Kargil War Thread - VI

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 25 Jul 2010 00:26

Is this how we should remember Kargil?

Each year around this time, over the past decade, we are urged to remember Kargil.

To mourn, pay homage, and remember the brave souls who were killed or maimed while evicting Pakistani intruders from the rocky, icy heights of Indian soil.

People like young Captain Saurabh Kalia and five other soldiers who were captured by the ‘peace loving’ Pakistani forces on May 15, 1999, and brutally tortured for 22 long days before they were shot, and their mutilated corpses delivered to India.

People like Squadron Leader Ajay Ahuja, whose MiG was shot down over Indian soil on May 27, 1999, and who was used for target practice by brave Pakistani soldiers after he bailed out and opened his parachute. He had celebrated his 36th birthday just four days earlier.

Here’s what an Indian Ministry of External Affairs press release dated May 30, 1999, said: “The Deputy High Commissioner of Pakistan was summoned to South Block today. A strong protest was lodged about the brutal shooting of IAF Squadron Leader Ajay Ahuja by his captors, as evident from the post-mortem report. It was conveyed that Government of India strongly condemns this act of cowardice and savagery and expects that those who are guilty of shooting Squadron Leader Ahuja in cold blood will be prosecuted by the Government of Pakistan for murder and punished.”

I remember the press conference held by then defence minister Jaswant Singh at New Delhi’s Shastri Bhawan soon after the post mortem on the mutilated bodies of Captain Kalia and his men. Even his famed baritone voice faltered when he tried to describe the torture inflicted on the men, captured while on a patrol in Kargil.

“The postmortem revealed that the Pakistan army had indulged in the most heinous acts; of burning their bodies with cigarettes, piercing ear-drums with hot rods, puncturing eyes before removing them, breaking most of the teeth and bones, chopping off various limbs and private organs of these soldiers besides inflicting all sorts of physical and mental tortures before shooting them dead, as evidenced by the bullet wound to the temple,” says Wikipedia. All this over 22 days.

Captain Kalia, promoted on the battlefield, had not even received his first paycheck from the army.

On June 12, Jaswant Singh met Pakistan’s foreign minister ‘Janab Sartaj Aziz,’ in New Delhi, at the latter’s request.

“Essentially, I made just two points,” Singh said later. “Firstly, vacation of aggression in Kargil and secondly inhuman treatment of Indian soldiers in Pakistani custody.”

The “sanctity of the LoC must be restored and respected. I also specifically demanded that those responsible for perpetrating barbaric action of torture and of killing of Indian soldiers when in captivity must be brought to justice,” he declared grandly.

Imagine how our men on the front felt when on July 9, they were told to stand down.

To allow the people who had killed over 500 of their colleagues and injured another 2,000 or more— to walk away back across the border, to laugh and boast about the “lesson” they had taught the Indian army.

It’s been 11 years since.

Forget prosecution, not one of the Pakistani soldiers responsible for these heinous acts has even been officially identified. Perhaps many of them were quietly given medals for their acts of supreme bravery.

For 11 years now, Captain Kalia’s father has been desperately pleading for his son’s post mortem from the government, so that he can petition the UN to declare it a War Crime. In vain.

All he has is a death certificate, which is gory enough in it’s detail.

Imagine how he felt when instead of arresting him, the Indian government actually allowed the man who revels in being called ‘The Architect of Kargil’, to deliver a keynote address at a conference in New Delhi.

Here are some of the gems from that speech (external link: video) by former Pakistani dictator and president General Pervez Musharraf, delivered at the Taj Palace Hotel, New Delhi, March 7, 2009:

‘In the few years of rapprochement during my tenure at the helm of affairs in Pakistan, our relations indeed were the best ever.,’

‘There is a dire need of an attitudinal change at both ends—more in India, less in Pakistan’

‘India has to show magnanimity and humility; one cannot be a large country with a small heart.’

Is this the land that Captain Kalia gave his life for?

