Monthly Archives: August 2018

The Army must continue to carry out its mandate to bring the situation to a point where the government can take it forward for a permanent resolution of the imbroglio. The solution lies in continued diplomatic efforts, accepting the highs and lows of the ongoing situation. The harsh reality is that neither can Pakistan annex any more in the Valley nor can we regain PoK.

COL MAHESH CHADHA (retd)
Defence commentator

THE very thought of resolving the Kashmir issue by military means without giving any solid solution — how, when and where — can be as hypothetical as a figment of somebody’s imagination. It must be remembered that in the three full-fledged wars (1947, 1965 and 1971) that Pakistan waged against India, any portion of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) captured, gained or lost by India was either returned or agreed to be retained by Pakistan — Haji Pir Pass in 1965 and Chhamb in 1971. He who may try to extrapolate the Bangladesh template on PoK would be living in a fool’s paradise and misleading the masses. The geography of the two countries today would negate the possibility of any such foolhardy venture, its futility writ large.

While the erstwhile east Pakistan was thousands of miles from the mainland — across the Arabian Sea and the Bay of Bengal — the line of communication and logistics running through India, PoK is contiguous with a huge land mass, mostly mountainous, under-developed and sparsely populated, and so is the treacherous terrain of Gilgit, Baltistan and other northern areas, where there is heavy deployment of Pakistani troops deeply entrenched, facing Indian troops eyeball to eyeball at places along the LoC. They, too, have offensive formations located close by to undertake counter-measures. To dislodge any of the defended localities (held by a company strength of only about 100 men) that has been fortified by intensive minefields and other obstacles, would take at least a division with a highly established air superiority launching a wave after wave of brigade size force (3,000 men) spread over days, suffering heavy casualties, and that too depending on the campaign season lasting only three months of summer with unpredictable weather conditions and a total no-go in winters — when there is heavy snowfall.

While some troops, in their exuberance, consider it a once-in-a-lifetime dream being fulfilled, the Indian Army does not have the wherewithal in terms of arms and ammunition to last such an intense battle that is likely to continue for more than three weeks, and so is the state of Pakistan — despite it having guaranteed and continuous military and financial support of China. Thus, after the last bullet is fired, the only option left to both sides would be either to play ball or if too determined to stick to their unachievable mission, as a last resort to use nuclear weapons, who does it first is immaterial because whosoever does it will have to accept the colossal collateral damage caused to its own army and people who would be in close contact with each other in any tactical situation. But before all this happens, there is every likelihood of world powers intervening to bring both sides to the negotiating table and call it quits. By which time everything would be lost, the economy shattered, and people suffering. While India, because of its own indigenous production, would come back on its feet within some time, Pakistan would as usual be going around the world to bail it out.

Considering such a scenario unlikely, let’s examine how Indian governments, despite some raising the rhetoric of freeing PoK and saying that J&K belongs to India, have understood the impossibility and inwardly accepted PoK as a lost cause in history and decided to move on. Being seized on the one hand of the growing anti-India sentiment due to not acceding to the general will of the people (mainly Muslims in the Valley) and on the other the rehabilitation and return of Kashmiri Pandits to their homes with assured security, the government has handed over the task of bringing insurgency under control to the security forces under the unified command of the Army. In the ongoing wars in the Middle East and Afghanistan, even the mightiest of the world’s armies have failed, suffered losses of their own men and material and have either pulled out or are in the process of pulling out, leaving those countries to their fate — at the hands of the ISIS, Taliban etc. — in whose wake Islamisation forecasts a more dangerous future.

No doubt the Army has tried its best to assuage the feelings of the locals by running many projects for their betterment under the umbrella of Operation Sadbhavana, opened schools for the children and taken them around the country to see for themselves how different communities speaking different languages and having different cultures and faiths live together. But that is not recognised fully. 

So, where do we go from here? Pakistan has an unfulfilled agenda in Kashmir and so do we. It is our integral part, where we have over the years invested so much in terms of men and material, shed blood for the cause of Kashmiriat, Insaniyat and Jamhooriat. If some self-willed political leaders speak of secession or dismemberment, we must ignore them for being sycophants serving their own purpose. The answer lies in continued diplomatic efforts, accepting the highs and lows of the ongoing situation. The Army must continue to carry out its mandate to bring the situation to a point where the government can take it forward for a permanent resolution of the imbroglio. The harsh reality is that neither can Pakistan annex any more in the Valley nor can we regain PoK.

