http://

Tribune News Service
Chandigarh, December 13

Armies of India and China on Thursday participated in ‘Combat Skill Live Firing’ exercise as part of the seventh edition of Sino-Indian joint military exercise ‘Hand-in-Hand 2018’, currently under way in China’s Chengdu.

Aimed at achieving synergy and interoperability, both contingents took turns to participate in the exercise. The exercise involved shooting static and impromptu targets while on the move.

‘Hand-in-Hand 2018’ began on December 11, and will go on until December 23.

Company size contingents of 11 Sikh Light Infantry from Indian Army and a regiment from Tibetan Military District of People’s Liberation Army are participating in the exercise.

The Indian contingent is commanded by Col Puneet Paratap Singh Tomar, Commanding Officer of 11 Sikh Light Infantry, while the Chinese contingent is led by Col Zhou Jun, Commanding Officer from Infantry Battalion of Tibetan Military District of PLA, according to an official Indian Army statement.

The celluloid depiction of the bravery of defence personnel in India has been lacking soul by being belligerent and loud

Nonika Singh

A soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of coloured ribbon. Napoleon Bonaparte

And Indian soldier even more so. The Indian Army and its high morale on battlefield or even off it, has  never been a subject of dispute. Alas, the same can’t be said of the celluloid depiction of the bravery of the men in uniform. In a society increasingly turning insular towards the sacrifices its defence forces make, a cinematic tribute ought to be the proverbial knock on the head. But with a few exceptions what makers offer is more like a thud, loud and belligerent.

No doubt men in uniform have never looked more dashing as on our silver screen. For a long time, the Indian cinema has flirted with the image of a defence officer, portraying him in the best of colours —  suave, intelligent and undeniably handsome. Be it in fleeting parts as in Sangam, Aradhana or plum roles (Hindustan Ki Kasam, Hum Dono, Border, Rustom), the list of heroes who have donned the uniform and rocked the look runs long and impressive.

But then wearing a uniform on screen is easy. Finding them a matching and equally sterling and inspiring story, however, is easier said than done. No wonder, war movies are not exactly a staple diet of our filmmakers.  Except for JP Dutta, whose heart beats for defence personnel, a few have dared to replicate the daring feats of our war heroes. Fewer still make the reel world credible and visceral. If old-timers swear by Haqeeqat whose song ‘Main yeh soch ke’ continues to ring through corridors of time, in more recent memory, the movie that flashes  is Border. Based on the Battle of Longewala during the Indo-Pakistan War in 1971 and starring handsome Sunny Deol as Punjab’s very own war hero Major Kuldip Singh Chandpuri, Border went on to win the National Award for National integration. Till date it is rated as the best movie by Dutta, who went on to direct LOC Kargil later.

Depicting the Indian Army’s valiant win on the highest battlefield, LOC, which opened to mixed reviews, had the standard Dutta tropes. Burdening each character with a pining wife and lover is the only way our directors deem fit to create an emotional core in such films dripping with overt sentimentality.

Patriotism, too, is an over used card with which they try to hook and hoodwink the viewer. Films like Anil Sharma’s Ab Tumhare Hawale Watan Saathiyo, touted as the first film on Indo-Pak friendship for instance indulged in blatant Pak bashing . Be it 1971 Beyond Borders or just 1971, which was about six prisoners of war, the directors and scriptwriters rarely push the envelope and, at best, fall in “good effort well intended” category.

Contrast this with the West where films delve deep into the psychology of the battles, what soldiers have to grapple with. Directed by Clint Eastwood, American Sniper — a biographical war drama film — followed the life of Kyle, who became the deadliest marksman in US military history with 255 kills from four tours in the Iraq War. Then there is Kathryn Bigelow’s The Hurt Locker, yet another Iraq war film described as spellbinding and gut-wrenching. Universally acclaimed, it won six Academy Awards, including Best Film and Best Original Screenplay, making Bigelow the first female director to win Best Film award.

Steven Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan is undisputedly on everyone’s favourite list of war films. Set during the invasion of Normandy in World War II, it asks how important one person’s life is and entails the sacrifices in the line of duty without even once uttering the word. It simply yet emphatically tells the story of a war veteran who sacrifices his life to save yet another soldier, Ryan.

Hollywood succeeds in portrayals that are poignant, gritty and moving in equal parts. These are films where silence speaks and not just the sound of guns. In comparison, desi war dramas only jump the gun and rarely touch a raw nerve.