Is this how we should remember Kargil?

negi · Post by **negi** » 25 Jul 2010 11:08

Kargil war-the neglected heroes (retd) -
Many military veterans have returned the medals awarded to them for gallantry and fighting wars to the President, a sure sign of frustration and feeling of neglect, points out Gen V.P. Malik

Anshul · Post by **Anshul** » 25 Jul 2010 12:18

No Offence meant...but it wasn't just Saurabh who was tortured....there was a JCO and 4 ORs.Isn't it very stupid that those names never make it to BR ? Kalia's father should seek justice for all..not just his son.

The matter isn't of much importance to the UPA.The MEA will sit on it and let it decay till the senior Kalia passses away.Parole to Rajiv killers is more news worthy.BTW who remembers SK and his team ? We should have got hold of that SOB Musharraf...castarated him and presented his circumcised mohajir bamboo shoot to him after sealing the same in vinegar.

Jagan · Post by **Jagan** » 25 Jul 2010 12:24

sumeet_s wrote:
jamwal wrote:Candle light march in Hyderabad to pay tributes to the martyrs of Kargil war:

Venue: Necklace Road, opp MMTS Railway Station.
Date: 26th July (monday), on the eve of VIJAY DIWAS
Time: 6:30 PM to 8 PM
damn..its in the evening.

Jamwal saar.. do you know any such sort happening in morning hrs in hyd. any memorial in hyd??

Sumeet,

AP State War Memorial is in Secunderabad, Quite Close to where we met up. One can give that a shot on the day of Vijay Diwas.

http://relics.warbirds.in/main.php?g2_v ... r+Memorial

sumeet_s · Post by **sumeet_s** » 25 Jul 2010 18:53

Thank you Jagan sir,

I will go there tomorrow morning. I hope i don't reach late for the wreath laying.

Bala Vignesh · Post by **Bala Vignesh** » 26 Jul 2010 11:07

Hi, does anyone know of any memorial events honouring the martyrs of Kargil in bangalore???

Craig Alpert · Post by **Craig Alpert** » 27 Jul 2010 05:14

Govt Slammed for Not Holding Kargil Divas in Parliament

chackojoseph · Post by **chackojoseph** » 31 Jul 2010 13:37

Contributed by By Lt Col (Retd.) A.K Sam Sharma .
More Glory & Battle Honours for The 3rd Gorkha Rifles: Pirkanthi & Hathimatha

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 08 Aug 2010 19:36

x-post. AFM June 2009 issue scan

Aditya G wrote:
andy B wrote:http://ifile.it/bx68ig1/HIMALAYAN%20SHOWDOWN.zip
Thanks! It is Air Cmde Tufail's article by different name

hiteshrai · Post by **hiteshrai** » 13 Aug 2010 01:45

As per Wikipedia, Point 5353 still remains occupied by Pakistan till date. Can someone please confirm this. And if true, why is nothing being done by our government about it. Please shed some light on this issue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kargil_War
Wikipedia Exert from article on Kargil War

Withdrawal and final battles

Following the outbreak of armed fighting, Pakistan sought American help in de-escalating the conflict. Bruce Riedel, aide to then President Bill Clinton reported that the US intelligence had imaged Pakistani movements of nuclear weapons to forward deployments for fear of the Kargil hostilities escalating into a wider conflict between the two countries. However, President Clinton refused to intervene until Pakistan had removed all forces from the Indian side of the Line of Control.[56] Following the Washington accord on July 4, where Sharif agreed to withdraw Pakistani troops, most of the fighting came to a gradual halt, but some Pakistani forces remained in positions on the Indian side of the LOC. In addition, the United Jihad Council (an umbrella for extremist groups) rejected Pakistan's plan for a climb-down, instead deciding to fight on.[57]

The Indian army launched its final attacks in the last week of July; as soon as the Drass subsector had been cleared of Pakistani forces, the fighting ceased on July 26. The day has since been marked as Kargil Vijay Diwas (Kargil Victory Day) in India. By the end of the war, India had resumed control of all territory south and east of the Line of Control, as was established in July 1972 as per the Simla Agreement.

