Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

‘Ceasefire in 1947-48 war was unwarranted’

Discussion in 'Indian Defence Industry' started by flanker143, Jul 18, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. flanker143

    flanker143 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,902
    Likes Received:
    728
    A former Indian Army officer who took part in the 1947-48 operations against Pakistan-backed tribesman in Jammu and Kashmir feels that a ceasefire that halted the march of Indian forces to Muzaffarabad was unwarranted, according to a blog post by BJP leader L.K. Advani Sunday.

    Advani quoted a speech of former Jammu and Kashimir governor Lt. Gen. (retd) S.K. Sinha at the Kolkata University Institute last week stating that India had to confront a very difficult situation in the northern state after independence. The lecture was held as part of 110th birth anniversary celebrations of BJP idealogue S.P. Mukherjee.

    Sinha said in October 1947, Pakistan organised a clandestine invasion of the state by a force composed of Pathan tribesmen, ex-servicemen and soldiers ‘on leave’ which precipitated the first Indo-Pak war after the two countries became independent.

    Advani said an Indian Foreign Service officer, Chandrashekhar Dasgupta, who served as India’s ambassador to China 1993-96, has written a book on the Kashmir invasion titled “War and Diplomacy in Kashmir, 1947-48″, in which he describes this war as “unique in the annals of modern warfareâ€.

    `â€It was a warâ€, he writes, “in which both the opposing armies were led by nationals of a third country. British generals commanded the armies of the newly independent states of India and Pakistan. In India, moreover, the Defence Committee of the Cabinet was chaired by Lord Mountbatten, not Prime Minister Nehru. Thus the course and outcome of the Indo-Pakistan cannot be explained simply in terms of political objectives and military capabilities of the antagonists. A crucial determinant was the role of the antagonists,†Advani said.

    Advani said three top British generals were serving in the Indian Army after August 1947.

    He said during the period, Lt. Gen. Dudley Russell headed the Delhi and East Punjab and Sinha, then a major, was General Staff Officer (Operations).

    Advani said of the three British officers, Gen. Robert McGregor Macdonald Lockhart proved disloyal to India, and had to be removed.

    “Dudley Russell, in contrast, was very loyal. Maharaja Hari Singh acceded to India on the afternoon of 26 October, 1947. Russell told Sinha that there being an embargo on British officers serving either India or Pakistan from entering the Kashmir theatre Major Sinha as the only Indian officer in the region would have to conduct the operations,†Advani said.

    Advani said in his Kolkata speech, Sinha pointed out that it was nothing less than a miracle to do as many as 800 Dakota sorties at a short notice to airlift troops from Delhi to Srinagar.

    He said Sinha told the gathering that they were able to win a decisive victory by liberating Baramulla and advancing 60 miles to Uri where, the Valley ends and a gorge along the Jhelum starts to Muzaffarabad.

    Sinha said at this point Indian forces received orders to cease fire and halt the advance to Muzaffarabad. He said Russell was surprised by the orders as he felt Indian forces should advance to Muzaffarabad and seal the border by securing the two bridges at Kohala and Domel.

    “Russell, however, was overruled. The senior British officers in Delhi as also Lord Mountbatten, we gathered, did not want the Indian Army to get directly involved in fighting the Pakistan Army, which this advance to the border would certainly entail.

    “It was argued that hitherto the confrontation was mainly with the tribal raiders. The argument did not have much merit. Everyone knew that Pakistani soldiers dressed in civilian clothes were in action along with the tribesmen, and all were functioning under direct command of the Pakistani army General, Akbar Khan,†Advani quoted Sinha as saying.

    Sinha was the Indian Army vice chief when he was superseeded to enable Gen Arun Vaidya occupy the past on the retirement of Gen. K.V. Krishna Rao. He subsequently put in his papers
     
    1 person likes this.
  2. Tshering22

    Tshering22 Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2010
    Messages:
    1,049
    Likes Received:
    364
    All the losses, stalemates and other such were the result of Nehru's perverse pacifism that cost us a significant part of our country to be transferred into enemy hands.
     
  3. rcscwc

    rcscwc Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2010
    Messages:
    2,981
    Likes Received:
    593
    From national POV, it was un-warranted. But Nehru HAD to comply with the warrants of Mountebaten and Edwina. He was in their clutches and that too volantarily.
     
