TheIndo-Pakistani war of 1965, also known as thesecond Kashmir war, was an armed conflict betweenPakistan andIndia that took place from August 1965 to September 1965. The conflict began following Pakistan's unsuccessfulOperation Gibraltar,[15] which was designed to infiltrate forces intoJammu and Kashmir to precipitate an insurgency against Indian rule.[16] The seventeen day war caused thousands of casualties on both sides and witnessed the largest engagement of armoured vehicles and the largest tank battle since World War II.[17][18] Hostilities between the two countries ended after a ceasefire was declared throughUNSC Resolution 211 following a diplomatic intervention by theSoviet Union and theUnited States, and the subsequent issuance of theTashkent Declaration.[19] Much of the war was fought by the countries' land forces inKashmir and along theborder between India and Pakistan. This war saw the largest amassing of troops in Kashmir since thePartition of India in 1947, a number that was overshadowed only during the2001–2002 military standoff between India and Pakistan. Most of the battles were fought by opposinginfantry andarmoured units, with substantial backing from air forces, and naval operations.
India had the upper hand over Pakistan on the ground when the ceasefire was declared,[20][21][22][23][24][25][26] but thePAF managed to achieveair superiority over the combat zones despite being numerically inferior.[27][28][29][30] Although the two countries fought to a standoff, the conflict is seen as a strategic and political defeat for Pakistan,[31][21][32][33][34][35][36] as it had not succeeded in fomenting an insurrection in Kashmir and was instead forced to shift gears in the defence ofLahore.[37] India also failed to achieve its objective of military deterrence and did not capitalise on its advantageous military situation before the ceasefire was declared.[38][39]
Background
Since thepartition of British India in August 1947, Pakistan and India remained in contention over several issues. Although theKashmir conflict was the predominant issue dividing the nations, other border disputes existed, most notably over theRann of Kutch, a barren region in the Indian state ofGujarat. The issue first arose in 1956, which ended with India regaining control over the disputed area.[40] In the 1960s Pakistan received 700 million dollars ofmilitary aid from the United States, by signing a defence agreement in 1954, which significantly modernised Pakistan's military equipment.[41][42][43] After the defeat in 1962Sino-Indian War, theIndian military was undergoing major changes in personnel and equipment. During this period, despite being numerically smaller than the Indian military, Pakistan's armed forces had a qualitative edge in air power and armour over India, which Pakistan sought to use before India completed its defence build-up.[43][44]
A declassified US State Department letter that confirms the existence of hundreds of "infiltrators" in the Indian-administered part of thedisputed Kashmir region. Dated during the events running up to the 1965 war.
Pakistani soldiers began patrolling in territory controlled by India in January 1965, which was followed by attacks by both countries on each other's posts on 8 April 1965.[40][45] Initially involving border police from both nations, the disputed area soon witnessed intermittent skirmishes between the countries' armed forces. Pakistan launchedOperation Desert Hawk and captured a few Indian posts near the Kanjarkot fort border area.[46] In June 1965,British Prime MinisterHarold Wilson successfully persuaded both countries to end hostilities. Both countries signed an agreement to settle the disputed border through international arbitration by theInternational Court of Justice on 30 June 1965.[47][48] A tribunal was set to resolve the dispute, the verdict which came later in 1968, saw Pakistan awarded 780 square kilometres (301 square miles) of the Rann of Kutch, as against its original claim of 9,100 km2 (3,500 sq mi).[49][50][51] Pakistan's purpose for this operation was to assess the response of the Indian government and military[52] and to draw Indian armour southward to Kutch, away from thePunjab andKashmir region.[52]
After its success in the Rann of Kutch, Pakistan, under the leadership ofMuhammad Ayub Khan, believed theIndian Army would be unable to defend itself against a quick military campaign in the disputed territory ofKashmir as the Indian military had suffered a loss to China in 1962[citation needed] in theSino-Indian War. Pakistan believed that the population of Kashmir was generally discontented with Indian rule, and that a resistance movement could be ignited by a few infiltratingsaboteurs.
On 5 August 1965, Pakistani soldiers crossed theLine of Control dressed as Kashmiri locals headed for various areas within Kashmir. These infiltrators carried out intelligence collection with the help of locals in cities likeGulmarg andRajouri.[53] Indian forces, tipped off by the local populace, captured several Pakistani soldiers who revealed that Pakistan was attempting to ignite the resistance movement employing a covert infiltration, code-namedOperation Gibraltar.[54][full citation needed] The operation was eventually unsuccessful.[55]
On 6 and 7 August, Indian forces engaged in skirmishes with several columns of Pakistani soldiers, who tried to cut communication lines and mix with the locals during celebrations.[53]
Indian Army crossed the cease fire line on 15 August and captured several previously infiltrated peaks overlooking theSrinagar – Leh Highway.[40][56] Initially, the Indian Army met with considerable success, capturing three important mountain positions after a prolonged artillery barrage. By the end of August, Pakistan had made progress in areas such asTithwal,Uri andPoonch.
