”

McNair’s paper #41 published by USAF Air University (India Thwarts Israeli Destruction of Pakistan’s “Islamic Bomb”) also confirmed this plan. It said, “Israeli interest in destroying Pakistan’s Kahuta reactor to scuttle the “Islamic bomb” was blocked by India’s refusal to grant landing and refueling rights to Israeli warplanes in 1982.” Clearly India wanted to see Kahuta gone but did not want to face retaliation at the hands of the PAF. Israel, on its part wanted this to be a joint Indo-Israeli strike to avoid being solely held responsible.

The Reagan administration also hesitated to support the plan because Pakistan’s distraction at that juncture would have hurt American interests in Afghanistan, when Pakistan was steering the Afghan resistance against the Soviets.

Although plans to hit Kahuta were shelved, the diatribe against Pakistan’s nuclear programme continued unabated. Israel used its control over the American political establishment and western media to create hysteria. India worked extensively to promote paranoia, branding Pakistan’s programme as unsafe, insecure and a threat to peace. The fact is otherwise. It is technically sounder, safer and more secure than that of India and has ensured absence of war in the region.

The US invasion of Afghanistan provided another opening for Indo-Israeli nexus to target Pakistan’s strategic assets. This time the strategy was to present Pakistan as an unstable state, incapable of defending itself against religious extremist insurgents, creating the spectre of Islamabad and its nuclear assets falling in their hands. Suggestions are being floated that Pakistan being at risk of succumbing to extremists, its nuclear assets should be disabled, seized or forcibly taken out by the US. Alternatively, an international agency should take them over for safe keeping.

 

 

,

No Comments

May 28: Pakistan Became Nuclear Power By Sajjad Shaukat

      May 28: Pakistan Became Nuclear Power

          By Sajjad Shaukat

 

 

 

 

 

imgres

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

With national zeal and fervour in different parts of the country, Youm-e-Takbeer (The day of greatness) is celebrated every year on May 28 as a national day to mark the conduction of nuclear tests when on the very day in 1998; Pakistan became the first Muslim and the 7th nuclear power in the world.

While showing aggressive designs, on May 11, 1998, the then Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee surprised the international community by announcing that India has conducted 3 nuclear tests earlier that day. On May 13, 1998, India conducted two more nuclear tests.

However, both the neighboring countries have waged three wars, especially on the issue of the Indian occupied Kashmir, so Pakistan’s arch rival compelled Islamabad to follow the suit. In this regard, it took only 17 days for Pakistan to successfully carry out its five nuclear tests which were done on May 28 and the sixth one on May 1998, at Chaghi in Balochistan in response to five nuclear explosions detonated by India, threatening the security of Pakistan. For the purpose, about five thousands scientists including Dr Samarmand Mubarik and especially Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan had worked day and night and made the defence of the country impregnable.

As regards Pakistan’s atomic experiments, renowned journalist, Majid Nizami said, “Pakistan faced tremendous pressure from India after it detonated five nuclear devices and America in this scenario also did not want Pakistan to become a nuclear power. US President Clinton telephoned the Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif five times besides offering him billions of dollars to refrain him from nuclear tests. In this perspective, he further stated, Nawaz was receiving opinion from different sections of society, and in the same connection, he also convened a meeting of the editors wherein he (Majid Nizami) also gave the input.”

New Delhi’s war-mongering strategy against Pakistan could be judged from the fact that in 1974 India conducted first nuclear test at Pokhran Range in Rajhistan so as to pressurise Islamabad.

It is mentionable that when ZulfikarAli Bhutto, (The late) came to power, he paid much attention to the nuclear programme of Pakistan, as he knew that India would apply its coercive diplomacy on Islamabad or could attack our country. In this context, while talking on a TV channel on May 28, 2012, Pakistani nuclear scientist Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan appreciated the efforts of former Prime Minister Shaheed ZulfikarAli Bhutto for providing the opportunity to make the nuclear programme of Pakistan successful.

He also made it clear that Pakistan’s nuclear programme was totally indigenous, but acquired materials from some Western countries.

During many crises such as Kargil issue of 1999 and attack on the Indian parliament by the militants in 2001, New Delhi concentrated its troops across the Pakistan’s border, with the intention to attack Pakistan, while raising a series of false allegations against Islamabad. Pakistan was also compelled to deploy its Army along the Pak-India border. But, India did not dare to initiate a war because of Pakistan’s ‘Nukes.’ Similarly, in the past, Indian rulers had intended to implement their doctrine of limited war in Kashmir, but they could not do so owing to our nuclear weapons.

Particularly, in the aftermath of Mumbai terror attacks of 2008, India accused Pakistan’s spy agency, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) of supporting the militants. Although Pak diplomats denied Indian self-fabricated story regarding Mumbai catastrophe, but New Delhi adopted a threatening posture against Islamabad. It one again deployed its troops across the Pakistani border. Again, Islamabad also concentrated its military in order to give a matching response to India.

