War books are not only a prominent source for understanding the world’s conflicts — past, present and future — but also a useful base material for sociologists and political scientists to forecast future societal trajectories

Wars we fought, but didn’t forget: (Left) Indian soldiers during the Battle of Longewala in the Western Sector during the 1971 War; in the trenches in World War I

Sandeep Dikshit

The written history of the world is largely a history of warfare — John KeeganHumans have always engaged in warfare. The earliest known evidence of intra-state conflict is a 3,500-year-old ivory knife handle that must have figured in one of the battles between the Egyptians and the Mesopotamians. Only 283 years since then have seen no recorded wars.The Westphalia concept of nation states in the West is also an outcome of a 30-year-long war in the seventeenth century.(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)In the twentieth century, India’s impulses towards sovereignty and nationhood gathered steam after it contributed generously to the British effort in World War I. Among its neighbours, Russia became a Communist country after the same war while China turned one following wars between the Communists and the Nationalists, which were a result of the space provided by World War II. It may disappoint the creeping incursion theorists that 60 years later China’s borders have remained nearly the same. In fact, during its settlement with 12 countries, it actually gave away a lot of land it had claimed.This makes military history not only a prominent source for understanding the world’s conflicts — past, present and future — but also a useful base material for sociologists and political scientists to forecast future societal trajectories.It also gives a clue about the present militaristically aggressive behaviour of some nations such as the US, whose early leaders like Theodore Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln were raised in the crucible of wars and actually led battles.From a tangible perspective, history’s usefulness is more difficult to identify than applied sciences such as medicine or engineering. However, there is no such confusion regarding military history. Cynics may point out the futility of researching centuries-old muscle-and brawn-dependent warfare in an era of armed drones, nuclear submarines and inter-continental missiles. But technology and military history need not be irreconcilable; neither is technology a Silver Bullet. Military history, at the end, is also about technological change and how well or badly military forces adapted themselves to the changes, especially in the kinetics of tactics and strategy; the preparedness in logistics and administration, finessing of military doctrine military and theory, the degree of military professionalism and the mental agility of its leadership.It is also about normative application of the lessons learnt from past wars even if a copy-paste approach will likely bring grief.Military history need not be about mega clashes of armour and men. It could also be about learning from previous anti-terrorism campaigns for instance and applying them in the present instances.There is a caveat though: for soldiers, a mastery over military history does not translate into professionalism and competence; it can add to, but, is not a substitute for practical experience. A simplistic and distorted understanding can have adverse implications as the Americans recently experienced twice: Military professionals had cited the blowback against the British and Soviets to argue against a military intervention in Afghanistan, but then National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice had drawn a different conclusion: “The Soviets had never taken Kabul whereas the US will,” she said. The war is still on.It is true that military history alone is terribly inadequate in providing all the answers to all the issues confronting the politico-military policy makers of today. This is why an interdisciplinary approach is very important. At the same time, none can deny the lessons in capability of the political leadership, its synergy with the military brass and the military response and counter-response that come from studying past wars: the wars of 1962 and 1971 are studies in contrast while the 1965 battle would fall somewhere in between the two.In the end, every war ought to be a deliberate use of force to achieve political goals. In other words, in most cases, politicians flag off wars and the buck stops with them: win or lose. It is they who are answerable for a large number of critical components of a war: logistics infrastructure, expenditure on the military and the extent of indigenisation.The distilled lessons from military history thus become an integral part of a serving politician’s statecraft as also for tomorrow’s leaders, who are students today. For winning and avoiding wars, it becomes important to study military history in universities and schools as much as in military training institutes.

General Pervez Musharraf has expressed fondness for the Lashkar-e-Taiba, and said he was the ‘biggest supporter’ of the group and its founder Hafiz Saeed.

Strategic circles in India and perhaps around the world appear to have been shocked by a recent interview given by former Pakistan President General Pervez Musharraf. He said that there was much mutual fondness between him and the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), the internationally-branded terrorist organisation based in Pakistan.