On 1 September 1965, Pakistan launched a counterattack, calledOperation Grand Slam, with the objective to capture the vital town ofAkhnoor inJammu, which would sever communications and cut off supply routes to Indian troops. Ayub Khan calculated that "Hindu morale would not stand more than a couple of hard blows at the right time and place"[58][59][60] although by this timeOperation Gibraltar had failed and India hadcaptured the Haji Pir Pass.[58]
Commander of the Western army, Lt Gen Harbaksh Singh had suggested after the capture of Haji Pir, that Pakistani forces would carry out a major offensive in theChumb plain to advance and capture a strategically important location inAkhnoor to cut Indian supply lines but after a meeting with CAOS Chaudhari, the area was not reinforced. Instead, XV Corps under Lt Gen Katoch was tasked with securing Nowshera.[61]
At 03:30 on 1 September 1965, the entireChumb area came under massive artillery bombardment as Pakistan commencedOperation Grand Slam. India's Army Headquarters was taken by surprise.[62] Attacking with an overwhelming ratio of troops and technically superior tanks, Pakistan made gains against Indian forces under the command ofMaj Gen A. H. Malik, who were caught unprepared and suffered heavy losses. Maj Gen Mailk was then replaced byMaj Gen Yahya Khan byC-in-C Gen Muhammad Musa who authorised Maj Gen Khan to advance deeper into Indian Territory.[63][64]
India responded by calling in itsair force to blunt the Pakistani attack. The next day, Pakistan retaliated with itsair force and attacked Indian forces and air bases in bothKashmir andPunjab. India then decided to open up the theatre of attack into Pakistani Punjab and forced the Pakistani army to relocate troops engaged in the Chumb operation to defend Punjab. Operation Grand Slam therefore failed, as the Pakistan Army was unable to captureAkhnoor; it became one of the turning points in the war, when India decided to relieve pressure on its troops in Kashmir by attacking Pakistan further south. In the valley, another area of strategic importance wasKargil. Kargil town was in Indian hands, but Pakistan occupied high ground overlooking Kargil and Srinagar-Leh road. However, after the launch of a massive anti-infiltration operation by the Indian army, the Pakistani infiltrators were forced out of that area in the month of August.[63]
Ichogil Canal
India crossed theInternational Border on the Western front on 6 September.[65] President Ayub Khan, on the same day, declared a state of emergency through radio broadcast proclaiming that Pakistan was in a state of war with India.[66] On 6 September, the15th Infantry Division of the Indian Army, underWorld War II veteran Major General Niranjan Prasad, battled a massive counterattack by Pakistan near the west bank of theIcchogil Canal (BRB Canal), which was anin fact border of India and Pakistan. The General's entourage itself was ambushed, and he was forced to flee his vehicle.
The Battle of Jassar, fought on 6 September involved the defense of the Jassar Enclave, a Pakistani area on the Ravi River, against an Indian attack, with Pakistani forces, including the 3 Punjab and 13 FF, repelling the assault.[67][68]
The7th Infantry Division under the command of Maj Gen Har Kishan Sibal attempted an offensive on the canal on 6 September. The forces advanced through Khalra-Barki- Lahore road and reached Barki by 7 September. The forces engaged heavily at theBattle of Burki. The battle involved the air forces, armoured, infantry divisions and artillery brigades from both sides. The town fell by 11 September. A great amount of Pakistani ammunition was captured from Barki which helped Indian forces after the battle.[69][70] The Indian artillery stood within the range ofLahore International Airport. As a result, the United States requested a temporary ceasefire to allow it to evacuate its citizens inLahore.[71]
Pakistani Sherman medium tanks and infantry push forward while under fire.
The thrust against Lahore consisted of the 1st Infantry Division supported by the three tank regiments of the 2nd Independent Armoured Brigade; they quickly advanced across the border, reaching the Ichhogil (BRB) Canal by 6 September. The Pakistani Army held the bridges over the canal or blew up those it could not hold, effectively stalling any further advance by the Indians on Lahore.3rd Jat battalion was the first Indian unit to cross the Icchogil canal and capture it alongside Dograi.[72] The same day, a counteroffensive consisting of an armoured division and infantry division supported byPakistan Air ForceSabres forced the Indian 15th Division to withdraw to its starting point. Although 3 Jats suffered minimal casualties, the bulk of the damage being taken by ammunition and store vehicles, the higher commanders had no information of 3 Jats' capture of Dograi and misleading information led to the command to withdraw from Batapore and Dograi to Ghosal-Dial. This move brought extreme disappointment[73] to Lt-ColDesmond Hayde, CO of the 3 Jats. Dograi was eventually recaptured by the three Jats on 21 September, for the second time but after a much harder battle due to Pakistani reinforcements, in theBattle of Dograi.[74]
On 8 September 1965, a company of five Maratha Light Infantry was sent to reinforce a Rajasthan Armed Constabulary (RAC) post at Munabao – a strategic hamlet about 250 kilometers from Jodhpur. Their brief was simple: to hold the post and to keep Pakistan's infantry battalions from overrunning the post at bay. But at Maratha Hill (in Munabao) – as the post has now been christened – the Indian company could barely manage to thwart the intense attack for 24 hours. A company of three Guards with 954 heavy mortar battery ordered to reinforce the RAC post at Munabao could never reach. The Pakistani Air Force had strafed the entire area, and also hit a railway train coming from Barmer with reinforcements near Gadra road railway station. On 10 September, Munabao fell into Pakistani hands, and efforts to capture the strategic point did not succeed.[75]
Sialkot offensive
Battle of Phillora
On the days following 9 September, India's1st Armoured Division under Major GeneralRajinder Singh advanced towardsSialkot with the intention to capture the sector and was met with Pakistan's6th Armoured Division underMaj Gen Abrar Hussain. They first engaged in the town of Phillora. Failure on the Pakistani side to cause damage to the Indian advance forced the 6th Armoured Division to retreat to the town of Chawinda on 11 September and theBattle of Phillora was an Indian success.[76][77][78][79][80][81] Pakistan lost 66 tanks in the battle while India only lost 6.[78][79][82]
Battle of Chawinda
The PakistaniI Corps under the command ofLt Gen Bakhtiar Rana and the 6th Armoured under Maj Gen Hussain engaged with the IndianI Corps commanded by the newly appointed Lieutenant GeneralPatrick Dunn and the 1st Armoured under Rajinder Singh from 14 to 19 September in the largest tank battle since theBattle of Kursk during theWorld War II. It also involved the lowest ever air battle to be fought as the PakistaniSabre engaged with the IndianGnats. The Indian offensive was repulsed and stopped successfully.[83][84] Pakistan claimed that Indians lost 120 tanks at Chawinda.[85] compared to 44 of its own.[86] But later, Indian official sources confirmed India lost only 29 tanks atChawinda,[87][88]
Towards the end of the Sialkot offensive, the Pakistani Armoured arsenal was left heavily damaged with more than 200 tanks destroyed and 36 captured which was very heavy compared to the Indian damages.[89]
Battle of Asal Uttar
On 8 September, the Pakistani 1st Armoured Division and 11 Infantry Division under the command of Maj Gen Nasir Khan pushed an offensive towardsKhem Karan, with the intent to captureAmritsar (a major city inPunjab, India) and the bridge onRiver Beas toJalandhar.[90] India then launched a counter-offensive. After India breached the Madhupur canal on 11 September, the Khem Karan counter-offensive was halted, affecting Pakistan's strategy substantially.[58] The Pakistani forces engaged with an outnumbered Indian force comprising only the 2nd Independent Armoured Brigade commanded byBrig Thomas K. Theogaraj, who formed a defensive horseshoe formation to counter the advancing Pakistani force.[91][92][93]
The Pakistani tanks were more numerous and superior in quality, giving them a significant advantage. At theBattle of Asal Uttar, however, the Pakistani force advanced into the well-positioned and well-camouflaged Indian formation, which led to approximately 97 Pakistani tanks being destroyed, against only 10 Indian tanks lost.[94] The battle was a tremendous success for India and completely halted the Pakistani advance on the Punjab front.[95] The town where the battle was fought came to be known as Patton Nagar, named after the thoroughly destroyed US-madeM48 Patton tanks in the battle.