Notably, when US special forces killed Osama Bin Laden in Pakistan on May 2, 2011 in violation of Pak sovereignty—though Islamabad had repeatedly made it clear that its government and intelligence agencies did not know anything about Bin Laden’s whereabouts including any official involvement regarding the 26/11 Mumbai catastrophe, but, New Delhi continued its aggressive style which could be judged from the statement of Indian Army Chief Gen. VK Singh who claimed on May 4, 2011 that if situation arose, the Indian defence forces were competent to undertake a US-like operation inside Pakistan, which killed Al Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden. Indian army’s Northern Command chief also expressed similar thought.

In this respect, Indian top civil and defence officials clearly said that their country could conduct a US-type military operation or surgical strikes inside Pakistan.

Nevertheless, in the aftermath of Mumbai attack, India left no stone unturned in frightening Pakistan through a prospective invasion. Violation of Pakistan’s air space by New Delhi had created an alarming situation, as Islamabad had also taken defensive steps in response to meet any aggression or surgical strikes by India. Situation was so critical that Pakistan started moving thousands of military troops from the Afghan border and the tribal areas to its border with India. But, India failed in implementing its plans of any military action or aerial strikes on Pakistan due to the fact that the latter also possesses nuclear arsenal which could destroy whole of India.

It is noteworthy that America dropped atomic bombs on Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as Tokyo had no such devices to retaliate. After the World War 11, nuclear weapons were never used. These were only employed as a strategic threat. During the heightened days of the Cold War, many crises arose in Suez Canal, Korea, Cuba and Vietnam when the US and the former Soviet Union were willing to use atomic weapons, but they stopped because of the fear of nuclear war which could culminate in the elimination of both the super powers. It was due to the concept of ‘mutually assured destruction’ that the two rivals preferred to resolve their differences through diplomacy.

Political strategists agree that deterrence is a psychological concept that aims to affect an opponent’s perceptions. In nuclear deterrence weapons are less usable as their threat is enough in deterring an enemy that intends to use its armed might.

While both the neighbouring adversaries are nuclear powers, Indians should not ignore the principles of deterrence, popularly known as balance of terror.

In these terms, India is badly mistaken, if it overestimates its own power and underestimates Pakistan’s power. As our country lacks conventional weapons vis-à-vis India, so it will have to use atomic devices during a prolonged conflict which would result into national suicide of the two countries. So India may apply its blackmailing diplomacy on the non-atomic states of South Asia in exerting psychological pressure, but it is useless in case of Pakistan whose deterrence is credible, making its defence invincible, as it possesses a variety of nuclear weapons and missiles which could be used against India as the last option, if the latter attacked our country.

Moreover, it is due to atomic bombs that Islamabad can talk to New Delhi with honour and dignity, discouraging India from casting an evil eye on our motherland.

Furthermore, as Pakistan is the only declared nuclear country in the Islamic World, hence, it has become special target of some western top officials and media persons who continue their propaganda against Pakistan’s nuclear programme. They have especially hired the services of media anchors and writers who work on their payroll and have been creating doubts about the safety and security of Pakistan’s atomic weapons and nuclear plants. Particularly, in 2009 when the heavily-armed Taliban entered Swat, Dir and Buner, US high officials and their media had exaggerated the ‘Talibinisation’ of whole Pakistan, while showing concerns about Pakistan’s atomic arms. In that regard, the then US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had warned that Pakistan’s nuclear weapons could fall into the hands of terrorists. But, when Pakistan’s armed forces ejected the Taliban insurgents out of these areas by breaking their backbone, She started appreciating the capabilities of Pakistan Armed Forces.

 

Similarly, when terrorists had attacked on Pakistan’s Naval Airbase in Karachi on May 23, 2011, US-led some western countries including India and Israel exploited the situation through disinformation about the security of Pak nukes. And, terrorists’ assault on Kamra Base was successfully foiled by the personnel of Pakistan Air Force, but, a baseless report, published in the New York Times had indicated that suspected militants attacked a major Pakistani Air Force base where some of the country’s nuclear weapons were considered to be stored in the early hours of the militants’ attack. The ex-US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta also stated day, “There is a danger of nuclear weapons of Pakistan, falling into hands of terrorists.”

Undoubtedly, Pakistan’s nuclear assets are in safe hands-well-protected and are under tight security arrangements, having the best command and control system.

Nonetheless, May 28 is celebrated as Youm-e-Takbeer by various political parties and social organizations including general masses with a pledge to make Pakistan a stronger country, militarily and economically, among the comity of nations. No doubt, on this very day of 1998, Pakistan became nuclear power.

Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations

Email: sajjad_logic@yahoo.com

 

No Comments


Skip to toolbar