Invariably, Bollywood does not go beyond paying lip service to the gallant. Jingoism might make Dutta see red, but when he forces unnecessary bravado on us as in his latest Paltan, no other word comes to mind. Prior to the release of this movie based on the Nathu-la military clashes of  1967, which took place along the Sikkim border,  he promised that there won’t be a single dry eye. Alas, the only heartfelt moment in the film was the line “Tum 100 crore ke ehsason mein zinda ho”.

Indeed, every once in a while there is a film that demands and commands attention. Shoojit Sircar’s Madras Cafe for instance. Delving into India’s role in Sri Lanka’s ethnic strife and the presence of   the IPKF in Sri Lanka, it encapsulated the cycle of events through the eyes of iArmy Intelligence officer Vikram (John Abraham). Despite certain flaws, it did manage to take you into the thick of things. Never mind that it married fact with fiction, it was on point as far as research and authenticity (real names of course were changed) were concerned. Sans item songs or any other digression, it remained close to the subject. Peppered with dialogues like “We lost our Prime Minster and Sri Lankan Tamils their future,” it was indeed an intelligent take on wars, portraying these as essentially what they are — a human tragedy more than anything else.

Dutta, too, asserts that war movies are essentially anti-war. Yet despite his noble intentions, India is yet to make a world class war film, a feat achieved by smaller nations such as Israel whose two films Waltz With Bashir and Foxtrot, dealing with dilemmas of soldiers won critical appreciation worldwide.

Will the upcoming Kesari that tells the story of Battle of Saragarhi, in which an army of 21 Sikhs fought against 10,000 Afghans in 1897, might tilt the scales and give us a cinematic treat that has eludedus so far? In near future we will also get to see movies on Uri attacks and on Captain Vikram Batra who died in the Kargil War and was awarded the Param Vir Chakra posthumously.  To what extent will the film on Batra will do justice to the gallant officer, remains to be seen. Uri: The Surgical Strike takes a leaf from the very recent retaliatory ‘surgical strikes’ in the wake of Uri attacks.

Will these movies reverse the tide and rise above clichés? Without doubt these are stories waiting to be told. However, the trick lies in not merely recounting heroic tales but delving deep and going beyond the Mera Bharat Mahan rhetoric too.

he presence of Pak army chief and a Khalistani leader gave the game away

Lt Gen Syed Ata Hasnain (retd)
Chancellor, Central University of Kashmir 

Prime minister Imran Khan just completed hundred days in office. His pre-power utterances did not inspire much confidence as he mouthed only words that the security establishment of Pakistan (the Deep State) was happy to hear. However ever since coming to power, he has been trying too hard to draw India into a dialogue, even as there is no let-up in the proxy war his country relentlessly pursues in J&K. Either he is not smart enough to appreciate India’s concerns or the Deep State hopes to escape some of the vilification which comes its way time and again from the international community, by forcing an Indian refusal. Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi’s subsequent mischievous statement that Imran Khan delivered a googly and India sent two ministers to Pakistan reveals the immature attitude of the Pakistan government promoted by the deep state.

While yet a cricketer, Imran was popular in India. He seems to think that the same popularity has accompanied him into the murky world of politics. The relationship of his country with India is on a different plane than what it was in the 70s and 80s. The terms then too were not friendly, but people-to-people contact existed. The LoC was quiet except for an odd infringement of the ceasefire agreed in 1971. The Siachen issue was beginning to heat up relations. But there existed an accepted idea that the military domain involving trans-LoC exchanges should not come in the way of bilateral relations. It was only after 1987 that things started to change in J&K and came to a head in early 1990. Imran was then captaining his team for the World Cup in 1992. Navjot Sidhu played for India and a goodly relationship had developed between them and other team members. The friendship continued, unmindful of the changes. This is what the two bring to the table today, frozen in time. Both are idealists while the time today is of realists.

Evidence that Imran has not been able to shed the sportsman’s persona comes from his utterances about Sidhu in his recent speech. Referring to the possibility of peace with India if and when Sidhu would be the PM of India exposes his naivety. If it was a  statement at the behest of the Deep State, it is even worse because Gen Bajwa must know that evoking a positive response from India won’t happen by instigating the BJP. Perhaps that was the intent; irritate the Indian leadership to such an extent that even with a goodwill gesture such as the Kartarpur corridor, it would be forced to respond negatively and thereby hopefully remain open to international criticism. 