During the battle, Pakistani rail bound reinforcements were attacked and destroyed by IAF Gnats.[96]
The war was heading for a stalemate, with both nations holding territory of the other. The Indian army suffered from 3,712 killed and 7,638 wounded, while Pakistan suffered from 1,500 killed and 4,300 wounded. Indian claims that they possession of 1,920 km2 (740 sq mi) of Pakistani territory and the Pakistan army held 550 km2 (210 sq mi) of Indian territory.[97] The territory occupied by India was mainly in the fertile Sialkot, Lahore and Kashmir sectors,[98][99] while Pakistani ground gains were primarily indeserts oppositeSindh and in theChumb sector inKashmir.[99] Pakistan claims that it held 4,190 km2 (1,620 sq mi) of Indian territory, while losing 1,160 km2 (446 sq mi) of its territory.[100][101][102][103]
Pakistani Sabre being shot down in combat by an Indian Gnat in September 1965 as seen from the Indian aircraft.
The war saw the aircraft ofthe Indian Air Force (IAF) and thePakistan Air Force (PAF) engaging in combat for the first time since independence. Although the two forces had previously faced off in theFirst Kashmir War during the late 1940s, that engagement was very limited in scale compared to the 1965 conflict.[citation needed]
The PAF's aircraft were largely of American origin, whereas the IAF flew an assortment of British and Soviet airplanes. However, the PAF's American aircraft were superior to those of the IAF's.[105][106]
Artist's depiction of Pakistani Fighter Jet
The F-86 Sabre was vulnerable to the diminutiveFolland Gnat, nicknamed "Sabre Slayer".[107] The Gnat is credited by many independent and Indian sources as having shot down sevenPakistaniCanadair Sabres[a] in the 1965 war,[108][109] while two Gnats were downed by PAF fighters. The PAF'sF-104 Starfighter was the fastest fighter operating in the subcontinent at that time and was often referred to as "the pride of the PAF". However, according toAir CommodoreSajad Haider, the F-104 did not deserve this reputation. Being "a high-level interceptor designed to neutralise Soviet strategic bombers ataltitudes above 40,000 feet (12.19 km)," rather than engage in dogfights with agile fighters at low altitudes, it was "unsuited to the tactical environment of the region".[110] In combat the Starfighter was not as effective as the IAF's far more agile, albeit much slower,Folland Gnat fighter.[111][112] Yet it zoomed into an ongoing dogfight between Sabres and Gnats, at supersonic speed, successfully broke off the fight and caused the Gnats to egress.
An IAF Gnat, piloted bySquadron Leader Brij Pal Singh Sikand, landed at an abandoned Pakistaniairstrip atPasrur, as he lacked the fuel to return to his base, and was captured by the Pakistan Army. According to the pilot, he got separated from his formation due to a malfunctioning compass and radio.[113][114] This Gnat is displayed as a war trophy in thePakistan Air Force Museum, Karachi.Sqn LdrSaad Hatmi who flew the captured aircraft toSargodha, and later tested and evaluated its flight performance, presumed that Gnat was no "Sabre Slayer" when it came to dog fighting.[114] Three Indiancivilian aircraft were shot down by PAF, one of whichshot down at Bhuj, Gujarat was carryingBalwantrai Mehta,chief minister of the Indian state ofGujarat, total eight killed in the incident along withBalwantrai Mehta and his wife. The Pakistan Air Force had fought well in countering the much larger Indian Air Force and supported the ground forces.[115]
The two countries have made contradictory claims of combat losses during the war, and few neutral sources have verified the claims of either country. The PAF claimed it shot down 104 IAF planes and lost 19 of its own, while the IAF claimed it shot down 73 PAF planes and lost 59.[116] According toPAF, it flew 86 F-86 Sabres, 10 F-104 Star fighters and 20 B-57 Canberra's in a parade soon after the war was over. Thus disproving the IAF's claim of downing 73 PAF fighters, which at the time constituted nearly the entire Pakistani front-line fighter force.[117]Indian sources have pointed out that, despite PAF claims of losing only a squadron of combat craft, Pakistan sought to acquire additional aircraft fromIndonesia,Iraq,Iran,Turkey, and China within 10 days of the beginning of the war.[118]
The two air forces were rather equal in the conflict because much of the Indian air force remained farther east to guard against the possibility of China entering the war.[119]According to independent sources, the PAF lost 20 aircraft while the Indians lost 60–75.[14][120] Pakistan ended the war having depleted 17 percent of its front-line strength, while India's losses amounted to less than 10 percent. The loss rate had begun to even out, and it has been estimated that another three weeks' fighting would have seen the Pakistani losses rising to 33 percent and India's losses totalling 15 percent. Air superiority was not achieved, and they were unable to prevent IAF fighter bombers and reconnaissance Canberras from flying daylight missions over Pakistan. Thus, 1965 was a stalemate in terms of the air war with neither side able to achieve complete air superiority.[119][121] After the war, India's Chief of Air StaffMarshal Arjan Singh claimed that the IAF was able to achieve air superiority within three days of the Pakistani air strikes.[122] However, according to Kenneth Werrell, the Pakistan Air Force "did well in the conflict and probably had the edge".[123] When hostilities broke out, the Pakistan Air Force with around 100 F-86s faced an enemy with five times as many combat aircraft; the Indians were also equipped with comparatively modern aircraft inventory. Despite this, Werrell credits the PAF as having the advantage of a "decade's experience with the Sabre" and experienced pilots. One Pakistani fighter pilot,MM Alam, was credited with the record of downing five Indian aircraft in less than a minute, becoming the first knownflying ace since the Korean War.[123] His claims were never confirmed by thePAF and are disputed by Indian sources[124][125][126] and some PAF officials.[127][128][129]