However it had failed to occupy strategic peak Point 5353, Bunker Ridge, Saddle Ridge and Dalu Nag.[58] Point 5353 is the highest peak in the region which has a clear view of the National Highway 1 D that connects the Kashmir valley with Kargil; it remains occupied by Pakistan even a decade after the battle.[59]

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 02 Sep 2010 18:44

Did a woman reporter cause deaths in Kargil?

The Central Information Commission has directed the Army to disclose if any such inquiry ever took place as per records and disclose the information as per provisions of the RTI Act.

The case relates to activist S C Agrawal who sought to know from the Army if "some extra-casualties in the Indian Army [ Images ] occurred at warsite during Indo-Pak Kargil-war in/around the year 1999 because of a defiant move of a TV reporter who insisted on using a flashlight for the TV coverage in the night resulting in guiding Pakistani Army for the exact location to be bombed?"

He also asked if any enquiry took place in this regard, its report and other related details. The Army has refused to give any details saying "request amounts to seeking clarifications and investigations and are based on mere hypothetical assumptions/heresay" and is not an "information" defined under the RTI Act. Information Commissioner M L Sharma agreed with this point of view and asked Agrawal to make the queries specific.

Agrawal then limited it to three questions: Was an enquiry ordered in the incident? If yes, copy of report of the enquiry committee, if any and name of the concerned TV reporter and the TV channel associated with the coverage. After this the Commissioner ordered the application sent back to the Army to revisit the case on the basis of pruned application and "disclose information as per provisions of the RTI Act".

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 02 Sep 2010 20:06

Vipul wrote:Did a woman reporter cause deaths in Kargil?

The Central Information Commission has directed the Army to disclose if any such inquiry ever took place as per records and disclose the information as per provisions of the RTI Act.

The case relates to activist S C Agrawal who sought to know from the Army if "some extra-casualties in the Indian Army [ Images ] occurred at warsite during Indo-Pak Kargil-war in/around the year 1999 because of a defiant move of a TV reporter who insisted on using a flashlight for the TV coverage in the night resulting in guiding Pakistani Army for the exact location to be bombed?"

He also asked if any enquiry took place in this regard, its report and other related details. The Army has refused to give any details saying "request amounts to seeking clarifications and investigations and are based on mere hypothetical assumptions/heresay" and is not an "information" defined under the RTI Act. Information Commissioner M L Sharma agreed with this point of view and asked Agrawal to make the queries specific.

Agrawal then limited it to three questions: Was an enquiry ordered in the incident? If yes, copy of report of the enquiry committee, if any and name of the concerned TV reporter and the TV channel associated with the coverage. After this the Commissioner ordered the application sent back to the Army to revisit the case on the basis of pruned application and "disclose information as per provisions of the RTI Act".

burqa aunty??

Gaur · Post by **Gaur** » 02 Sep 2010 20:08

^^
Who else?

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 02 Sep 2010 20:11

Gaur wrote:^^
Who else?

But she swears on her cold little paki heart that she is innocent.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 02 Sep 2010 21:50

chetak wrote:
Vipul wrote:..."some extra-casualties in the Indian Army [ Images ] occurred at warsite during Indo-Pak Kargil-war in/around the year 1999 because of a defiant move of a TV reporter who insisted on using a flashlight for the TV coverage in the night resulting in guiding Pakistani Army for the exact location to be bombed?".....

Wasn't there another serious charge that Barkha Dutt disclosed the upcoming attack on Tiger Hill (or another high priority target) prior to the actual start of the assault.

Fani_A · Post by **Fani_A** » 02 Sep 2010 23:40

Kargil was/is an administrative, political and strategical mess, salvaged to an extent by our best in the world soldiers on the frontline. It was an excellent opportunity to take back PoK, limited only to the extent that USA/CHINA would have stopped it at some point. But our government should have atleast tried to explore and get to that point. Instead it settled on something that was an overall loss, a position worse than that at the start. Again the more powerful well positioned side chose to accept an overall loss. Beats me why. No matter what are the reasons (fear of nuclear war, external ultimatum), I do no understand why atleast getting back to the starting position and then getting back something for the defensive effort was not possible. That would have been hard to oppose by anyone. I guess not having a agreed upon strategy will land us in the same position again and again since when the moment comes the response is pathetic, coherence/syncronization nil and true leadership (from the highest down) zero resulting in very defensive and meek actions. Complaining about war crimes would not net us anything in reality. Given the outcomes of all the happenings after the war, we should instead finish all our business before the war is ended.

