FIRST INDO – PAK WAR, 1947 : A UNIQUE WAR
Last week Kolkatta observed the 110th Birth Anniversary of Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerji.
Addressing a packed auditorium of invitees to the Kolkatta University Institute, General S.K. Sinha, former Governor, Jammu and Kashmir State, recalled how shortly after independence India had to confront a very difficult situation in the State. In October 1947, Pakistan organized a clandestine invasion of the State by a force composed of Pathan tribesmen, ex-servicemen and soldiers ‘on leave’.
This precipitated the First Indo-Pak war after the two countries became independent. This was a really strange war. A very bright Foreign Service Officer Chandrashekhar Dasgupta who has served as India’s Ambassador to China from 1993-96 has written an excellent book on this Kashmir invasion titled “War and Diplomacy in Kashmir, 1947-48” in which he describes this war as “unique in the annals of modern warfare”.
“It was a war”, he writes, “in which both the opposing armies were led by nationals of a third country. British generals commanded the armies of the newly independent states of India and Pakistan. In India, moreover, the Defence Committee of the Cabinet was chaired by Lord Mountbatten, not Prime Minister Nehru. Thus the course and outcome of the Indo-Pakistan conflict cannot be explained simply in terms of the political objectives and military capabilities of the antagonists. A crucial determinant was the role of the British officers at the helm of the two armies and, in the case of India, the British Governor-General, Lord Mountbatten”.
Three top British Generals were serving in the Indian Army after August 1947. All of them got connected with the operation in Kashmir – Lockhart as Army Chief from 15 August, 1947, to 31 December, 1947, Boucher as Army Chief from 1 January, 1948 to 14 January, 1949, and Russell as Army Commander from August 1947 to 19 January 1948 when he was succeeded by Cariappa.
Throughout the period that Russell was Army Commander, S. K. Sinha, as Major, was General Staff Office Operations.
Of the above three British officers Lockhart proved disloyal to India, and had to be removed. Dudley Russell, in contrast, was very loyal. Maharaja Hari Singh acceded to India on the afternoon of 26 October, 1947. Russell told Sinha that there being an embargo on British officers serving either India or Pakistan from entering the Kashmir theatre Major Sinha as the only Indian officer in the region would have to conduct the operations.
For the airlift of troops from Delhi to Srinagar, Sinha was told on the first day only six Dakotas would be available. From the following day fifty civilian Dakotas of private airlines – mostly with European pilots – would be available. The airlift would have to be completed in fifteen days as Srinagar airfield would become unusable after that because of snowfall.
In his Kolkata speech, Gen.Sinha said that it was nothing less than a miracle to do as many as 800 Dakotas sorties at such short notice.
Lord Mountbatten has recorded: “In my long experience of war I have not come across another such massive airlift carried out so successfully.”
As a serving officer in the army at the time of independence, Gen Sinha was able to explain to me very clearly how disparate the situation was in the Army at that time as between British officers and Indian officers. Indian officers, he told me, lacked the seniority and professional experience of the British officers.
The highest rank held by Indian officers was of Brigadier. There were six officers in the rank of Brigadier including Cariappa on 14 August 1947. Among these six, there was only one Muslim officer, Akbar Khan. As for officers in lower ranks, Sinha said, we were about thirty to forty in the rank of Colonel and Lt. Colonel
Gen. Sinha said: On the first day when we landed at Srinagar we were only 300 strong, and the enemy indulging in rapine and plunder in Baramulla about 1000 strong.
By November 7, Gen. Sinha said, India’s strength had increased substantially. So we were able to win a decisive victory. Baramulla was liberated and we advanced sixty miles to Uri where the valley ends and a gorge along the Jhelum starts to Muzaffarabad.
At this point, Gen. Sinha told the Kolkatta gathering, we received orders to cease fire and to halt the advance to Muzaffarabad. Our British Commander Russell was surprised by the orders. He felt we were losing a golden opportunity. He was of the view that the Indian forces should advance to Muzaffarabad and seal the border by securing the two bridges at Kohala and Domel. Sealing the entry points into Kashmir, he opined, would also relieve the pressure on the besieged forces in Poonch . Russell however, was overruled. The senior British officers in Delhi as also Lord Mountbatten, we gathered, did not want the Indian Army to get directly involved in fighting the Pakistan Army, which this advance to the border would certainly entail. It was argued that hitherto the confrontation was mainly with the tribal raiders. The argument did not have much merit. Everyone knew that Pakistani soldiers dressed in civilian clothes were in action along with the tribesmen, and all were functioning under direct command of the Pakistani army General, Akbar Khan.
TAILPIECE
Let not the Congress Party try to find scapegoats for the latest Mumbai outrage. The common man must be feeling amazed to read the Maharashtra Chief Minister blaming the blasts on the NCP just because the Home Portfolio in the State is with the Party.
The Union Home Minister himself has absolved R.R. Patil of blame when he asserted that there had been no intelligence failure, which meant that the local police set up was not at fault.