The 1965 war witnessed some of the largest tank battles sinceWorld War II. At the beginning of the war, the Pakistani Army had both a numerical advantage in tanks, and better equipment overall.[130] Pakistani armour was largely American-made; it consisted mainly ofPatton M-47 andM-48 tanks, but also included manyM4 Sherman tanks, someM24 Chaffee light tanks andM36 Jacksontank destroyers, equipped with 90 mm guns.[131] The bulk of India's tank fleet was olderM4 Sherman tanks; some were up-gunned with the French high-velocity CN 75 50 guns and could hold their own, whilst some older models were still equipped with the inferior75 mm M3 L/40 gun. Besides the M4 tanks, India fielded the British-madeCenturion Tank Mk 7, with the 20pdr (84 mm) gunRoyal Ordnance QF 20-pounder gun, and theAMX-13,PT-76, andM3 Stuart light tanks. Pakistan fielded a more significant number and more modern artillery; its guns out-ranged those of the Indian artillery, according to Pakistan's Major General T.H. Malik.[132]
At the outbreak of war in 1965, Pakistan had about 15 armoured cavalry regiments, each with about 50 tanks divided into three squadrons. In addition, there were 4 additional regiments termed "tank delivery units" (TDUs), i.e. 30, 31, 32 and 33 TDU(presumably to deceive the Indian military planners as to their actual tank strength), each consisting of two tank squadrons and one M-36B Jackson tank destroyer squadron.[133] Besides the Patton, there were about 200 M4 Shermans re-armed with 76 mm guns, 150 M24 Chaffee light tank and a few independent squadrons of M36B1 tank destroyers. Most of these regiments served in Pakistan's two armoured divisions, the 1st and 6th Armoured divisions – the latter being in the process of formation.
The Indian Army of the time possessed 15 cavalry regiments,[133] and in the 1950s had begun modernising them by the acquisition of 164AMX-13 light tanks and 188Centurions. The remainder of the cavalry units were equipped withM4 Shermans and someM3A3 Stuart light tanks. India had only a single armoured division, the1st 'Black Elephant' Armoured Division, which consisted of the17th Horse (The Poona Horse), also called 'Fakhr-i-Hind' ('Pride of India'), the4th Horse (Hodson's Horse), the16th Cavalry, the2nd Lancers, and the62nd Cavalry,[134][135] the two first named being equipped with Centurions. There was also the 2nd Independent Armoured Brigade, one of whose three regiments, the3rd Cavalry, was also equipped with Centurions.Despite the qualitative and numerical superiority of Pakistani armour,[136] Pakistan was outfought on the battlefield by India, which made progress into the Lahore-Sialkot sector, whilst halting Pakistan's counteroffensive onAmritsar;[137][138] they were sometimes employed faultily, such as charging prepared defences during the defeat of Pakistan's1st Armoured Division atAsal Uttar.
Neither the Indian nor Pakistani Army showed any great facility in the use of armoured formations in offensive operations, whether the Pakistani 1st Armoured Division at Asal Uttar (Battle of Asal Uttar) or the Indian 1st Armoured Division at Chawinda. In contrast, both proved adept with smaller forces in a defensive role, such as India's 2nd Armoured Brigade at Asal Uttar and Pakistan's 25th Cavalry at Chawinda.
The Centurion battle tank, with its 20pdr gun and heavy armour, performed better than the overly complex[need quotation to verify] Patton.[138]
Naval operations did not play a prominent role in the war of 1965. On 7 September, aflotilla of the Pakistan Navy commanded by Commodore S.M. Anwar, carried out a bombardment of the Indian Navy's radar station coastal town ofDwarka, which was 320 kilometres (200 mi) south of the Pakistani port of Karachi.Operation Dwarka, as it is known, is a significant naval operation of the 1965 war[139][140][141] contested as a nuisance raid by some.[142][143] The attack on Dwarka led to questions being asked in India's parliament[144] and subsequent post-war modernisation and expansion of the Indian Navy, with an increase in budget fromRs. 35 crores toRs. 115 crores.[145][146] Indian sources claim that it was not their intention to get into a naval conflict with Pakistan, and wished to restrict the war to a land-based conflict.[147]
Covert operations
ThePakistan Army launched numerous covert operations to infiltrate and sabotage Indianairbases.[148] On 7 September 1965, theSpecial Services Group (SSG)commandos wereparachuted into enemy territory. According toCommander-in-Chief of the Pakistan Army GeneralMuhammad Musa, about 135 commandos were airdropped at three Indian airfields (Halwara,Pathankot andAdampur). The daring attempt turned out to be an "unmitigated disaster".[148] Only 22 commandos returned to Pakistan as planned, 93 were taken prisoner (including one of the Commanders of the operations, Major Khalid Butt), and 20 were killed in encounters with the army, police, or civilians.[citation needed] The reason for the failure of the commando mission is attributed to the failure to provide maps, proper briefings and adequate planning or preparation.[149]
Despite failing to sabotage the airfields, Pakistan sources claim that the commando mission affected some planned Indian operations. As the Indian14th Infantry Division was diverted to hunt for paratroopers, the Pakistan Air Force found the road filled with transport, and destroyed many vehicles.[150]
India responded to the covert activity by announcing rewards for captured Pakistanispies or paratroopers.[151] Meanwhile, in Pakistan, rumours spread that India had retaliated with its own covert operations, sending commandos deep into Pakistan territory,[149] but these rumours were later determined to be unfounded.[152]
Assessment of losses
India and Pakistan make widely divergent claims about the damage they inflicted on each other and the amount of damage suffered by them. The following summarises each nation's claims.