In the sensitive world of India-Pakistan relations, every gesture is under the scanner for potential negativity, howsoever positive the intent. The moment Imran learnt that the Indian Government was playing ball up to a point and had no intent of treating a religious-cultural initiative as a political initiative, he should have changed tack. He should have spoken of the event being a major one in the people-to-people field which hopefully would transform to the political field. Mentioning the futility of war was fine, but implying mutual assured destruction due to the nuclear capability of both countries was like baiting India.

We are at a stage in the mutual relationship where to break the negativity in the political diplomatic sphere, sensitivities have to be kept in mind. Pakistan’s general election is over, India’s general election is away, but crucial state elections are on. This is a sensitive time for the ruling dispensation. A major decision in foreign policy would surely not be taken now. Even the acceptance of the corridor by India at this stage surprised many analysts. 

But getting a Khalistan protagonist to attend the ceremony was inappropriate. India’s major concern about the corridor has been about the potential influence by Khalistan separatist leaders on pilgrims who may visit the shrine. This aspect by itself appears to cast a doubt on the eventual success of this initiative.

Was Gen. Bajwa’s presence at the ceremony necessary? Gen. Rawat was nowhere near the Indian ceremony. Our Army kept itself away from it. Since the Indian event preceded the Pakistani event, someone on the Pakistan side did not do his homework. Its officialdom has some very smart people, but my impression gets diluted with the unnecessary presence of their army chief. Bajwa’s presence reinforced the perception that Pakistan army is the key controller. Sending a local commander to attend it would have conveyed a positive message. Someone who is looking to improve a political relationship from a position of relative weakness (in this case in two domains, the economic and international opinion) does have to bother about public perception across the border.

Sidhu is a superb speaker, but it seems he chooses the wrong themes to speak about. He was aware that his Chief Minister was conveying an important strategic message by staying away from the Pakistani event. Very few have actually complimented him for that. He was expressing a national concern without any political baggage. Sidhu could have won brownie points for the nation, for his Chief Minister and himself by conveying to his hosts, in the sweetest way that only he can convey, that India had concerns and addressing those concerns was important in order to make the initiative work. He should have thanked Imran profusely, but also cautioned him appropriately. These are times when political parties come together to play a strategy, as did the BJP and the Congress in 1994. Captain Amarinder Singh’s gesture smacked of the maturity of 1994. Unfortunately, Sidhu’s gest

On the morning of Friday, 23 November, 2018 three gunmen attacked the Consulate of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) at Karachi. In an hour-long gun battle, the Sindh Police managed to thwart the attack, killing the three gunmen while losing two of their men. All 21 Chinese citizens were safely evacuated. Prime Minister Imran Khan called the Karachi incident a “failed attack which was clearly a reaction to the unprecedented trade agreements that resulted from our trip to China. The attack was intended to scare Chinese investors and undermine the CPEC. These terrorists will not succeed.” Imran Khan was referring to his recent visit to China to plead more economic assistance for Pakistan’s failing economy, but nothing concrete emerged amid reports that he had raised issues concerning the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and its less than effective dividends for the people of Pakistan.

A terror attack in Pakistan with no Islamist link is a rarity. This one was by the Baloch Liberation Army and carries the sentiment of the demand for separation and creation of the independent state of Balochistan. However, there is more to it than just that sentiment, as the Baloch strongly feel the presence of the Chinese in Pakistan, and more specifically in their region, is inimical to their interests. They vehemently oppose Chinese projects in the western province that borders Iran and Afghanistan.

Balochistan is Pakistan’s poorest and least populous province despite a number of development projects Islamabad initiated there in the past. Baloch are 14 percent of Pakistan’s population residing in 40 percent of its land area. Rebel Baloch groups have waged a separatist insurgency in the province for decades, with the demand that the central government and the richer Punjab province unfairly exploit their resources. In 2005, Islamabad reacted to the insurgency by launching a military operation that resulted in the death of Nawab Akbar Bugti a respected Baloch leader; that operation had a profound effect in cementing separatist sentiments.

The CPEC in which China has invested more than 62 billion USD runs through the heart of Baluchistan. It aims to expand China’s influence in Pakistan and in conjunction with other initiatives of the Belt & Road Initiative (BRI) across Central and South Asia in order to counter US and Indian influence. The CPEC links Pakistan’s southern Gwadar port in Balochistan on the Arabian Sea to China’s western Xinjiang region. It also includes plans to create road, rail and oil pipeline links to improve connectivity between China and West Asia. The Baloch perceive that this project will give them nothing, exploit Balochistan’s abundant natural resources and give even more confidence to Islamabad to subjugate their people. Pakistan has raised a 15,000 strong force to secure the corridor against rebel attacks and other activities which hamper the completion of the project.

