Daughter of martyr policeman Deepak Thushoo who died in militant encounter in Kashmir, wailing near the body before last rites at Jagti township in Nagrota outskirts of Jammu on Thursday.Tribune Photo: Inderjeet Singh

Tribune News Service

Srinagar, March 22

The Army and J&K Police paid floral tributes to the five security personnel killed in a fierce gunfight in the frontier Kupwara district on Wednesday.The Army held a solemn ceremony at Badamibagh cantonment, where Lt Gen AK Bhatt, Chinar Corps Commander, and all ranks paid homage to the three soldiers killed in the gunfight on behalf of the nation. “In a show of solidarity, representatives from other security agencies also joined in paying their last respects to the martyrs,” Srinagar-based defence spokesman Col Rajesh Kalia said.Havildar Jorabar Singh, Naik Ranjeet Khalkho and Naik Mohammad Ashraf Rather were killed in an anti-militancy operation in Halmatpora, Kupwara .Jorabar Singh, 45, had joined the Army in 1993 and hailed from Rait village in Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. He is survived by his wife and three children.Ranjeet Khalkho, 33, hailed from Dudhakhuti village in Ranchi, Jharkhand, and had joined the Army in 2001. He is survived by his parents, a brother and three sisters.Mohommad Ashraf Rather, 35, had joined the Army in 2004. He belonged to Reshigund village of Kralpora in Kupwara, Kashmir, and is survived by his wife and a daughter.Floral tributes were also paid to the two policemen — Senior Grade Constable Deepak Thusoo of Nagrota and Special Police Officer Mohammad Yousuf of Kachhama in Kupwara — killed in the Kupwara gunfight.Member of Parliament Fayaz Ahmad Mir led the police and security forces personnel in paying tributes to the two slain policemen in Kupwara. In Srinagar, Inspector General of Police Swayam Prakash Pani led the police and security forces officers in the wreath-laying ceremony for the two policemen.Deepak Thusoo is survived by his aged parents, wife, 12-year-old son, 7-year-old daughter and an unmarried sister, a police spokesman said.Mohammad Yousuf is survived by his aged parents, three sons and two minor daughters, the youngest being five years old.

Children participate in a turban tying competition organised in remembrance of Char Sahibzade in Amritsar. — File photo

Syed Ali Ahmed

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, December 22

The National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) has agreed to consider inclusion of a chapter on Char Sahibzade of 10th Sikh Master Guru Gobind Singh in its syllabi from next year.This was communicated to Manjinder Singh Sirsa, Delhi MLA and general secretary of the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee (DSGMC) by the NCERT. Sirsa had raised the issue with Prime Minister Narendra Modi.In a communique written to Sirsa on the issue, Secretary of the NCERT Major Harsh Kumar stated that the Director, NCERT, had appreciated the concern of Sirsa regarding inclusion of a chapter on Char Sahibzade for their unparalleled valour and supreme sacrifice in the country.The secretary informed that new policy of education was in progress which would give direction for development of national curriculum framework, syllabi and curricular material for schools, Sirsa said.Harsh Kumar said Sirsa’s suggestion would be placed before the expert committee before finalising syllabi and curricular material for social science in general and history in particular.Sirsa said his mission was to get the next generation aware of the supreme sacrifice made by four Sahibzade for the nation and humanity. There was no parallel in the world of the sacrifice they made at such a tender age.Sirsa also urged all the education boards of different states to include chapters on history of the supreme sacrifice in their syllabi so that children studying in these states could get acquainted with these incidents of historical importance.

Ajay Banerjee

TRibune News Service

New Delhi, March 7

In what reflects a ‘lack of interest’ by foreign companies in the Indian defence manufacturing sector, there has been a mere Rs 1.17 crore foreign direct investment (FDI) since May 2014. (Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)Touting FDI in defence as a major shift in policy, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) had okayed up to 49 per cent stake for foreign companies partnering Indian companies. As per the MoD figures given in Parliament, the defence industry received FDI worth Rs 1.17 crore from April 2014 to December 2017, a mere shadow of the overall FDI inflow into the country during 2016-17 fiscal which stands at Rs 3,86,885 crore. In 2016, a revised FDI policy on defence was announced, allowing FDI up to 49 per cent under the automatic route and beyond that through the government route, “wherever it was likely to result in access to modern technology or for other reasons to be recorded”.The government had also come out with a “Security Manual for Licensed Defence Industries”, prescribing guidelines on physical, information, documentation, cyber and personnel security aspects. The defence manufacturing sector needs significant capital investment and infusion of technology for which foreign investment can play a critical role. 