59IAF (official), 43PAF.[162] In addition, Indian sources claim that there were 13 IAF aircraft lost in accidents, and three Indian civilian aircraft shot down.[163]
In his book titledOrigins of Political Extremism: Mass Violence in the Twentieth Century and Beyond Manus I. Midlarsky wrote;[169]–
The most recent estimate has Pakistan occupying 1,600 square miles of Indian territory (1,300 of it desert). India conquered 350 square miles of Pakistan, but "of greater strategic value, as it was located near the West Pakistani capital, Lahore, and the industrial city of Sialkot as well as in Kashmir.
There have been several neutral assessments of the losses incurred by both India and Pakistan during the war. Most of these assessments agree that India had the upper hand over Pakistan when the ceasefire was declared. Some neutral assessments are mentioned below —
The war was militarily inconclusive; each side held prisoners and some territory belonging to the other. Losses were relatively heavy—on the Pakistani side, twenty aircraft, 200 tanks, and 3,800 troops. Pakistan's army had been able to withstand Indian pressure, but a continuation of the fighting would only have led to further losses and ultimate defeat for Pakistan. Most Pakistanis, schooled in the belief of their own martial prowess, refused to accept the possibility of their country's military defeat by "Hindu India" and were, instead, quick to blame their failure to attain their military aims on what they considered to be the ineptitude of Ayub Khan and his government.
FormerNew York Times reporter Arif Jamal wrote in his bookShadow War[170] —
This time, India's victory was nearly total: India accepted a cease-fire only after it had occupied 740 square miles [1,900 km2], though Pakistan had made marginal gains of 210 square miles [540 km2] of territory. Despite the obvious strength of the Indian win, both countries claim to have been victorious.
Devin T. Hagerty wrote in his bookSouth Asia in world politics[171] –
The invading Indian forces outfought their Pakistani counterparts and halted their attack on the outskirts of Lahore, Pakistan's second-largest city. By the time the United Nations intervened on September 22, Pakistan had suffered a clear defeat.
In his bookNational identity and geopolitical visions,[172] Gertjan Dijkink writes –
The superior Indian forces, however, won a decisive victory and the army could have even marched on into Pakistani territory had external pressure not forced both combatants to cease their war efforts.
An excerpt fromStanley Wolpert'sIndia,[173] summarising the Indo-Pakistani war of 1965,
In three weeks, the second Indo-Pak War ended in what appeared to be a draw when the embargo placed by Washington on U.S. ammunition and replacements for both armies forced the cessation of conflict before either side won a clear victory. India, however, was in a position to inflict grave damage to, if not capture, Pakistan's capital of the Punjab when the cease-fire was called, and controlled Kashmir's strategic Uri-Poonch bulge, much to Ayub's chagrin.
In his book titledThe greater game: India's race with destiny and China, David Van Praagh wrote[174] –
India won the war. It held on to the Vale of Kashmir, the prize Pakistan vainly sought. It gained 1,840 km2 [710 sq mi] of Pakistani territory: 640 km2 [250 sq mi] in Azad Kashmir, Pakistan's portion of the state; 460 km2 [180 sq mi] of the Sailkot sector; 380 km2 [150 sq mi] far to the south of Sindh; and most critical, 360 km2 [140 sq mi] on the Lahore front. Pakistan took 540 km2 [210 sq mi] of Indian territory: 490 km2 [190 sq mi] in the Chhamb sector and 50 km2 [19 sq mi] around Khem Karan.
Dennis Kux'sIndia and the United States estranged democracies also provides a summary of the war,[175]
Although both sides lost heavily in men and material, and neither gained a decisive military advantage, India had the best of the war. New Delhi achieved its basic goal of thwarting Pakistan's attempt to seize Kashmir by force. Pakistan gained nothing from a conflict which it had instigated.
A region in turmoil: South Asian conflicts since 1947 by Robert Johnson mentions[176] –
India's strategic aims were modest – it aimed to deny the Pakistani Army victory, although it ended up in possession of 720 square miles [1,900 km2] of Pakistani territory for the loss of just 220 square miles [570 km2] of its own.
An excerpt from William M. Carpenter and David G. Wiencek'sAsian security handbook: terrorism and the new security environment[177] –
A brief, but furious 1965 war with India began with a covert Pakistani thrust across the Kashmiri cease-fire line and ended up with the city of Lahore threatened with encirclement by the Indian Army. Another UN-sponsored cease-fire left borders unchanged, but Pakistan's vulnerability had again been exposed.
English historianJohn Keay'sIndia: A History provides a summary of the 1965 war[178] –
The 1965 Indo-Pak war lasted barely a month. Pakistan made gains in the Rajasthan desert, but its main push against India's Jammu-Srinagar road link was repulsed, and Indian tanks advanced to within a sight of Lahore. Both sides claimed victory, but India had most to celebrate.
Uk Heo and Shale Asher Horowitz write in their bookConflict in Asia: Korea, China–Taiwan, and India–Pakistan[179] –
Again, India appeared, logistically at least, to be in a superior position, but neither side was able to mobilize enough strength to gain a decisive victory.
Conflict resumed again in early 1965, when Pakistani and Indian forces clashed over disputed territory along the border between the two nations. Hostilities intensified that August when the Pakistani army attempted to take Kashmir by force. The attempt to seize the state was unsuccessful, and the second India-Pakistan War reached a stalemate.
Anthony Tucker-Jones write in his book Tank Battles of the Cold War, 1948–1991:[181]
Both sides fought each other to a stalemate. Shortly after they agreed to a cease-fire, with each side having lost about 200 tanks.