General Musharraf went on to say that he was the “biggest supporter” of the LeT and its founder, Hafiz Saeed, and asserted that he backs the terror group’s role in “suppressing” the Indian Army in Kashmir. That a former President of Pakistan is admitting to this, and the fact he exploited the LeT to contest the Army of a neighboring country, is tantamount to a full admission of state-sponsored terror by Pakistan in J&K. Not that this needed any confirmation; it’s the timing that is interesting, as is the personality stating this.

There was a time, between 2003 and 2007, when India was negotiating with Musharraf, perceiving a change of heart in Pakistan. Backroom channels were abuzz for over four years after he declared a unilateral ceasefire along the LoC in November 2003. There was even talk of a mutual withdrawal from the Siachen Glacier, which mercifully was never accepted by the Indian Army brass. All this was on the basis of what appeared as a transformed General Musharraf looking for true peace, under the shadow of India’s outstanding leader, then-Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee.

What gives? Why is Musharraf cozying up to Hafiz Saeed now? The answer lies in the wide open spaces in Pakistan’s political scenario, where the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) remains a shadow of its past, the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz)  is in serious internal disruption mode after the ouster of Nawaz Sharif as Prime Minister, and Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) hardly has the capability to go it alone.

This tempted Hafiz Saeed to launch his own political party, the Milli Muslim League (MML), to politically mainstream his rogue terrorist organisation, the Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD). The Pakistan Election Commission has yet to officially register the MML, but Yaqoob Sheikh and Liaqat Ali Khan of the MML contested by-elections in NA-120 (Lahore) and NA-4 (Peshawar) respectively as independent candidates; in fact, Yaqoob Sheikh even secured 5,822 votes.

A new organisation, Tehreek Labaik Ya Rasool Allah, which recently swamped the capital Islamabad demanding death sentences for PML-N ministers and the complete dismissal of parliament, has led the latest emergence of ideologically radical parties that have simultaneously surfaced in recent months. The waning political weight of centrist parties is going to be a major challenge going forward.

Musharraf is looking at this challenge as an opportunity. There have been reports of him attempting to patch together a combine of 23 parties of different hues, including the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) and the Pak Sarzameen Party. He has called this conglomerate ‘Pakistan Awami Ittehad’, but there can be no certainty that partners here will flock together when it comes to the elections next year. Besides, these are strange bedfellows, and the inclusion of parties such as MQM is a shot in the dark. With nothing having crystallised, Musharraf is seizing the moment of Hafiz Saeed’s release from detention in the fond hope that MML will probably fall in line to join his combine.

At the age of 74, Musharraf’s ambitions, the taste of power (with his background of having led Pakistan for over nine years, 1999-2008) and the relatively open space in Pakistan’s political labyrinth are all creating new complexities. It is hard to say which direction all this will take Pakistan in, even as the nation wrestles with issues concerning extremist violence on its streets.

While all this is pre-election machinations, Musharraf’s admission of employing and backing the LeT to fight the Indian Army appears to be opening potential links for future alliance. Does this have the backing of the Pakistani Army? It is quite certain that an admission by its former chief and President of Pakistan of supporting an Islamist organisation to achieve Pakistan’s strategic ambitions is not causing any embarrassment to it.

The Pakistani Army is a past master in handling this through its policy of denial and deft information handling. With supposedly moderate elements, former leaders, political opportunists and the army all in the fray for exploiting political Islam, how the cookie crumbles in Pakistan is anybody’s guess.