ShivaS · Post by **ShivaS** » 03 Sep 2010 00:48

Absolutely on dot.

Since 1998 I have been asking what is our end game startegy,vis a vis TSP.
What is our policy vis a vis PRC.

George Kaka did give a hint but was shouted down by one and all including the so called nationalist party.

It is PRC that is our enemy (he said with out mincing words) TSP is fall out PRC playing games.

As long as we are ashamed to assert our nationalism, our rightful owneship of what belongs to us, and protect it nurture it, we will be toyed with all sundries. period.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 03 Sep 2010 02:07

ShivaS wrote:
As long as we are ashamed to assert our nationalism, our rightful owneship of what belongs to us, and protect it nurture it, we will be toyed with all sundries. period.

You have clarity in your argument. What would it take to bring this nationalism. Any thoughts on this.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 03 Sep 2010 09:35

I really fail to see the logic behind this argument about Indian missing the opportunity to take POK during Kargil. How was that going to happen? Do people suppose that PA would have sat idle while we went at POK? PA did not and could not extend full support to the NLI positions because of poor planning and of course, the ruse that these were Mujahideen. India having a go at POK would mean crossing the LOC and would have got PA 'officialy' into the war. Any move by IA towards POK, would have been met by PA. And with the sector of operations limited to these areas only, PA could and would have matched India troops for troops. How does one reach a conclusion that POK was for India for taking? What advantage did we have - except IAF. And again, supposing India made credible gain against PA in this sector, what would have prevented PA from opening another sector - something in Souther J&K?

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Sep 2010 09:41

Infinite scenarios can be built to answer the above, the point is first it needs to be established if there exists a 'political will' to think along those lines. The fact is GoI does not want PoK back unless TSP gives it to us on a platter .

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 03 Sep 2010 10:26

rohitvats - correct...

So Mr Negi lets assume we have the political will or had it at that time---

How do you think we go about recovering POK and do you think the IA is at present in a position to do just that....

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Sep 2010 10:27

^ And why do we assume things , might as well assume that we have the PoK its easy that way, no ?

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 03 Sep 2010 10:42

Well it is you who is making a number of implied airy fairy assumptions no? Read what Rohitvats has written and think more deeply along those lines as well before betraying your ignorance of ground realities.....

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 03 Sep 2010 10:56

X-posting my post in POK News and events thread:

Bade wrote:
If as RohitVats says there are no solutions in the military realm then the remaining options are only non-military and non-diplomatic methods, rather than wait eternally for PRC economy collapse or even TSP state collapse with no more external support to prop it up at each near-death experience.

Sir, there are no quick-fix military solutions to the POK problem. At least not now. This is a treacherous mountainous terrain and any assualt will be a slug-fest stretched out over a month or more. Kargil will be a screen-saver in front of such an attack. Without India opening other sectors, PA can match India troops for troops. The wild card is the IAF - it can screw PAF in these areas. But then PA itself will not site idle and restrict the conflict to this sector if we are in a position to take the POK.

IMO, in any future Indo-Pak, POK should be the objective we should be aiming for. But for this, I believe the solution lies in Southern J&K and plains of Southern Punjab and Rajasthan. We need to put enormous pressure in these areas - like outflanking the defences in Central Kashmir by gaining upper hand in Southern Kashmir and give a left hook, if you will. Get them to withdraw troops from POK while you maintain constant pressure on this sector as well. Plus, we need vertical envelope capability. Imgaine a battalion of Paratroopers and Air Assault Troopers in Skardu and Gilgit when troops from here have been thinned out for deployment in other sectors.