Ceasefire
On 20 September, theUnited Nations Security Council unanimously passed aresolution, which noted that its previous two resolutions went "unheeded" and now "demanded" an unconditional ceasefire from both nations within 48 hours.[182][183]India immediately accepted,[184][b] while Pakistan accepted it on 23 September, with some notable dramatics.[186]
India and Pakistan accused each other of ceasefire violations; India charged Pakistan with 585 violations in 34 days, while Pakistan countered with accusations of 450 incidents by India.[187] In addition to the expected exchange ofsmall arms and artillery fire, India reported that Pakistan used the ceasefire to capture the Indian village of Chananwalla in theFazilka sector. This village was recaptured by Indian troops on 25 December. On 10 October, aB-57 Canberra on loan to the PAF was damaged by threeSA-2 missiles fired from the IAF base atAmbala.[188] A Pakistani ArmyAuster AOP was shot down on 16 December, killing one Pakistani army captain; on 2 February 1967, an AOP was shot down by IAFHawker Hunters.
The United States and theSoviet Union used significant diplomatic tools to prevent any further escalation in the conflict between the two South Asian nations. The Soviet Union, led by PremierAlexei Kosygin, hosted peace negotiations inTashkent (now inUzbekistan), where Indian Prime MinisterLal Bahadur Shastri and Pakistani PresidentMuhammad Ayub Khan signed theTashkent Declaration on 10 January 1966,[189] agreeing to withdraw to pre-August lines no later than 25 February 1966. InIndia, the agreement was criticised because it did not contain a no-war pact or any renunciation of guerrilla warfare acrossKashmir.
India's Prime Minister,Shastri, suffered a fatal heart attack soon after theTashkent Agreement on 11 January 1966. As a consequence, the public outcry in India against the peace declaration transformed into a wave of sympathy for the rulingIndian National Congress.[190]
Public perceptions
The ceasefire was criticised by many Pakistanis who, relying on fabricated official reports and the controlled Pakistani press, believed that the leadership had surrendered military gains. The protests led to student riots.[191] Pakistan State's reports had suggested that their military was performing admirably in the war – which they incorrectly blamed as being initiated by India – and thus theTashkent Declaration was seen as having forfeited the gains.[192] Some recent books written by Pakistani authors, including one by ex-ISI chief Lieutenant GeneralMahmud Ahmed Durrani initially titledThe Myth of 1965 Victory,[193] reportedly exposed Pakistani fabrications about the war, but all copies of the book were bought by the Pakistan Army to prevent circulation because the topic was "too sensitive".[194][195] The book was published with the revised titleHistory of Indo Pak War 1965, published by Services Book Club, a part of the Pakistan military and printed by Oxford University Press, Karachi. A few copies of the book have survived.[196] A version was published in India asIllusion of Victory: A Military History of the Indo-Pak War-1965 by Lexicon Publishers.[197] Recently a new Pakistani impression has been published in 2017.
Intelligence failures
Strategic miscalculations by both India and Pakistan ensured that the war ended in a stalemate. In part, this inspiredShekhar Gupta to coin theprotologism, "war of mutual incompetence".[198]
Indian miscalculations
Indian military intelligence gave no warning of the impending Pakistan invasion. The Indian Army failed to recognise the presence of heavy Pakistani artillery and armaments inChumb and suffered significant losses as a result.
The "Official War History – 1965", drafted by theMinistry of Defence of India in 1992, was a long-suppressed document that revealed other miscalculations. According to the document, on 22 September when theSecurity Council was pressing for a ceasefire, the Indian Prime Minister asked commanding Gen. Chaudhuri if India could possibly win the war, were he to delay accepting the ceasefire. The general replied that most of India's frontline ammunition had been used up, and the Indian Army had suffered considerable tank losses. It was determined later that only 14% of India's frontline ammunition had been fired, and India held twice the number of tanks as Pakistan. By this time, the Pakistani Army had used close to 80% of its ammunition.
Air Chief Marshal (retd.) P.C. Lal, who was the Vice Chief of Air Staff during the conflict, points to the lack of coordination between theIAF and the Indian army. Neither side revealed its battle plans to the other. The battle plans, drafted by the Ministry of Defence and General Chaudhari, did not specify a role for the Indian Air Force in the order of battle. This attitude of Gen. Chaudhari was referred to by ACM Lal as the "Supremo Syndrome", a patronising attitude sometimes held by the Indian army towards the other branches of the Indian Military.[153]
Pakistani miscalculations
The Pakistani Army's failures began with the supposition that a generally discontented Kashmiri people would revolt against their Indian rulers, bringing about a swift and decisive victory. The Kashmiri people, on the other hand, remained calm and collected. The Indian Army was given enough information to understandOperation Gibraltar and that they were battling not insurgents, as they had initially thought, but Pakistani Army regulars.
Telegram from the Embassy of the United States inKarachi: "Continuing propaganda regarding achievements of PAK forces seems to have convinced most that only PAK forbearance saved the Indians from disaster."
The Pakistani Army didn't know that Indian leaders wanted to attack the southern part of the country to start a new war. Pakistan had to send troops to the southern part of the country to protect Sialkot and Lahore instead of using them to help get to Kashmir.