There is another angle to the militant attack. It, in fact, obliquely assists Pakistan in its quest for greater assistance to bail it out of its precarious financial position. Down to the last 8 billion USD in foreign exchange reserves, equivalent to approximately six weeks’ worth of imports, Pakistan has been seeking bailouts from different quarters. 3 billion USD promised by Saudi Arabia has seen only a billion USD reach its account and another 3.3 billion USD worth of energy credits again from Saudi Arabia gives it a temporary reprieve. Simultaneously, a 9 billion USD bailout from the International Monetary Foundation (IMF) has been sought, but is mired in transparency issues regarding the terms and conditions of the CPEC (relatively unknown) which the US as one of the major controllers of the IMF wants laid out bare. Prime Minister Imran Khan made a trip to Beijing to reinforce the longstanding existing relationship with China. However, even with the signing of many trade agreements, the visit did not produce any immediate financial relief, with China insisting that more talks were needed. Imran Khan was also seeking to renegotiate the Chinese terms as well as the priorities of the CPEC. In fact, lack of success in this direction has forced Pakistan to reinvigorate the pursuit of the IMF bailout but has run into the US demand on greater transparency.

To add to it is the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) demands on Pakistan to do more on dismantling financial networks that support transnational terror to get any reprieve in financial support. Pakistani newspaper Dawnreported that the delegation of the Asia Pacific Group of the FATF was not impressed with the progress made by Pakistan so far as it found the legal framework insufficient and the institutional arrangements weak.

People from Balochistan further charge that the province’s local population has no stake in the CPEC and chafe at China importing materials from China, needed for projects, rather than purchasing them locally and also employing Chinese rather than Pakistani labor; all actions which give no boost to the local economy.

The militant attack in Karachi could turn all this around if the Chinese perceive a serious security threat to their flagship project. It could see a change in the Chinese approach towards securing more support for the project and therefore a rejigging of the terms and conditions, exactly what Imran Khan was seeking during his visit. It could also lead to an assuaging release of loans under negotiation. The Chinese are known for their “no free lunch” approach to financial assistance. Beijing’s release will be for the strictest purpose of effect. It will include terms for enhancing the security and making the CPEC project more viable. The experience with Malaysia is only too recent to fritter away the long term gains at the altar of short term losses.

India was right in condemning the attack, although many in India will decry the lack of support for a Baloch militant group in light of Pakistan’s proxy war in Jammu and Kashmir. Pragmatism demands that perception be reinforced about the difference between India’s stature as a responsible nation battling transnational terror and of Pakistan which is repeatedly accused of supporting it; the latest being President Trump’s responses in a recent interview.

The Karachi militant attack may seed more such actions by Baloch rebels and nationalists unless Pakistan is able to convince the Chinese to re-examine the CPEC and its local dividends. Failure to do so by the Chinese is likely to lead to more instability astride the Corridor and its consequent failure.

The author is a retired lieutenant-general and former general officer commanding 15 and 21 Corps

PAKISTAN PM Imran Khan would have set the pigeons aflutter at South Block by his offer for talks with PM Modi. More crucial for India’s stance of “terror and talks cannot go together”, Imran conceded that it was not in Pakistan’s interests to allow the use of its territory for terror activities in other countries. “The mindset of the people has changed,” he tried to convince skeptical Indian journalists. The ball is now in India’s court after it treated Pakistan’s earlier quest to utilise the Kartarpur corridor with suspicion as it sought a reset by glossing over past terror strikes in India that were incubated on its soil. Imran Khan’s call for amity and détente sounds more sincere with a reference to India’s bugbear — cross-border terrorism.

But there were adverse signals both from the presence of separatists at the ceremony and the Sikhs for Justice (SFJ) announcing plans for a pro-Khalistan convention in Pakistan. Such provocations, even if of figurative importance, feed into the apprehensions of the Indian security establishment, rendering them reluctant partners in a peace initiative. While Imran has tried hard to cast Pakistan in global eyes as a harbinger of peace, his admission about terror launch pads in Pakistan goes only a small distance to address the angst of substantial political constituency here that perceives Pakistan as an exporter of terror.

The unanimity among all the major players in Pakistan on improving ties with India, as Imran claims, should be reflected in bringing to book the masterminds of the Mumbai, Uri and Pathankot attacks, the actual cause for the strain. The Sikh community’s happiness over the development of the corridor cannot escape the overarching political context. The ease of passage of pilgrims to the shrine will always be an adjunct of the state of play in bilateral ties. Imran is playing for the long haul as is apparent from his readiness to wait for reciprocation till the general elections here are over. Besides bringing spiritual solace and fulfilment to lakhs of Sikhs, the corridor can well be a new path to  peace.

