“Kargil adventure was a much bigger blunder than 1971 surrender”, say former Pakistani military officers

“Kargil adventure was a much bigger blunder than 1971 surrender”, say former Pakistani military officers


A military operation once celebrated by Pakistan's former dictator, General Pervez Musharraf, is now widely condemned by experts and former officers as a disastrous strategic failure. The 1999 Kargil conflict, aimed at severing India's control in the region, has been exposed as a miscalculated gamble that backfired on Pakistan.

"The plan was a blunder and a massive failure. It not only turned out to be a disaster, it also violated the Lahore Summit agreement between India and Pakistan. Also, because the Pakistan Army denied its involvement, even refused to accept the dead bodies of its own soldiers who were later buried by the Indian Armed forces, turned out to be more embarrassing and attracted more dishonour to the institution,” says Colonel (retd) Ashfaq Hussain.

The Kargil conflict, initiated by a small group of top Pakistani military officials without the knowledge of then-Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, sought to isolate India's positions in Kashmir and Ladakh. The architects of this plan falsely believed India would be forced into negotiations favorable to Pakistan.

“On one side, Pakistan was faced with international pressure and on the other side, the plan failed miserably as China did not act as per Islamabad’s assumptions. Our then Foreign Minister Sartaj Aziz got a cold shoulder from China along with all others because Islamabad’s version that it was not its Army but the Kashmir freedom fighters at Kargil, was a story not bought by anyone,” Hussain added.

The Kargil operation was built on the assumption that India would vacate high-altitude posts during harsh winter conditions. Pakistani forces exploited this to seize strategic peaks. However, India's 'Operation Vijay' swiftly countered the incursion. “We had the advantage of the higher peak position. We could spot them from the height and counter fire on them more effectively,” said Colonel Retd. Ashfaq Hussain, author of the book ‘Witness to Blunder’ that details his first-hand experience of the time, sitting as an officer in the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) in Rawalpindi.

The limited scope of the Kargil plan within the Pakistani military suggests Prime Minister Sharif, though initially unaware, may have tacitly supported it with the hope of personal political gain. His lack of understanding of India's potential retaliation led to a disastrous outcome. By late June 1999, under pressure from US President Bill Clinton, Pakistan was forced into a humiliating withdrawal.

The Kargil operation, far from being a victory, is now widely recognized as a military and political disaster for Pakistan. Colonel Hussain summarizes the sentiment bluntly: “Kargil adventure was a blunder. It was a much bigger blunder than the surrender of 1971.”
 
India committed similar mistake in Kargil war as it did in 1971 although on a smaller scale. We should have at least collected cost of war from Pakistan.
 
We have to appreciate the fact that the Pakistani generals are concerned about Pakistan's strategic iniative all the time whereas Indian generals are in deep slumber and someone else must wake them up to tell them that Indian landhad been occupied by enemy forces.
 
India too made mistakes. One particular being even a greater blunder than Pak did. I felt sad that LBS as PM shouldn't have seceded large part of PoK captured during his time. I hated Soviet Union because they didn't side with us on the negotiation table. Sometimes, I felt like blood of our Jawans were wasted for no reason by the leaders. Wish that metalhead NamO as PM and his strong Nationalist team was there instead of LBS but alas....!
 
We have to appreciate the fact that the Pakistani generals are concerned about Pakistan's strategic iniative all the time whereas Indian generals are in deep slumber and someone else must wake them up to tell them that Indian landhad been occupied by enemy forces.
India behaves exactly like it used to behave during the time of Prithviraj Chauhan. Unaware, unprepared and unambitious. Things are changing with NaMo bro and Mota bhai Amit shah.
 
There was a time when India has :
  • Opportunity to take back majority of POK
  • Chittagong tracts and Tribal rich Mymensingh/Sylhet regions. They wanted to be part of India.
  • Hindu populated areas of Bangladesh near Silchar district of Assam.
If Pak invades Western front then India could have opened multiple fronts including in the East.
 
Might have annexed sea and land gap of north east in 1971 and pok kashmir atleast some part during kargil
Reply it was not that easy as india is projecting as war to defend or right to defend against attack if india would have annexed any land then it would been projected pre planned war and maybe Pakistan would have gain edge by saying that it was not Pakistan army who attack them it was local militants attack us or Indian planned this war to try to annexed Pak land. Being Pakistan close to west side it would have been huge disadvantage for us as in UN undoubtedly west + china have been vote in favour of Pakistan then.
But, yes india should have called the war cost but the land would not go in favour.
 