The proposed Mountain Strike Corps with their proposed heliborne aspect, hope to achieve some of what I have proposed above.

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Sep 2010 11:07

ks_sachin wrote:Well it is you who is making a number of implied airy fairy assumptions no? Read what Rohitvats has written and think more deeply along those lines as well before betraying your ignorance of ground realities.....

What tripe, what assumption have I made ? I simply stated that re-capturing the PoK depends on political will ,the diktat to not cross the LoC during the Kargil fiasco is a classic example of the same. What was lost in 47/48 can be re-captured and it is needless to say that it would incur a price in terms of men and material and that is why my point about the 'political will' .

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Sep 2010 11:29

I think under the present Nuclear environment land grabbing business from either side will not be possible political will or not , one will have to live with the present map.

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 03 Sep 2010 11:39

Tripe Indeed!!!

Well the general tone among arm chair generals seems to be that if there is a political will then the Pakistani armed forces will bend over backwards - that is the implied assumption i am refering to...learn to read between the lines sometimes...

enough said....

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Sep 2010 11:52

Your argument is flawed, to clarify

1. So Mr Negi lets assume we have the political will or had it at that time---

2. How do you think we go about recovering POK and do you think the IA is at present in a position to do just that....

As I said one cannot just assume things for highlighted part in '2' is a direct consequence of '1' .

So there is nothing meaningful between those lines.

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 03 Sep 2010 12:02

Fine...Tu Shivaji.....as my Marathi Mother-in-law states....

1 dependent or 2 or 2 dependent on 1 who cares --- look at the broad import of what I am saying or keep your counsel when you have nothing meaningful to add....

PS Did you even read what I wrote on the previous post......

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 03 Sep 2010 16:41

rohitvats wrote:I really fail to see the logic behind this argument about Indian missing the opportunity to take POK during Kargil. How was that going to happen?

The debate in informed circles is not so much about opportunity to take POK back but an opportunity to escalate and go beyond simple plain defense. Credible examples that I have read from sources, is an example of an attack on Skardu. Yes, all the traditional fears of escalation do come into play, and the reason we probably played a defensive card, and hence were limited by what could be accomplished playing a defensive card. It does not mean that a measured escalation does not have any chance of success.

The above (playing defensive) is not what the IA likes to do in context of Pakistan. 1965, 1971 and 1984 are examples. One of Cold Start's doctrines is for a salami slicing of TSP lands. The defensive critiques of Kargil are valid.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 03 Sep 2010 17:19

ShauryaT wrote:
rohitvats wrote:I really fail to see the logic behind this argument about Indian missing the opportunity to take POK during Kargil. How was that going to happen?
The debate in informed circles is not so much about opportunity to take POK back but an opportunity to escalate and go beyond simple plain defense. Credible examples that I have read from sources, is an example of an attack on Skardu. Yes, all the traditional fears of escalation do come into play, and the reason we probably played a defensive card, and hence were limited by what could be accomplished playing a defensive card. It does not mean that a measured escalation does not have any chance of success.

The above (playing defensive) is not what the IA likes to do in context of Pakistan. 1965, 1971 and 1984 are examples. One of Cold Start's doctrines is for a salami slicing of TSP lands. The defensive critiques of Kargil are valid.

The debate on this forum or at least the opinion expressed is that India gave away opportunity to re-take POK, especially the Northern Areas.It was in that context I made my reply.

As for offensive measures - outflanking the enemy and going for interdiction of supply lines and bases (like Olthingthang and Muntho dhalo) versus assault on Skardu is again a different ball game. The former would have entailed insertion in a 20-30kms radius from LOC while Skardu is 75kms from Kargil as the crow flies.

It is not that Skardu could not and cannot be assaulted - but it required and will require far higher number of troops and a greater time frame. Remember, PA would have been waiting for us and we need 1:7 superiority to assualt the PA in these mountains. And that it will not play a linear game. It can induct equally large number of troops in the sector and put pressure on you some where else - in the same sector. It helps them to restrict area of operations as it nullifies India's numerical advantage.

negi · Post by **negi** » 03 Sep 2010 19:34

ks_sachin wrote: 1 dependent or 2 or 2 dependent on 1 who cares --- look at the broad import of what I am saying or keep your counsel when you have nothing meaningful to add....

