Myth of One Versus Ten
09 September, 2013
By Ahmed Ishaq
Indian aggression on Pakistan in 1965 was dealt with iron fist by Pakistani Army. Pak Army made a solid defence in opposition to the Indian Army, who tried to encroach into Pakistani territory. Pak Army with support of Air force and Navy battled bravely not only compelled the Indian Army to retreat from the occupied areas but it also entered deep into the Indian Territory, occupying its land too. People of Pakistan stood side by side, shoulder to shoulder with their forces and the kind of support they gave to their forces was written in golden words in the history of Pakistan.
Indian Army was much superior to its adversary during the 1965 war, but it fought with a little heart and was retreated from the war despondently. Although many defence experts and war historians believed that the 1965 war was a no win no lost, and it was actually terminated later on. Nevertheless, during the war the Indian Army was the main assailant and Pakistan was actually defending against the powerful aggressor. Before and after the 1965 war, a myth did exit of one versus ten, which mean one Pakistani soldier can fight singly handedly against ten Indian soldiers in any kind of war. I don't what was the reason behind the myth, and how did it crop up in Pakistan?
The war was terminated after the Tashkent Accord between Field Marshall Ayub Khan and Indian Prime Minister Shastri. After singing the accord, Pakistani Army was ordered to leave all the occupied land as well as the Indian Army followed the suit. The moments after the Tashkent accord was signed, at night Indian Prime Minister Shastri was found dead in his room and as well as a top cabinet minister ZA Bhutto also left Ayub's govt. on Ayub Khan acceptance of humiliating terms in Tashkent Accord.
If we make a comparison between Indian Army and Pakistani Army during 1965 war, it is cleared that Indian Army had outnumbered Pakistani Army. It is believed that the Operation Gibraltar was the main reason behind Indian aggression on Pakistan. Indian civilian and military leadership was skeptical about the movement of Pak Army along the borders of occupied Kashmir. They were having a view that Pak Army was giving arms to the Kahsmiris in order to initial an armed movement against the Indian rule in the occupied Kashmir. As a result, they wasted no time on waging an all-out war against Pakistan. But the Indian military planners failed to contemplate the modern weaponry of Pak Army. Many defence analysts still having a viewpoint that during the 1965 war it was the modern weapons which favored Pak Army. Although Pak Army was not even comparable to the Indian army when it come to the size but what more
important was the Indian civil and military planners failure to understand the type of sophisticated and modern weapons and ammunition possessed by Pak Army, which later on helped par Army to solidify Pakistan's defence against the Indian Army. In fact, the advance military equipment possessed by Pak Army played an important role in Indian 1965 war retreat. The myth of one soldier versus ten Indian soldiers did became a reality when Pak Army fought with much superior weapons against the inferior and outdated Indian Army weapons. Despite having a conventional military superiority, the Indian Army unable to sustain against the larger barrels of Pakistani cannons. This is what I can understand about the myth of one versus ten.
We celebrate 6 September as our defence day, which was the first day of 1965 war. Forty Seven years has been passed, but today still Pakistan is facing troubles on its Eastern borders. Its adversary is building arms creating a security dilemma for it. Today, it adversary is modernizing its nuclear and missile programs in order to shift to balance of power in favor. Today, we are still not equal to Indian military might as Indian defence budget is ten times bigger than us creating one ratio ten. Today, the issue of Kashmir is still unresolved and India as status-quo power is still resisting ending the resolvable issue of Kashmir. Today, India is still enjoying a conventional military superiority over Pakistan. But after the overt nuclearization of South Asia, the convectional asymmetrical gap is not helping India anymore. These are nuclear weapons which are the anchor sheet of peace and stability in south Asia.
Today, Pakistan is a responsible nuclear weapon state. Nuclear weapons are the jewel of the crown of its defence. Pakistan firmly believes on its credible minimum deterrence against its adversary. Pakistan wants peace and stability in the south Asia and we must understand that Pakistan is the sole enabler of peace and stability in the region, but when it come to tango for tango it adds more vulnerability to the fragile peace of South Asia. A day before defence day, a very significant meeting of National Command Authority was chaired by the Prime minister.
NCA meeting reiterated Pakistan's long stand in bringing peace and stability but without any compromise on its nuclear program. Today, scores of myths are being created against the nuclear program, but it must be understand that Pakistan do have a robust command and control structure. The ignorant world media is creating myths regarding the safety and security of Pakistan's nuclear weapons deliberately creating myths, but they are unable to separate myths from realities. In 1965 Pakistan able to defend because of modern convectional weapons, today we have nuclear weapons, despite conventional asymmetry, which makes Pakistan unconquerable to any power in the world.
The Writer works for Strategic Vision Institute, his email is firstname.lastname@example.org