IN acquitting former Telecom minister, A Raja, Ms Kanimozhi and all other accused in the “2G scam”, the Special CBI court at Patiala House has introduced a spicy flavour to the national political curry. To the extent, 2G had become emblematic of a supposedly corrupt government and a broken down political economy, the Special CBI court verdict is bound to energise the discredited UPA crowd, as also take the bite out of PM Modi’s messianic proclamations against the corrupt. Coming close on the heels of an honourable electoral draw in Gujarat, the political equations are poised to be redefined. Suddenly, the sinners are looking less than sinners and the saints no longer come across so saintly.The CBI has done a shoddy job but it will find its institutional arm twisted to ensure that an appeal got filed against the Special Court’s judgment. Judge Saini’s magisterial dismissal of the prosecution case as nothing more than “rumour, gossip and speculation” goes to the very heart of the infirmities that have come to overload our public institutions. His elaboration that “public perception has no place in judicial proceedings” is a bracing slap across the face of many in superior judiciary who tend to work “national conscience” and similar perceptual constructs into their judicial reasoning.A war of words has predictably broken out between the UPA and the NDA partisans and practitioners over the verdict and its political ramifications. That war among politicians will continue and only intensify till 2019. But there are significant lessons for all those who preside over our institutions. The former CAG, Vinod Rai, ought to be the most chastened man in India. His twisted logic produced a figure of Rs 1.76 trillion loss to the national exchequer. This was only a notional loss but it lodged itself in the national imagination as an act of ethical wrong-doing on a gigantic scale. Arguably, the process was abused by the politician-bureaucratic axis, but Vinod Rai too did not play by the book. He subjected the polity to great convulsions; in the process, the nation got a bad name globally, resulting in huge — unquantifiable — losses in terms of businesses and investment withheld. Many more reputations and myths would come unravelling.

Pakistan has said yes to revival of the mechanism that looks into issues of fishermen and prisoners in each other’s custody. — PTI file

Smita Sharma

Tribune News Service

New Delhi March 7

Amidst continuing bloodshed along the Line of Control, India and Pakistan today acceded to humanitarian proposals. Islamabad accepted three humanitarian gestures proposed by India on the issue of civilian prisoners on both sides. In a formal statement, Pakistan said Foreign Minister Khawaja Asif has accepted proposals that include exchange of three categories of prisoners — women, mentally challenged or with special needs and those above 70 years of age. (Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)   Pakistan has also said yes to revival of the Joint Judicial Committee mechanism that looks into issues of fishermen and prisoners in each other’s custody. The panel last met in October 2013 in India. Also, the proposal to facilitate visit of medical experts from both sides to meet and examine the mentally-challenged prisoners for their repatriation, has been cleared by Islamabad. Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj had discussed these proposals with Pakistani envoy Sohail Mahmood on October 17 last year. MEA spokesperson Raveesh Kumar said,“The officials on both sides would be working on the modalities to implement the understanding reached on the humanitarian issues.”Additionally, Pakistan has proposed the exchange of prisoners above 60 years and below 18 years of age, which is expected to be accepted soon by India, as per sources. “Through such initiatives, Pakistan and India would embark on the road to a comprehensive dialogue, and make a conscious effort to de-escalate the situation on the LoC,” said the Pakistan Foreign Ministry statement. The two neighbours have witnessed much hostility in ties over the past year after the meeting between Indian national Kulbhushan Jadhav lodged in Pakistani jail and his mother and wife in Islamabad on December 25 last year. 

No signs of formal talksAmid signs of thaw in India-Pakistan ties, there is no sign yet of formal talks, with India awaiting a response to the invitation to Muhammad Pervaiz Malik, Pakistan’s Commerce and Textile Minister, to attend an informal WTO (World Trade Organisation) ministerial meeting in Delhi on March19 and 20. TNS

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.

Amritsar: On the anniversary of the 1971 India-Pakistan war, veteran BJP leader Laxmi Kanta Chawla has asked the Narendra Modi government to make public the exact number of Indian Prisoners of War (POWs) in Pakistan and reveal their identity. She said the Indian forces had won a historic battle by capturing about 1,00,000 soldiers of Pakistan in the 1971 war. The then Indian Government had released all those soldiers and sent them back to their native country.  She said all Indian leaders, including Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, celebrated Vijay Divas with pride.  However, the country had failed to bring back the Indian POWs till date, she remarked. She called upon the government to make public the exact number of POWs in Pakistani jails. TNS

THE FORGOTTEN 54 –

Ex-servicemen stand in support of Major Aditya Kumar at Supreme Court. File photo

Satya Prakash

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, March 5

In a dramatic turn of events, the Jammu and Kashmir Government on Monday told the Supreme Court that Major Aditya Kumar was not named in the FIR in connection with the Shopian firing on January 27 in which three civilians were killed.During hearing of a petition filed by Major Kumar’s father Lt Col Karamveer Singh seeking quashing of the FIR, senior counsel Shekhar Naphade told a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra that the column in the FIR meant for mentioning the names of  “accused”  was blank.(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)Naphade’s statement came after the CJI sought to know the allegations against the officer.  “He is an Army officer and not an ordinary criminal,” the Bench, also comprising Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice DY Chandrachud, observed.The Bench, which had on February 12 stayed criminal proceedings against the Major, fixed April 24 to finally dispose of the matter. It said the investigation shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing. On behalf of the Centre, Attorney General KK Venugopal supported the petitioner and criticised the state for registering a criminal case against a serving Army officer without sanction from the Centre. Naphade opposed the stay on investigation, saying: “Nobody has the licence to kill… Let the probe continue. The court has already protected the officer by saying that no coercive steps shall be taken against the officer.”“Everyday soldiers are being killed. Mobs gather outside police stations to pelt stones. Do they have a licence?” the Attorney General countered. He quoted Section 7 of Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1990, under which no prosecution can be launched against a serving Army officer without prior permission from the Centre. However, Naphade said the Centre’s permission was not required to file an FIR and it would be required only at the time of filing of charge-sheet.  Three civilians were killed on January 27 when the Army fired at a stone-pelting mob in Shopian village.

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.