Sanjeev Singh Bariana
Tribune News Service
Chandigarh, November 25

Citing continued terrorist attacks in Punjab and the killing of Indian soldiers by Pakistan troops at the LoC, Punjab Chief Minister Capt Amarinder Singh today turned down the Pakistan Foreign Minister’s invitation for the stone-laying of the Kartarpur corridor on November 28.

His Minister for Tourism, Cultural Affairs and Museums Navjot Singh Sidhu, though, will be flying to Pakistan to attend the  “ground-breaking ceremony” by Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan. Talking over phone from poll-bound Madhya Pradesh, where he is campaigning for the Congress, Sidhu said: “I have the permission of the CM and have informed the Ministry of External Affairs, as required.”

In a letter to the Pakistan Foreign Minister, Sidhu wrote: “On this momentous day, the hearts of the Sikh community will overflow with hope and gratitude as they contemplate their chance to pay obeisance at the historical gurdwara.”

Capt Amarinder welcomed the “historic occasion” but said he could not make it. He expressed hope that the Pakistan PM “will do all he can to bring the countries together on the road to peace”.

To islamabad: can’t go, because…

“Not a day passes when Indian soldiers are not killed or wounded on LoC; secondly, because of ISI’s nefarious activities in Punjab“ Capt Amarinder Singh 

Ray of hope for boosting ties, says Sidhu

“I had sought the CM’s permission for a cause. I see it as a ray of hope for boosting India-Pakistan ties. I will attend the state function in Amritsar too.“ Navjot Singh Sidhu

Tribune Njews Service

Jammu, November 23

A Brigade Commander-level flag meeting was held between the Indian and Pak armies on Friday morning at the Poonch-Rawalkote crossing point.

The Indian Army delegation was led by Brigadier VS Sekhon while the Pakistan team was led by Brigadier Qaiser.

The flag meeting focused on augmenting confidence-building measures, maintaining peace along the Line of Control (LoC) and prevention of infiltration from Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. The meeting was held in a cordial and friendly atmosphere and ended with both sides assuring to adhere to the norms of the 2003 ceasefire agreement and work towards improving the situation along the Line of Control.

Amit Kumar Sinha, a sergeant with the Indian Air Force, on Wednesday succumbed to injuries he sustained when he was shot at on November 18 by thieves who wanted to steal the mobile phone he had just bought.

Amit, 35, had come to Patna on November 3 to celebrate Diwali and Chhath with his parents, four sisters and two brothers. The cheer for the family was short-lived.

Amit had gone to buy a mobile phone form a shopping complex on the Kurji-Patliputra road on November 18 evening.

As he came out of the shop with his newly bought MI phone, motorcycle-borne criminals accosted him and demanded at gunpoint that he hand over the device. Amit resisted, and was shot twice.

He was first admitted to a nearby hospital in Patliputra Colony and later shifted to the army hospital in Danapur, where he died at 1.30am on Wednesday.

Before the Diwali-Chhath break, he had visited Patna for Rakshabandhan in August.

He was to rejoin duty at Nalli air force base in Gujarat on November 23.

As Amit’s body reached his house in Mithila Colony of Nasriganj locality on Wednesday morning, the wails of his mother Nirmala Devi, 63, and his sisters could be heard from a distance.

Local residents, including many women, had assembled outside his and some of them were consoling the family members.

Amit, a bachelor, had joined the air force in 2000. His first posting was in Bihta, about 40km from Patna.

An eight-member team from the Bihta air force base also reached his house and placed a floral wreath on his mortal remains.

Shouts of “Sinha amar rahe, amar rahe” rent the air as Amit’s was taken to Shiva Ghat on the bank of the Ganga in Digha for his last rites.

His elder brother Sanjay Kumar, who runs a shop in Mithila Colony, performed the rites.

Amit’s friend Ajay Singh, who was with him on November 18 evening, said Amit had joined the air force to serve his country and lay down his life fighting for the motherland.

“But see what happened to him, he died fighting with petty criminals,” Ajay said.

Amit’s 70-year-old father, Krishna Kumar Singh, a retired journalist, his mother and his siblings had been left with nothing but tears, the friend rued.

Contacted about progress in Amit’s murder case, deputy superintendent of police (law & order) Rakesh Kumar said the local cops had identified some persons and raids are on to arrest those involved in the crime.