But is it not surprising that in case of the spectrum scam, even though three Ministers, all belonging to the same alliance partner, have had to be removed and later jailed, the DMK is being fondly protected by New Delhi on the plea of coalition dharma.
So far as the Mumbai killings are concerned, you can blame neither the Chief Minister nor the Home Minister of the State. It is New Delhi that is squarely responsible.
Both the P.M. and the Congress President must realise that unless GOI’s terror policy changes radically, such incidents will continue to recur.
L.K. Advani
New Delhi
17 July, 2011
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
July 18th, 2011 at 4:18 pm
Respected Statesman,
“Fear is a reaction. Courage is a decision.” – Sir. Winston Churchill
Sir, the partnership between ‘The Party Thoughts’ and its ‘Politicians Actions’ should converge exclusively on “policy”; and on how far the policy wires the government in order to empower the nation and its people’s progression. The Congress party’s Political thoughts persist safely for decades, whereas its politician’s action desists within seconds. The reason is identity crisis of their leadership, absence of personality of strength and lack of courage in making a decision (Policy).
July 18th, 2011 at 4:19 pm
Guns & Glory - The UPA Government’s top guns failed to fire, when compared to NDA. The glory for this government’s survival so far goes to Smt. Sonia Gandhi for her consciousness in crowning her men, turban of her choice (MMS) but at last people of India facing the burden of her choice.
This UPA Government has no other end of choice, but it has to preserve the Scamsters as an only source of property to survive.
“For a Statesman with Courage (LK Advani ji); Age never matters only determination counts…”. I pray for the count to never stop.
Namaste & Well-wishes
July 19th, 2011 at 9:23 am
Food for thought-”Conspiracy” word in the case of Prof. Davenderpal Singh Bhullar’s case.
by Daljit Singh
Popular belief in vast unsubstantiated conspiracies is a recurring theme in American history. For example, the Red Scare of 1919 and 1920 (thirty-six bombs simultaneously mailed to prominent citizens) instigated a nationwide search for a Bolshevik conspiracy. Similarly, Senator Joseph McCarthy’s 1950 allegation that communists had infiltrated the State Department precipitated wholesale investigations unjustifiably stigmatizing many individuals and organizations. Conspiracy theories can persist in the absence of credible supporting evidence. For example, many people believe that the 1963 assassination of President John Kennedy was the act of a broad conspiracy despite extensive investigation and the Warren Commission’s contrary conclusion.
Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/conspiracy#ixzz1SWAkAenT
The prosecution case is usually ai
July 19th, 2011 at 9:26 am
CONT. ……..
The prosecution case is usually aided by such a technically improper jury assumption, and defense lawyers are hardly happy about it.Says Indianapolis Attorney John Raikos; ” The real evil of conspiracy is that it is a vehicle used by the prosecutor to get in evidence that he could not otherwise possibly get in”. Some legal scholars agree. Yale Law Professor Abraham Goldstein says: ” It threatens the whole fair-trial notion”. And adds, it crowds the maxim of Anglo-Saxon Law That a man cannot be punished for evil intent alone.
It can be ” a legal vacuum cleaner”, agrees Georgetown’s Greenhagh, ” but only if misused”.Ultimately it is only the potential for misuse that disturbs most critics. By and large, prosecutors have not gravely abused their potent weapon, perhaps out of fear of Provoking judges to limit.
July 19th, 2011 at 9:27 am
My submission is that–Prosecutors were not credulous/plausible enough to prove the circumstantial evidence, but acted as a ” vacuum cleaners in the absense of any direct proof”.
July 22nd, 2011 at 4:01 pm
Advani ji, Please react to Karnataka Lokayukta report before it is too late, remove Yedurappa immediately, sacrifice Karnataka. Do you have any clue how much embarrassment does this Karnataka episode causes to all BJP supporters. You resigned when your name was dragged in Hawala case. May be Yedurrappa is clean but he has no moral right to continue. Sacrifice Karnataka. Don’t let people call your party Bhrasht Janata Party. Accept your mistake gracefully to public. There is no shame in admitting to a blunder. People will forgive you.
It is grossly shameful of BJP spokesperson to mention Congress corruption, or Shiela Dixit or Maharashtra, to counter Yedurrappa’s corruption charges. India people will never forgive your party.
July 24th, 2011 at 4:01 pm
Is there some email address to write to advani ji ?How can some one write to advani ji in private ? I wanted to write to advani ji about the BJP.Am i allowed to post here my article relating to bjp and not to the topic above ? Please mail the reply at prateek.bhatia@inmail24.com
September 2nd, 2011 at 2:39 pm
In my humble opinion, the British government did nothing to add glory to her good name, when India and Pakistan became independent in 1947. I believe Lord Mountbatten had no experience in administration, and was not inclined to head any administration. But, the wrong people were heading the government of Great Britain, at the outbreak of World War Two. Lord Mountbatten was a man who succumbed to the idea of Partition of India, when only his opinion mattered, on the matter. The historians who wrote on Lord Mountbatten, were either all Europeans, or Americans, and they recorded, perhaps, that Lord Mountbatten did all that he was capable of.