During the World War II, the Allies — the US, UK and France — used China to target Japan

New Delhi, April 4

An Indian Army patrol has recovered wreckage of a World War-II vintage US Air Force aircraft in Roing district of Arunachal Pradesh.

The patrol had located the aircraft debris covered by thick undergrowth and buried under five-feet snow on March 30.

During the World War (1939-1945) the Allies — US, UK and France — used China as a base to launch against imperial Japan Army.

The US planes regularly flew sorties from Panagarh in West Bengal to locations in China. The route was over-flight over Arunachal Pradesh and then militarily referred to as the flights ‘over the hump’. Several such planes crashed. The US Department of Defence has been asking Indian government to allow access to these sites to locate the remains.

The latest finding of debris was based on the information received from local trekkers of Lower Dibang district through the police. A special patrol of Army was sent to locate the wreckage in a remote location, 30 km from Roing. The patrol moved cross country for 30 km in thick jungles and snow-covered areas for eight days to trace the wreckage.

The region had seldom been ventured by anyone in the past and is even obscured from air due to thick foliage. The discovery of the vintage aircraft and other warlike stores will lead to revelation of some historical inputs, the spokesperson for the Indian Army said. — TNS

The court had acted on a plea of the sailor’s mother who has been fighting a protracted legal battle to know the cause of her son’s ”mysterious” death during a training session

he Andhra Pradesh police probe into the death is incomplete even after 25 years (File)

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, April 13

The controversy over the purchase of 36 Rafale fighter jets from France has taken a new turn following an article published in French daily claimed that Anil Ambani’s France-based company (not the same dealing with Dassault Aviation) was given a tax waiver of 143.7 million euros (over Rs 1,100 crore).

The waiver came in October 2015, six months after PM Narendra Modi announced the Rafale deal in April 2015,  Le Monde reported. Anil Ambani’s Reliance Defence is an offset partner of Dassault in the Rafale deal. Reacting to the report by the French daily, Reliance Communications said the tax demands were completely unsustainable and illegal, and denied any “favouritism or gain from settlement”. 

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) said the period of tax concession did not relate “even remotely” to the Rafale deal.

Anil Ambani’s France-based  ‘Reliance Flag Atlantic France’ deals in under-sea cabling which carries telephone and internet traffic. French tax authorities, after a probe, found the company liable to pay 60 million euros in taxes for the period between 2007 and 2010. Reliance offered to pay 7.6 million euros as a settlement. 

This offer was turned down, and the French authorities conducted a fresh probe from 2010 to 2012 and levied an additional 91 million euros, Le Monde reported.

However, six months after the Rafale announcement, the French tax authorities accepted 7.3 million euros from the company as a settlement, the daily reported.

“France has cancelled a tax recovery of a total amount of 143.7 million euros, yet claimed for years, in favour of a French company belonging to Reliance Communications,” it reported. The French daily cited an auditor’s report of January 30, 2015, saying Reliance Flag Atlantic France is subject to two tax adjustments. It claimed that the parent company of the French company of Anil Ambani, Reliance Globalcom Ltd, is domiciled in Bermuda, which is on the blacklist of tax havens in the EU. In a statement, Reliance Communications said: “Reliance Flag settled tax disputes as per legal framework available to all companies operating in France.”

The MoD said: “Any connections drawn between the tax issue and the Rafale matter is totally inaccurate and a mischievous attempt to disinform… neither the period of the tax concession nor the subject matter of the concession relate even remotely to the Rafale deal concluded during the tenure of the present government.”

No political interference: France

• France has clarified a global settlement was reached between the French tax authorities and Reliance Flag, and that it was not subject to any political interference
• “The settlement was conducted in full adherence with the legislative framework governing this common practice of the tax administration,” the French embassy said

It’s Modi’s kripa: Cong

“This is called zero sum choices, startling tax concession and Modi ‘kripa’… PM Modi is acting as middleman for Anil Ambani… It is clear only one watchman is the thief.” —Randeep Surjewala, Cong spokesperso

The more Pakistan plays the ‘victim’ card, the less credible it appears. Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi said on Sunday that India was devising a plan to attack Pakistan, probably between April 16 and 20, after staging a ‘mishap’ in Jammu and Kashmir. Citing ‘reliable’ intelligence, he stated that the purpose of the ‘misadventure’ would be to justify India’s offensive against Pakistan and increase diplomatic pressure on Islamabad. Crying wolf, the neighbour has already apprised five permanent members of the UN Security Council about the so-called conspiracy.