Arrey Boss when you aren't even clear on these fundamental points then why ask about HOW ?

PS Did you even read what I wrote on the previous post......

I deliberately ignored that for I was trying my best to not get personal here but now that you have brought it up imo the 'arm chair general' point is the last refuge of those who have run out of 'arguments' .

ks_sachin · Post by **ks_sachin** » 04 Sep 2010 10:20

negi wrote:
ks_sachin wrote: 1 dependent or 2 or 2 dependent on 1 who cares --- look at the broad import of what I am saying or keep your counsel when you have nothing meaningful to add....
Arrey Boss when you aren't even clear on these fundamental points then why ask about HOW ?

PS Did you even read what I wrote on the previous post......
I deliberately ignored that for I was trying my best to not get personal here but now that you have brought it up imo the 'arm chair general' point is the last refuge of those who have run out of 'arguments' .

Fine 'O' wise oracle....

Fani_A · Post by **Fani_A** » 07 Sep 2010 20:44

negi wrote:Infinite scenarios can be built to answer the above, the point is first it needs to be established if there exists a 'political will' to think along those lines. The fact is GoI does not want PoK back unless TSP gives it to us on a platter .

exactly.

my prior post was not actually specific to PoK. it applies to all situations involving TSP, PRC, Nepal, Bangladesh and/or a combination.

there is a need for prior discussion and agreement between those in power (or those who can be in power i.e. all major parties) on strategy and action plan. this will give the in-charge the courage and assurance he/she needs to implement it all when the time comes. it is understandable that not many leaders in INDIA (or anywhere for that matter) have it in them to do it and very much less so if there is internal opposition.

Aditya G · Post by **Aditya G** » 12 Sep 2010 10:34

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1100908/j ... 910619.jsp#

Tribunal shoots down army Kargil appeal
OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT

New Delhi, Sept. 7: The brigadier has beaten his army for the second time.

The Armed Forces Tribunal today rejected an appeal by the Indian Army to review its order to rewrite the Kargil war history in the case of Brigadier Devinder Singh. The army will now have to set the record straight if it forgoes the option of approaching the Supreme Court.

Brigadier Singh commanded the 70 Infantry Brigade in the Batalik sector during the 1999 Kargil war. But his superiors, especially Lt Gen. Kishan Pal who was the 15 Corps commander — did not give him due credit in the After Action and Battle Performance Reports.

After 10 years of legal battle, Brigadier Singh, since retired, won an order in May this year in which the tribunal asked for the official account to be rewritten to acknowledge his role. But the army went for a cover-up, even conjuring up a fictitious brigade headquarters that was not shown to be under Singh’s command.

Singh was not asking for monetary or pecuniary benefits. He just wants his honour restored — even though he believed a gallantry medal and a promotion to the rank of major general were due to him.

The army sought a review of the tribunal’s order that questions the quality of generalship in the war and the distortion of the records in the official history called “Op Vijay: Account of the War in Kargil”.

Singh declined to comment on today’s order, wanting to wait for the official papers to be processed. An army source said: “The order has just been passed today. We have to study it to examine if further action can or needs to be taken.”

The army can appeal through a special leave petition to the Supreme Court against the order.

As if the unprecedented judgment in May was not enough, the tribunal was today categorical in its rejection of the army’s review petition. Its chairperson, Justice A.K. Mathur, said the army should be “thankful” that the tribunal had not asked for action to be taken that could be “worse” for Lt Gen. Pal. The entire Kargil War was in Lt Gen. Pal’s area of responsibility. He was at the time the general officer commanding the 15 Corps.

With the rejection of the review petition, the army will now have to expunge sections from Singh’s Annual Confidential Report and rewrite the official accounts in a manner that ensures him the credit that is his due.