Pakistan's attempt to capture Ahnoor, a town north-east of Jammu and a key region for communications between Kashmir and the rest of India, was a failure. Many Pakistani commentators said that the Ayub Khan administration was indecisive during "Operation Grand Slam". The critics contend that the mission was unsuccessful due to Ayub Khan's awareness of the significance of Akhnoor to India, referring to it as India's 'jugular vein', and his reluctance to invade it and initiate a conflict. Although progress was made in Akhnoor, General Ayub Khan relieved the commanding officer,Major General Akhtar Hussain Malik, and replaced him with GeneralYahya Khan. During the replacement, a 24-hour pause was observed, enabling the Indian army to regroup in Akhnoor and successfully repel a sluggish assault led by General Yahya Khan. The Indian Chief of Staff of the Western Command said, "The enemy came to our rescue." Then, Akhtar Hussain Malik criticised Ayub Khan for inventing Operation Gibraltar, which ultimately failed, and for denying him command at a crucial point in the conflict. Malik said he would tell the truth about the war and how the army failed, but later decided not to because he was afraid of being banned.[199]
Some authors have said that awar game – that was held in March 1965 at theInstitute for Defense Analyses in the United States might have encouraged Pakistan. The exercise concluded that Pakistan would prevail in the event of a conflict with India.[200][201] Other authors likeStephen P. Cohen, have consistently commented that the Pakistan Army had "acquired an exaggerated view of the weakness of both India and the Indian military … the 1965 war was a shock."[202]
During the war, the PakistaniAir Marshal andCommander-in-Chief of PAF,Nur Khan, later stated that it is the Pakistan Army that should be held accountable for initiating the conflict, rather than India.[203][204] However, propaganda about the war continued in Pakistan,[205][206] with most of the blame being placed on the leadership and little importance given to intelligence failures. This pattern persisted until the disastrous outcome of the Indo-Pakistani war in 1971.
Involvement of other nations
The United States and the United Kingdom have been the principal suppliers of military matériel to India and Pakistan since 1947. Both India and Pakistan were Commonwealth republics. While India had pursued a policy of nominal non-alignment, Pakistan was a member of bothCENTO andSEATO and an ally of the West in its struggle against communism.[207] Well before the conflict began, however, Britain and the United States had suspected Pakistan of joining both alliances out of opportunism to acquire advanced weapons for a war against India. They had therefore limited their military aid to Pakistan to maintain the existing balance of power in the subcontinent.[208] In 1959, however, Pakistan and the United States had signed an Agreement of Cooperation under which the United States agreed to take "appropriate action, including the use of armed forces" to assist the Government of Pakistan at its request.[209] By 1965, American and British analysts had recognised the two international groupings, CENTO and SEATO, and Pakistan's continued alliance with the West as being largely meaningless.[210]
Following the start of the 1965 war, both the United States and Britain took the view that the conflict was largely Pakistan's fault, and suspended all arms shipments to both India and Pakistan.[22] While the United States maintained a neutral stance, the British Prime Minister, Harold Wilson, condemned India for aggression after its army advanced towards Lahore; his statement was met with a furious rebuttal from India.[211]
Internationally, the level of support which Pakistan received was limited at best.[212][213][214] Iran and Turkey issued a joint communiqué on 10 September which placed the blame on India, backed the United Nations' appeal for a cease-fire and offered to deploy troops for a UN peacekeeping mission in Kashmir.[215] Pakistan received support from Indonesia, Iran, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia in the form of six naval vessels, jet fuel, guns, and ammunition and financial support, respectively.[216] Pakistan didn't gain meaningful support at an international level.[32][212][217][218]
Since before the war, the People's Republic of China had been a major military associate of Pakistan and a military opponent of India, with whom it hadfought a brief war in 1962. China had also become a foreign patron for Pakistan and had given Pakistan $60 million in development assistance in 1965.[219] During the war, China openly supported the Pakistani position. It took advantage of the conflict to issue a strongly worded ultimatum to India condemning its "aggression" in Tibet and hinting at nuclear retaliation by China (China had exploded its first nuclear device the previous year).[214] Despite strong fears of Chinese intervention on the side of Pakistan, the Chinese government ultimately exercised restraint.[220] This was partly due to the logistical difficulties of a direct Chinese military intervention against India and India's improved military strength after its defeat by China in 1962.[213] China had also received strong warnings by the American and Soviet governments against expanding the scope of the conflict by intervening.[214] In the face of this pressure, China backed down, extending the deadline for India to respond to its ultimatum and warning India against attackingEast Pakistan.[218] Ultimately, Pakistan rejected Chinese offers of military aid, recognising that accepting it would only result in further alienating Pakistan internationally.[214] International opinion considered China's actions to be dangerously reckless and aggressive, and it was soundly rebuked in the world press for its unnecessarily provocative stance during the conflict.[214]
India's participation in theNon-Aligned Movement yielded little support from its members.[221] Support given by Indonesia to Pakistan was seen as a major Indian diplomatic failure, as Indonesia had been among the founding members of the Non-Aligned Movement along with India.[222] Despite its close relations with India, theSoviet Union was more neutral than other nations during the war, inviting both nations to peace talks under its aegis inTashkent.[223]
Aftermath
India
Despite the declaration of a ceasefire, India was perceived by many as the victor due to its success in halting the Pakistan-backed insurgency in Kashmir.[33] In its October 1, 1965 issue,Time magazine quoted a Western official assessing the consequences of the war: "Now it's apparent to everybody that India is going to emerge as an Asian power in its own right."[224]
In light of the failures of theSino-Indian War, the outcome of the 1965 war was viewed as a "politico-strategic" victory for India. The Indian prime minister,Lal Bahadur Shastri, was hailed as a national hero in India.[225]
While the overall performance of the Indian military was praised, military leaders were criticised for their failure to effectively deploy India's superior armed forces to achieve a decisive victory over Pakistan.[226] In his bookWar in the modern world since 1815, noted war historianJeremy Black said that though Pakistan "lost heavily" during the 1965 war, India's hasty decision to call for negotiations prevented further considerable damage to the Pakistan Armed Forces. He elaborates:
India's chief of army staff urged negotiations on the ground that they were running out of ammunition and their number of tanks had become seriously depleted. In fact, the army had used less than 15% of its ammunition compared to Pakistan, which had consumed closer to 80 percent and India had double the number of serviceable tanks.[227]
In 2015,Marshal of the Indian Air Force Arjan Singh, the last surviving armed force commander of the conflict, gave his assessment that the war ended in a stalemate, but only due to international pressure for a ceasefire, and that India would have achieved a decisive victory had hostilities continued for a few days more:
For political reasons, Pakistan claims victory in the 1965 war. In my opinion, the war ended in a kind of stalemate. We were in a position of strength. Had the war continued for a few more days, we would have gained a decisive victory. I advised then prime minister Lal Bahadur Shastri not to agree to a ceasefire. But I think he was pressured by the United Nations and some countries.[228]
As a consequence, India focussed on enhancing communication and coordination within and among the tri-services of the Indian Armed Forces. Partly as a result of the inefficient information gathering preceding the war, India established theResearch and Analysis Wing for externalespionage andintelligence. Major improvements were also made incommand and control to address various shortcomings and the positive impact of these changes was clearly visible during theIndo-Pakistani war of 1971 when India achieved a decisive victory over Pakistan within two weeks.