Bhanu P Lohumi

Tribune News Service

Shimla, November 26

The Manali-Keylong National Highway has been closed to traffic due to inclement weather. The Border Roads Organisation (BRO) has told the state administration that it would not open the Rohtang Pass in the event of fresh snowfall.The Rohtang Pass was closed twice during November due to snowfall. It was cleared by the BRO to enable the stranded vehicles and the people to reach their destination, but now the BRO will open it only after the winter is over. The road was opened for a day today to enable tribals to return to Lahaul from Kullu.Despite the weather being dry, the mercury stayed 10 to 15 degrees Celsius below the freezing point in the high-altitude tribal areas and mountain passes, resulting in the freezing of water and making driving hazardous.Residents of Lahaul-Spiti are annoyed over the closure of the Rohtang Pass. They said barring a few spots like Rahni Nullah and Byas Nullah, there was no risk and the Pass could remain open until the place witnessed heavy snowfall.Kundan Lal Sharma, a resident of Keylong, said SUVs were made for bad roads and harsh weather and that these should be allowed to ply in the area.Sources said the district administration and the BRO were busy passing the buck, while the Lahaul-Spiti district administration maintained that the road was closed after heavy machinery was removed from Rohtang. The BRO stated that in case, the administration decided to allow vehicles to pass Rohtang, they would help.Meanwhile, the minimum temperature has slightly increased in the tribal areas. Keylong was the coldest minus 2.9 degree Celsius followed by Kalpa 0.4 degree Celsius, Manali 1 degree Celsius, Bhuntar 2 degree Celsius, Shimla 7.1 degree Celsius and Dharamsala 7.2 degree Celsius. The Met office has predicted rain and thunderstorm in the mid hills and rain and snow in the higher hills on November 28.

Closure of Rohtang Pass annoys tribals 

• The Rohtang Pass was closed twice during November due to snowfall. It was cleared by the BRO to enable the stranded people to reach their destination.
• Now, it will be opened only after the winter is over.
• The road was opened for a day on Sunday to enable tribals to return to Lahaul from Kullu.
• Residents of Lahaul-Spiti are annoyed over the closure of the Rohtang Pass.
• They said barring a few spots like Rahni Nullah and Byas Nullah, all other roads were fine and that the Pass could remain open until the place witnessed heavy snowfall.

India should consider Chinese twin offers on BRI route and border dispute since they address its military and strategic concerns.

Pravin Sawhney,Editor, FORCE

his could well be India’s opportunity to manage China. In an interesting gesture, China has offered to assuage India’s sovereignty concern on the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). China has also proposed to start a series of dialogues for an “early harvest” on the disputed border issue, provided India agrees to consider finding common ground between its Act East policy and other development strategies, and the BRI. Both Chinese proposals have come from its Ambassador in India, Luo Zhaohui. “We can change the name of the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Create an alternate corridor through Jammu and Kashmir, Nathu la (pass) or Nepal to deal with India’s concerns,” he said at Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi. Earlier, he wrote in this newspaper (November 16), making a connection between the BRI and Act East policy. In what may not be a coincidence, the Russian Ambassador in India, Nokolay Kudashev, said that China and India should talk on the BRI and set aside their differences in favour of economic cooperation.The timing of the Chinese offer is opportune. In December, the foreign ministers’ trilateral meeting between India, China and Russia is to be held in Delhi followed by the 20th round of border resolution talks between special representatives of India and China. The Chinese interlocutor, Yang Jeichi, has been elevated as member of the Politburo of the Communist Party of China. India’s military anxiety

India should consider the Chinese offer since it could address India’s two core concerns: military and strategic. Let’s start with the military anxiety. Given the unbridgeable gap between the Indian and Chinese military power; the fact that the disputed border is neither agreed on maps nor ground; that the terrain favours China owing to better infrastructure and acclimatisation of troops; and above all, that the border has a military moniker called the Line of Actual Control (LAC), which can be shifted by military force by the powerful side, India is constantly worried about intrusions and transgressions by Chinese troops.This is why, departing from protocol, PM Narendra Modi, during Xi Jinping’s visit to India in September, 2014, publicly sought clarification on the LAC at the joint press conference. Unlike the present LAC, transgressions on an agreed LAC — a de facto border — would be an act of aggression tantamount to a declaration of war. Since China did not want to lose the advantage of exercising military coercion by sauntering across the LAC at will, it rejected Modi’s proposal. This proposal, which is the best that India could get short of the border resolution (which is unlikely anytime soon), could be the “early harvest” hinted by Luo in exchange for India considering the BRI.Strategic concerns