The preemptive move betrays Pakistan’s nervousness in the light of its abject failure to rein in terror outfits operating from its soil. India has rightly dismissed Pakistan’s statement as irresponsible and preposterous and seen through the ploy of absolving itself of responsibility in case there is a repeat of the Pulwama terror strike. With several terror assets in place across the border, Pakistan has every reason to be nervous about one of its modules trying its luck with or without explicit instructions from Rawalpindi. Even though the Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) had promptly owned up the February 14 attack on a CRPF convoy, Pakistan is suggesting that India orchestrated it all to justify the Balakot airstrike. This laughable theory will cut no ice with the international community, which is already distrustful of Pakistan’s claims and intentions. The Imran Khan government’s purported crackdown on banned militant outfits has proved to be an eyewash. In late February, India had handed over a dossier to Pakistan with details of the JeM’s complicity in the Pulwama attack and the presence of JeM terror camps and its leadership in the neighbouring country. A month later, Pakistan announced that it had found no evidence to prosecute 50-odd persons who were detained in connection with the terror strike.

Thanks to the Balakot operation, India managed to call Pakistan’s nuclear bluff. The neighbour’s latest act of desperation won’t help it defend the indefensible. India should remain on guard and resist getting provoked into taking any rash step. Sooner than later, and not for the first time, Pakistan could end up with egg on its face.

he 260 feet Maitri Bridge, the longest cable suspension bridge over the Indus river, has been built by Combat Engineers using innovative engineering methods in a record time of 40 days

War veterans of 1947-48, 1962, 1971 and 1999 operations in the Ladakh region led by Naik Phunchok Angdus (Retd), an 89-year-old war veteran, on Monday dedicated a cable suspension bridge constructed by the Indian Army’s Fire and Fury Corps over the mighty Indus river at Choglamsar in Leh. The Army undertook the task of building the Maitri Bridge on Indus river following requests received from the civil administration to help the locals of Choglamsar, Stok and Chuchot villages (largest villages of Ladakh region).

The bridge was opened to the public by war veterans in the presence of Lt Gen YK Joshi, General Officer Commanding, Fire and Fury Corps, in a brief ceremony which was attended by a large number of local Army veterans besides senior Army and civil administration officials.

​The 260 feet cable suspension bridge, which has been built using innovative engineering methods, is the longest suspension bridge over the Indus river. It was constructed by the Combat Engineers (Sahas aur Yogyata Regiment) of the Fire & Fury Corps in a record time of 40 days, ferrying almost 500 tonnes of bridging equipment and construction material.

Symbolising the excellent civil-military relations existing in the Leh-Ladakh region, the bridge, named Maitri Bridge, has been constructed in the year when the Fire and Fury Corps is celebrating 20 years of Kargil Vijay Diwas.
Locals of the area thanked the Army for constructing the bridge, which has brought much relief to people of the area.

Manoj Joshi
Distinguished Fellow, Observer Research Foundation

The Chinese Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) was announced by President Xi Jinping at a function in Kazakhstan in 2013. It began as a Chinese national project, funded with Chinese money to serve Chinese national goals. Six years down the line, it is mutating and imposing a Chinese-designed layer on to the existing pattern of globalisation.

It has taken aboard criticism that its projects were creating debt traps to make countries vulnerable to Chinese geopolitical designs. Last week the second Belt and Road Forum (BRF) for International Cooperation was held in Beijing, providing us an outpouring of speeches, opinion pieces and research. It  was as much a stock-taking exercise as the platform to announce the new directions to what is now a set Chinese policy that  will impact the world in the coming decades.

These new directions have been shaped by the criticism of the BRI in India and other western countries, as well as the issues raised in the ongoing trade and technology war, where the US has charged Beijing with denying western companies market access, subsidising the activities of its state-owned enterprises abroad, compelling companies to make forced technology transfers and using opaque policies in issuing tenders and so on.

In his speech inaugurating the BRI Forum, President Xi signalled that China was willing to adjust its policies and shape a BRI which would emphasise international collaboration, transparency, high-quality products, procedures and processes, enhance market access, and promote imports of goods from developed and developing countries.

It must be noted, to start with, that the criticism of BRI has been somewhat over-the-top. Take for example the notion of that it encourages ‘debt traps’. For India this has been a major issue because of the manner in which the Sri Lankan port of Hambantota slid into the hands of a Chinese company under a 99-year lease. In an article in the New York Times last week, Deborah Brautigam of Johns Hopkins University noted that specialists studying the subject have found ‘scant evidence’ that Chinese banks were lending to projects that had little prospect of profit for the sake of gaining strategic advantage for China. Looking at the data of two major US institutions studying the subject, she concluded that ‘the risks of BRI are often overstated or mischaracterised’. In both Latin America and Africa, fears that China ‘was deliberately preying on countries in need are unfounded’.