  4. Capt.Popeye

    Capt.Popeye Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,091
    Likes Received:
    242
    I wish to comment on one aspect (the underlined part) of this story right now.
    It is interesting and amusing that some Army officers have to interpolate themselves into military history and extremely ex post facto at that. First there was Lt. Gen. Jacob doing that w.r.t. 1971 ops, and Lt. Gen. Sinha in this episode. S.K. Sinha as per the facts recorded, was a Staff Officer of Major rank. However the ranking Indian Officers involved in the operations of that time were Maj.Gen. K.M. Cariappa and Brig. Thimmayya, Brig. L.P.Sen and not to mention Brig. S.H.F.J. Maneckshaw who was DGMO in New Delhi. So who actually planned and ran the counter-ops in Jammu and Kashmir? These Flag rank officers or a Staff rank officer, Maj.S.K. Sinha ?
     
  5. Bhadra

    Bhadra FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2011
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    5
    Two big factors.

    With POK with India, Northern Area would also be part of as access would have been blocked. How could the trecherious British Empire used Northern Areas as the listening post against the Big Bear USSR?

    Second, with POK being part of India, it would not be sure if Seikh Abdillah ( estranged convert cousin of Nehru) would be elected with majority. Why should Punchies, Punjabies, Balties etc vote for a kashmiri. The present dispnsation ensures otherwise.

    Truth has mainy facets.
     
  6. Bhadra

    Bhadra FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2011
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    5


    Not entirely valid arguments if one knows that the dealing hand knows much more than suprimposed or overbearing ones. A Major in DMO (DGMO) that time or even today is the dealing man. Gen Sinha's political orientations post retirement is well known but it effecting his superb military writting has never been evident or being pointed out. This theory has been well prpounded by many who were /are arm chair Babus. The Gen was in the midst of it and hence deserves much weightage.
     
  7. Guynextdoor

    Guynextdoor Lt. Colonel SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2010
    Messages:
    4,855
    Likes Received:
    1,740
    This discussion is pointless.No country was ever a 'part of India' until AFTER 1947 we conquered it. The same 'pansy' invaded hyderabad, kicked out the portugese and booted a hundred princes off their backsides to create modern India. Whatever the reasult of 1947, India had no 'god given right' to kashmir. We took it by force and it is ours. Speculating is pointless.
     
  8. Capt.Popeye

    Capt.Popeye Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,091
    Likes Received:
    242
    Negative. Staff officers even at that time; simply act(ed) to supply inputs and flesh out ideas of higher command, then act to liase with other arms/agencies to check out the execution of those plans. So knowledge does not supersede the decision-making role. In the chain of command, the then DGMO was Brig. Maneckshaw in AHQ. Was Sinha on his staff?
    As for the rest, Sinha may be a great writer on any matters, but does that have any bearing on the military history of 1948 war plans which were drawn up in Gen. Roy Bucher's office in New Delhi. Sinha's political affilitiations are unimportant, though such affiliations do indeed tend to color one's views on something or the other. But that is not the subject here, since I have no dispute or disagreement on Sinha's political views. My POV is singularly related to the underlined part in my first post on this tread.
     
  9. Bhadra

    Bhadra FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2011
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    5

    Capt Popeye, I never said Gen Sinha had any influence over the British plans with respect to Kashmir as G-2 of Mil Ops. I am only suggesting about his knowing a few things. If he claims the Mil Ops were halted, then is not that true. Even the birds would know that when guns no longer are booming.


    Kashmir always was part of the " great game " right from the days of First Anglo - Sikh War and Treaty of Amritsar on 16 Mar 1846 vide which a seprate state of Jammu and Kashmir was carved. Zorawar Singh subsequentlly was allowed to annex far flung Areas with the British desire to extend the frontiers Northward to checkmate Russia. China was permitted to have control over Tibet and far flung areas.

    As Kashmir had become pivotal to British Frontier policy, it menifested in Mountbatten instigating Dogras to remain independant, failling which reamin in control of Northern Areas of earstwhule J&K. If IA was allowed to march upto Muzzarabad the entire Great Game for the British would be over.

    So forget about the planes being drawn by Roy Bucher. Entire plans were that of London which is evident from the manner the left over British Genrals acted going to the extent of organising and leading a rebellion in Gilgit.