Moreover, India has two strategic concerns — the said and the unsaid. The said one is about the CPEC which passes through territory held by Pakistan, but is claimed by India. China has responded by saying that a mutually acceptable route could be formulated. The unsaid concern, which is the trickier, is this: India believes that joining the BRI would limit its strategic options necessary for its rise. The best option, India believes is to partner with the US, and other like-minded democracies and friendly nations, in ensuring that the present regional architecture does not get upended by the BRI. India, therefore, has announced its Act East policy with connectivity, trade and security as its three pillars. Its other development strategies include Sagarmala, Spice Route and Mausam initiatives, the Asia-Africa sea corridor with Japan, and the Quadrilateral — India, the US, Japan and Australia — dialogue for strategic and maritime cooperation. Moreover, the US, by renaming the Asia-Pacific as the Indo-Pacific has sought maritime partnership with India from East Asia — with the pivot in ASEAN —across the Indian Ocean Region. The US has also proposed connectivity on land and sea to counter the BRI.Important issues

While all this appears exciting, India should consider three issues:1 Its national power (economic, military and technological) does not compare favourably with China; the Indian Navy warships lack long-legs, numbers and endurance. Not to forget its limited annual allocations and an unenviable shipbuilding industry. 2 The BRI is a strategic threat since it impedes India’s rise by getting its neighbourhood and “extended neighbourhood” on board the BRI. Soon, this would translate into military threat for India (on land and seas) since the People’s Liberation Army would develop defence ties with nations that have joined the BRI to protect its own people, assets, infrastructure and interests there.3 The US administration, with its withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership and ‘America First’ policy, has handed over the economic leadership of the Asia-Pacific to China. This has resulted in a review of the regional balance-of-power by US’ allies Japan, South Korea and Vietnam, who are gravitating towards China. Since these nations are hedging their bets, does it make sense for India to position itself as China’s rival, especially when China is a power which cannot be contained? India’s interests would be better served by considering the Chinese double offer. Strategic hedging or as the foreign secretary, S Jaishankar, recently said, “rigidity of positions no longer holds” should be adopted soonest.

Nawanshahr, November 13

The police today busted a gang of snatchers that was planning to loot a cash van. Two pistols, a kirpan and a bike were recovered from the possession of five gang members.The police said Army jawan Vikramjit Singh, who belongs to Hoshiarpur and is posted in Rajasthan, was the mastermind of the snatchings along with Jagdish of Jalandhar. Both are on the run.Those arrested have been identified as Bihar resident Mithilesh Kumar, Nandish of Balachaur, Malkit and Rampal of Ropar and Prabhlobhan Singh of Banga. The police said Vikramjit had recently gone back to Rajasthan after spending holidays with his family. — TNS

File photo

Arun Joshi

tribune news service

Srinagar, November 10

The Kashmiri separatists had made up their mind to give another try to an engagement with New Delhi and also to bring Pakistan on board as latest as November 4, but a notice to JKLF chief Yasin Malik the very same day made them do a U-turn and reject the talks offer in almost absolute terms.“They felt the space to operate for the Hurriyat Conference was being completely squeezed. Since there was no back channel at work, they thought it was time to tell Delhi that separatists cannot be cowed down and made to sit across the table,” sources said. This also gave a boost to pro-Pakistan elements like Syed Ali Shah Geelani, who on Thursday reaffirmed that “Kashmir should be a part of Pakistan”.(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)According to the separatists, Delhi’s special representative Dineshwar Sharma was being used as a ruse.Sources said the Hurriyat, like all other groups in Kashmir, was convinced that “Pakistan, good or bad, cannot be wished away. It has a historical stake and also controls the levers of militancy to a large extent”. Already there is dismay among separatists over the very limited public support they have garnered against the NIA raids, and the opening of doors to the interlocutor would have strengthened the impression propagated by Delhi that they had been doing wrong all through.

Without reviving martial spirit of Indian State, Military Veterans can’t expect justice 

—- Many TV Channels showed on October 30, 2017 that the Indian Military Veterans (protesting for one-rank-one-pay, OROP) were humiliatingly removed from India’s capital New Delhi at Jantar-Mantar [ allegedly due to order of National Green Tribunal (NGT) which expects protestors to protest at Ramlila ground and not at Jantar-Mantar]. But protest venue (either Jantar-Mantar or Ramlila ground) is not the real issue. The real issue as generally mentioned at ( http://www.pakistanchristianpost.com/detail.php?articleid=2422 ) is the disgraceful manner in which Military (including its Veterans) is being treated in India and for this mainly the senior / top brass of Indian Military, the serving and Veterans, are to be blamed. The Indian Military will not come out of this disgraceful situation unless the following is done which, what to talk of OROP or any other legitimate demand of Military Veterans and serving Military men, but even respect and honor of Indian Military and (its Veterans) will rise to the exalted level:- 

(1)- Military Veterans should launch a new registered NGO (by giving its membership to other Indians too than merely to Military Veterans) which will carry out demonstrations at all the State Capitals and District headquarters for demanding the following which are exclusively concerned about the martial matters of Indian State. 