We have to appreciate the fact that the Pakistani generals are concerned about Pakistan's strategic iniative all the time whereas Indian generals are in deep slumber and someone else must wake them up to tell them that Indian landhad been occupied by enemy forces.
Not some one else.
It was a shepherd who lost his cow and went searching the cow saw the intrusion.Luckily ,he had binoculars.
 
They'll never forget what our arty did to them. That in no way undermines the sacrifices made by all members of our armed forces. 250000 shells expended. Jai Hind
 
We have to appreciate the fact that the Pakistani generals are concerned about Pakistan's strategic iniative all the time whereas Indian generals are in deep slumber and someone else must wake them up to tell them that Indian landhad been occupied by enemy forces.
Indian generals : Peace of mind is essential for a happy life. 🤣😂
 
Reply it was not that easy as india is projecting as war to defend or right to defend against attack if india would have annexed any land then it would been projected pre planned war and maybe Pakistan would have gain edge by saying that it was not Pakistan army who attack them it was local militants attack us or Indian planned this war to try to annexed Pak land. Being Pakistan close to west side it would have been huge disadvantage for us as in UN undoubtedly west + china have been vote in favour of Pakistan then.
But, yes india should have called the war cost but the land would not go in favour.
What non sense! Taking back POK which included gilgit baltistan that time is not land grab but retaking our own territory. Does any vote against Bharat in UN make any difference? It was a pure anti national act & blood of brave Indian soldiers wasted by not retaking POK in 1971.
 
India too made mistakes. One particular being even a greater blunder than Pak did. I felt sad that LBS as PM shouldn't have seceded large part of PoK captured during his time. I hated Soviet Union because they didn't side with us on the negotiation table. Sometimes, I felt like blood of our Jawans were wasted for no reason by the leaders. Wish that metalhead NamO as PM and his strong Nationalist team was there instead of LBS but alas....!
What about 1971? Bharat should have taken back POK. Lot of Indian soldiers died & it was a pure anti national act by indira khan.
 
There was a time when India has :
  • Opportunity to take back majority of POK
  • Chittagong tracts and Tribal rich Mymensingh/Sylhet regions. They wanted to be part of India.
  • Hindu populated areas of Bangladesh near Silchar district of Assam.
If Pak invades Western front then India could have opened multiple fronts including in the East.
Even Nepal was ready to join India.
 
What about 1971? Bharat should have taken back POK. Lot of Indian soldiers died & it was a pure anti national act by indira khan.
You seem to be misinformed, perhaps influenced by biased sources. It would be beneficial to delve into books and historical accounts free from political agendas. In 1971, our defense forces were depleted after the campaign on the eastern border. While the western front was an option, it was deemed too late to initiate an offensive due to the presence of the US 7th fleet, along with the UK, in the Indian Ocean, pressuring India. Even Russia advised halting at that point to avoid escalation akin to a world war. We achieved our objectives and halted accordingly. Sam Manekshaw, advised the same, considering the logistical challenges of transferring fighting assets from east to west and the importance of Indian troops remaining in Bangladesh, a newly formed country. It's perplexing how one can be influenced to such an extent, given the wealth of information available on the internet for unbiased study.
 
What non sense! Taking back POK which included gilgit baltistan that time is not land grab but retaking our own territory. Does any vote against Bharat in UN make any difference? It was a pure anti national act & blood of brave Indian soldiers wasted by not retaking POK in 1971.
You need to do some study and Whatsapp University and Party Forwards are not one of them.
 
What non sense! Taking back POK which included gilgit baltistan that time is not land grab but retaking our own territory. Does any vote against Bharat in UN make any difference? It was a pure anti national act & blood of brave Indian soldiers wasted by not retaking POK in 1971.
Question is even if we wanted POK land as it is ours, do we really want the crazy people who live there? The baggage that comes along with the land is a big problem.
 
Irony, it was conceived before 1987 -- and rejected by Porni Army's then vice-chief, a mohajir named Rahimuddin Khan (nephew of erstwhile President Zakir Hussein), as he read it as "attempt to redo '65 to our advantage" -- to which he thought "time to redo '65 was NLT '66". Unfortunately, Musharraf (grotesquely infected with "redo '65" mentality) pushed that blunder through 12 years later -- knowing that this wouldn't be popular, Rahim refused to have his term as vice-chief extended.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
3,683
Messages
38,949
Members
2,489
Latest member
Louder87
Back
Top