    The British had persuaded Hari Sing not to join any Union, instigated Jinha and dealayed Indian reaction. They could not, however, stop Indian reaction. But why then Indian Forces stopped till the areas where there was Kashmiri population in the North and Dogras in the South? J&K extended much beyond. That is what is being debated.

    Thr fact that Gen Sinha that time was a Major should not disqualify him from expressing his thoughts and memories. In fact he and LP Sen are amonst the few to author war accounts of 1948 when they were in Service. He was part of the event and by simple logic, his narration and view desrves credence rather than you or me outrightly rejecting it because he was simplly a major.

    A war plan is put into exceutables by a staff officer and unless he knows and understands it, then he has no business to be one. He was in MO and organised all airlift to the vally and was subsequentlly overseeing the operations.

    You may say he was baised but to lesson his impression based on the fact that he was only a Major and nor a general is not knowing Liddle Hart and many other Majors who chanaged the ways humanity thought of and practiced war.

    I am only argueing at your disgust of the word "Major", nothing more or less.:BVICTORY:
     
  10. Capt.Popeye

    Capt.Popeye Captain SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2010
    Messages:
    1,091
    Likes Received:
    242
    You have gone off a tangent. Read my first post which refers very clearly to:
    Original Post By flanker143

    Then I said:
    Original Post By Capt.Popeye

    The crux of what I wrote is in the parts above. Kindly read again.

    My later post was a response to what you wrote, wherein you had made the first diversion/digression by talking about Sinha's political affiliations and his writing skills.
    Then in post #9 you go further away by talking about Sinha's rank. Anybody can have an opinion and articulate it effectively, even a L/Nk., a Naib Sub. or a Capt. Basil Lidell Hart.

    The matter I raised is in Flanker 143's post#1:
    Major Sinha as the only Indian officer in the region would have to conduct the operations,” Advani said.

    Did Maj. Sinha conduct (whatever that means) the operations?

    And your last post#9 has some errors in fact, but that is not the crux of the matter.
     
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2011
  11. Bhadra

    Bhadra FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2011
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    5
    Kindly be indoor !

    India was alway a subcontinent a socio-cultural and economic historiucal entity. No foreign author or invador who described it or booted out many a rulers ever claimed of having captured Hindustan or India. Only British Empire claimed it and administartivelly did it. That was end of 19th centrury and begining of 20th century.

    My Dear Sir, the worls was not created then, nor the concept of time, history, civilisation or culture started then. Anglo sexons who are not even the size of Arunachal were bewildered as to how such an entity as India not politically or administravelly one, could ever exist as such of thing was out of the reach of their Triabl civilisation. When they went to America they ahs to eliminate the entire humanity of Red Indian. In Australai, the aboriginal have to face extinction. Then only they could feel safe to be called a Nation.
    Do not impose your borrowed western values on an entire different set of civilisational norms. By The way what you are propgating and suggesting is that someone won India for you. No sir, Violance was an anti thesis for India being born as a nation. Voilance let Aurangeb down. It led Ashoka down and it resulted in downfall of Kauravas and Pandavas.

    Pray, sir, kindly let me know which Prince you had to kick out except for Hydrabad, Junagarh and Goa to be amalgamated. Do not deride the nationalistic sense of others since you do not happen to be Prince. Thank those princes that today you are able to blabber without consequences and kick up unreasobale muck.

    You are an Indian citizen so are others without distinction and favour. What about the modern Rajas, a la, Mayawati or Lalu or Kani Modi? Are they any way less than earstwhile Princes? Is that what you aspired to be? All the best. Keep your eys and ears open. Please do not take emotional offense..
     
  12. Bhadra

    Bhadra FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2011
    Messages:
    33
    Likes Received:
    5
    Capt ( to be upgraded to Time scale maj)

    Thanks...

    and Thanks...

    There is no meeting place for us in this thread.. somewhere else..
     
  13. UNAM

    UNAM 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2011
    Messages:
    231
    Likes Received:
    57
    1948 ceasefire was one of blunder committed by Nehru. indian army was in strong position at that time with recapturing many areas back. punch was recaptured after almost 1 yr.
     
  14. xXX-Nair:::Saab-XXx

    xXX-Nair:::Saab-XXx Major SENIOR MEMBER

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,113
    Likes Received:
    831
    Idiotic Governance & International Blunders by Congressis from Day 1 of Indias Independence...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page