Even so, Beijing has moved to address these issues relating to the

$440 billion worth of loans it has so far provided for BRI projects. At a meeting of finance professionals at the second BRF, Yi Gang, China’s Central Bank Governor, acknowledged the need for China to address the issue of the countries to service their borrowings at the time they were given the loans. At the same meeting, Li Kun, finance minister of China, said his country would develop a ‘debt sustainability analysis framework’ which will use World Bank and IMF methodology as well to ensure that risks from debts did not go out of control. Both these measures have won praise from Christine Lagarde, IMF Managing Director, who was present at the meeting.

The new financing criteria are also designed to attract foreign investment partners in the BRI financing. Western firms have always sensed the opportunities that the BRI would present. Their problem was that they were more or less frozen out of the action by the Chinese who tilted the playing field against them. However, and this is to the credit of President Trump, those walls are now crumbling and the Chinese are understanding that it may actually be advantageous for them to have others share risks as well as the gains.

Another major development in the BRI has been the evolution of the ‘third party’ cooperation model aimed at promoting shared development and spreading China’s risks. The origin of this model lies in the political decision of Japan to cooperate with BRI in practice, if not in name. As part of this, the two countries agreed in 2018 to jointly execute 50 infrastructural projects across Asia. This would combine China’s financial support and production capacity, with Japan’s rich overseas experience, advanced technology and risk management mechanisms. The UK has also expressed interest in getting involved in such projects. Both London and Tokyo figure that BRI is going to be around for a while and to oppose it is to deny their own companies the opportunity for profit. In the coming period, as the Chinese make their policy more open and market- friendly, other private players are also likely to jump in.

Chinese-led globalisation is a fact of life. BRI has already created facts on ground—rail lines, highways, ports and pipelines—which cannot be denied, leave alone reversed. Now, facing economic and political headwinds from the US and Europe, China is readjusting its policy. A great deal depends on the sincerity with which it can implement the changes it has spoken about.

Notwithstanding everything, BRI remains a Chinese-led project aimed at securing Chinese goals. They are not in it for altruistic purposes, but to enhance their own economic and political standing in the world. That is what all countries would do if they were in China’s position.

But where BRI v1.0 provided a vision of a stark approach aimed at maximising China’s advantage, v 2.0 indicates that Beijing has understood that it cannot be a zero-sum game and that if it wants its boat to rise in the harbour, it has to ensure that the other boats, too, do the same.

The writer was recently in Beijing to atten

Photo for representational purpose only.

Islamabad, April 5

Pakistan on Friday announced that it will release 360 Indian prisoners, mostly fishermen, this month in four phases, as a “goodwill gesture” amidst tensions between the two countries after the Pulwama terror attack

Foreign Office spokesperson Mohammad Faisal said the process of releasing the Indian fishermen will start on April 8 when 100 prisoners will be released. In the second phase on April 5, another 100 will be released. In the third phase on April 22, another 100 will be released and in the fourth and last phase on April 29, the remaining 60 prisoners will be released.

“We are doing it as goodwill gesture and hope that India will reciprocate it,” Faisal said while addressing his weekly briefing to the media in Islamabad.

The spokesperson said currently there are 347 Pakistani prisoners in India and 537 Indian prisoners in Pakistan.

“Pakistan will release 360 Indian prisoners, of which 355 are fishermen and 5 are civilians,” he said.

The fishermen will be taken from Karachi to Lahore and handed over to Indian officials at the Wagah border.

Anwar Kazmi, a spokesman of Edhi welfare organisation, which helps the released fishermen with clothes and food, told PTI from Karachi that the process of releasing the fishermen will start from Sunday.

“First a group of 100 fishermen will be taken from Karachi to Lahore on Allama Iqbal Express on Sunday,” he said.

They are likely to be handed over to India on Monday at Wagah. They spent months and sometimes years before repatriated.

Pakistan and India frequently arrest fishermen as there is no clear demarcation of the maritime border in the Arabian Sea and these fishermen do not have boats equipped with the technology to know their precise location.

Owing to lengthy and slow bureaucratic and legal procedures, the fishermen usually remain in jail for several months and sometimes years.

Pakistan’s announcement to release the fishermen came amidst escalating tensions between India and Pakistan after a suicide bomber of Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) terror group killed 40 CRPF personnel in Jammu and Kashmir’s Pulwama district on February 14.

India launched a counter-terror operation against a JeM training camp in Balakot in Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province. PTI