Batalik was one of the toughest sectors in the war. Brigadier Singh led from the front, sustaining injuries himself, to evict Pakistan-backed intruders who had crossed the Line of Control and occupied crucial heights in Indian territory.

Brigadier Singh had also forecast a pattern of enemy intrusions during a war game in Srinagar before the war actually broke out in right earnest in May-June 1999.

He went to Delhi High Court in 2006 after appealing within the army for the corrections to be made. He had complained that his superior officers, notably Lt Gen. Pal, were biased in writing his reports.

After the tribunal was set up in 2008 the case was transferred to it. The tribunal found Brigadier Singh’s complaints justified. The brigadier now works for an aviation company.

The case of Brigadier Singh threatens to open a can of worms. There are at least three other officers who served in the Kargil war who have challenged the official account of the army on their roles and responsibilities.

Among the most sensitive of the cases is that of Brigadier (also retired) Surinder Singh, who was the commanding officer in charge of the 121 Kargil brigade. He was dismissed for having allegedly failed to patrol the LoC in his sector and not having detected the intrusions. Brigadier Surinder Singh has complained that he was made a scapegoat for the failure of his superior officers and he was in fact among the first to alert the higher command to the possibility of intrusions.

Eleven years after the war, the way it was fought, the lapses that allowed the intrusions into Indian territory and the role of its generals — the chief at that time was General V.P. Malik — are still hotly debated.

The war called Operation Vijay by the army and Operation Safed Sagar by the air force was treated as little more than sporadic fights at first.

Then defence minister George Fernandes predicted victory in 48 hours but the hostilities lasted 80 days and cost the lives of nearly 550 soldiers and young officers.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 12 Sep 2010 12:29

It is time the said Brigadier is given his dues. After all, those paragraphs about his conduct in the battle as a leader and what he achieved are the sum total of his 30+years of career as a professional Soldier.

negi · Post by **negi** » 12 Sep 2010 12:40

^ Yes specially when in most of the cases involving a jawan/officer vs the Army a very negative vibe gets created around the former, I remember reading a lot of nasty comments against the Brigadier just because IA version of the story was taken at a face value (initially even I believed the IA version). God help us and the IA if we continue to treat our men like this.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 12 Sep 2010 12:57

That is why my dear freind, I request people to read and collect information and then come to conclusion(s). When I first heard of this story, I checked the book by Malik himself plus couple of other detailed works on the Kargil War - and all of them mentioned the name of the good brigadier and his exemplary leadership skills. Gen. Malik is very forthright in this.

This, to me appears like a case of institutional inertia.

negi · Post by **negi** » 12 Sep 2010 13:14

rohitvats wrote: I checked the book by Malik himself plus couple of other detailed works on the Kargil War - and all of them mentioned the name of the good brigadier and his exemplary leadership skills. Gen. Malik is very forthright in this.

I have the book too , the General wrote the book long after the war. I won't comment more on this but whatever personal exposure I have of the services and the process of court martial or other disciplinary action is that it is highly skewed against the subordinate/junior officer in command, in high number of cases the victim's stand is vindicated by the 'Civilian' court and services are let off for H&D purposes (more so because services inherently are untouchable by the civil law)

This, to me appears like a case of institutional inertia.

It is in fact a classic case of Institution's powers being misused by the ones at the helm and they know that they don't have nothing to fear as former would protect them.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Oct 2010 03:30

Jagan wrote:if anything I am arguing that these war reparations are a thing of past - and wont happen in the current world anytime soon. Even the Iraq thing you bought up - seems to be a one-off example. my arguement is simple - war damages have never been the norm. So why are you complaining about the Indian Government for this non-existent lapse? IMO its an untenable complaint against the govt. There are other bones to pick.

ramana wrote:After hearing about the torture I wrote to Dr. Kalia expressing my sympathies at his loss. He in turn sent me the autopsy and post card with Lt Saurabh Kalia's picture.

Ramana thanks for the update.

Jagan, I found the letter. Will scan the 3 pages and send to you. Maybe we can put it on the Kargil webpage.