(2)- Martial Court (separate from Court Martial) should be constituted which will decide all the grievances of members of Indian Military. 

(3)- BJP came in Government in the State of Assam mainly on the issue of identifying, tracking and deportation of Bangladeshi illegal migrants in Assam. Hence Government of India and of Govt of Assam should immediately start the process of sending all the Bangladeshi infiltrators to Bangladesh from India as these illegal immigrants have become serious security threat to India especially in view of Rohingya crises 

(4)- India should immediately talk to Pakistan for the retrieve of PoK (even militarily if necessary) as mentioned at http://www.alwihdainfo.com/India-trying-to-be-over-smart-by-not-talking-to-Pakistan-about-Kashmir_a58779.html 

(5)- The dispute with China is legal (unlike dispute with Pakistan which is political) hence India should pressurize China to constitute a judicial commission (preferably through UN of which China is a privileged veto wielding permanent member) in order to settle Indo-China border dispute without any further delay. 

(6)- India should immediately recover Rs ~ 1,000 Trillion State capital as Income Tax as mention at ( http://www.alwihdainfo.com/Now-India-bound-to-get-Rs–1000-Trillion-income-tax-as-Delhi-Police-steps-in_a31456.html AND http://www.newsnation.in/article/121125-news-nation-disclosure-on-blackmoney-kharabpati-farmers-take-agriculture-route-t.html ) so that in addition to solving many of the problems of India (arising out of financial hardship) the Military power of India can also be buttressed further. 

Indian Military Veterans have already faced enough of humiliations and it is high time they use some common-sense and realize that ‘seedhi ungli se ghee nahi nikalta’ (without pressure nobody listens) especially in democracy where other interest groups have taken control of Indian State. 

Regards 

Hem Raj Jain 
(Author of ‘Betrayal of Americanism’) 
Bengaluru, India
Read more at http://www.alwihdainfo.com/Indian-Military-Veterans-should-stop-bringing-disgrace-to-the-country_a58977.html#IrA1QeJwZiHsBdbv.99

Deepender Deswal

Tribune News Service

Hisar, October 24

An RTI application has revealed rise in the number of armed forces’ personnel killed in action in J&K ever since the NDA government came to power in mid-2014.The application filed by Hisar-based RTI activist Naresh Saini revealed five Army men and eight BSF personnel were killed from 2011 to 2014. The number of casualties tripled in two years and nine months from 2015 to September 2017, during which 39 soldiers, including 27 Army men and eight BSF personnel, were martyred.The information provided by the Ministry of Home Affairs relates to Army men and BSF personnel killed in J&K due to ceasefire violations and cross-border firing along the Indo-Pak border. The MHA diverted the query on Indo-China border.

श्रीनगर. नरेंद्र मोदी गुरुवार को कश्मीर में एलओसी के पास स्थित गुरेज सेक्टर पहुंचे। यहां उन्होंने जवानों के साथ दिवाली मनाई। प्राइम मिनिस्टर ने जवानों को मिठाई खिलाई और कहा कि आप ही मेरा परिवार हैं। मोदी के साथ आर्मी चीफ बिपिन रावत, नॉर्दर्न कमांड चीफ ले. जनरल देवराज अन्बू और चिनार कॉर्प्स के कमांडर ले. जनरल जेएस संधू भी मौजूद थे। मोदी की इस विजिट का पहले खुलासा नहीं किया गया था। पिछले साल मोदी ने हिमाचल प्रदेश के किन्नौर में आईटीबीपी, आर्मी और डोगरा रेजीमेंट के जवानों के साथ दिवाली मनाई थी।

जवानों के साथ दिवाली पर क्या बोले नरेंद्र मोदी?