China's repeated threats to intervene in the conflict supporting Pakistan increased pressure on the government to take an immediate decision to developnuclear weapons.[229] Despite repeated assurances, the United States did little to prevent extensive use of American arms by Pakistani forces during the conflict, thus irking India.[230] At the same time, the United States and United Kingdom refused to supply India with sophisticated weaponry which further strained the relations between the West and India.[231] These developments led to a significant change in India's foreign policy – India, which had previously championed the cause ofnon-alignment, distanced itself further from Western powers and developed close relations with theSoviet Union. By the end of the 1960s, the Soviet Union emerged as the biggest supplier of military hardware to India.[232] From 1967 to 1977, 81% of India's arms imports were from the Soviet Union.[233] After the 1965 war, the arms race between India and Pakistan became even more asymmetric and India was outdistancing Pakistan by far.[234] India's defence budget too would increase gradually after the war. In 1966–1967, it would rise to 17% and by 1970–1971 it would rise to 25% of its revenue.[235] According toWorld Bank data, India's defence expenditure by GDP decreased from 3.871% in 1965 to 3.141% in 1969, then slightly increased to 3.652% in 1971.[236]
Pakistan
After the war, a significant number of Pakistanis regarded their military performance to be positive. In Pakistan, 6 September is celebrated asDefence Day to remember howLahore was able to defend itself against the Indian army. The performance of the Pakistani Air Force was particularly praised.
The Pakistani government was accused of spreading misinformation about the consequences of the war among its citizens.[237] In his bookMainsprings of Indian and Pakistani foreign policies, S.M. Burke writes[171] —
After the Indo-Pakistani war of 1965, the balance of military power had decisively shifted in favor of India. Pakistan had found it difficult to replace the heavy equipment lost during that conflict while her adversary, despite her economic and political problems, had been determinedly building up her strength.
Air Marshal (retired)Nur Khan, who headed the Pakistan Air Force in 1965, said in an interview with Dawn newspaper[238] —
The army "misled the nation with a big lie" – that India rather than Pakistan provoked the war – and that Pakistan won a "great victory".
And since the "lie" was never rectified, the Pakistani "army came to believe its fiction, (and) has continued to fight unwanted wars,"
The myth of 'victory' was created after the war had ended, to counter Indian claims of victory on the one hand and to shield the Ayub regime and the army from criticism on the other.
A book titledIndo-Pakistan War of 1965: A Flashback,[240] produced by theInter-Services Public Relations of Pakistan, is used as the official history of the war, which omits any mention of the operationsGibraltar andGrand Slam, and begins with the Indian counter-offensive on the Lahore front. The Pakistan Army is claimed to have put up a "valiant defense of the motherland" and forced the attack in its tracks.[239]
Most people agree that the idea of a mobile, hard-hitting Pakistan Army was badly hurt during the war because important breakthroughs were not made.[241] The military's ill-founded belief that their "martial race" of soldiers could defeat "Hindu India" in the conflict was criticised by several Pakistani writers.[242][243] Rasul Bux Rais, a Pakistani political analyst wrote[244] –
The 1965 war with India proved that Pakistan could neither break the formidable Indian defenses in an intense violent military campaign fashion nor could she sustain an all-out conflict for long.
Historian Akbar S Zaidi notes that Pakistan "lost terribly in the 1965 war".[245]
The Pakistani air force, on the other hand, racked up considerable acclaim and esteem among the military and international warfare critics for its defence of Lahore and other crucial parts of the country and its hefty retaliation against India the day afterward. The air force's vigilance was also influenced by the fact that some pilots were frantically re-enlisted six times in a single hour when they detected Indian air raids. In Pakistan, the air force and army are honored onDefence Day andAir Force Day. These days are on 6 and 7 September, respectively.[246][247]
Furthermore, Pakistan had lost more ground than it had gained during the conflict, and, perhaps even more crucial, it had failed to secure Kashmir. Many people consider this outcome to be a setback for Pakistan.[34][35][36]
The faulty planning ofOperation Gibraltar was criticised by senior Pakistani officials and military experts, which ultimately led to the conflict. The Tashkent declaration was also criticised in Pakistan, even though few people were aware of the seriousness of the situation at the end of the conflict. Political leaders were also subjected to criticism. Ayub Khan had espoused high expectations among the Pakistani populace regarding the superiority, if not invincibility, of its armed forces,[248] in accordance with the guidance ofZulfikar Ali Bhutto, the foreign minister of Pakistan. Nonetheless, the failure of Pakistan to attain its military objectives during the conflict resulted in a political liability for Ayub.[249] After the defeat of its Kashmiri ambitions, an increasingly vocal opposition challenged the army's invincibility.[250]
The economic contraction in Pakistan was one of the most significant outcomes of the conflict.[251][252] Pakistan had experienced impressive economic growth since the early 1960s, but the war ended that. Between 1964 and 1966, Pakistan's defence spending rose from 4.82% to 9.86% of GDP, putting a tremendous strain on its economy. In 1970–71, the expenditure on defence accounted for 32%[235] or 55.66% of the total government expenditure.[253] According to veterans of the war, the war greatly cost Pakistan economically, politically, and militarily.[254] Nuclear theorist Feroze Khan maintained that the 1965 war was a lastconventional attempt to snatch Kashmir by military force, and Pakistan's own position in the international community, especially with theUnited States, began to deteriorate from the point the war started, while on the other hand, the alliance with China saw improvements.[254]Chairman joint chiefs GeneralTariq Majid claims in his memoirs thatZhou Enlai had long advised the government in the classic style ofSun Tzu: "to go slow, not to push India hard, and avoid a fight over Kashmir, 'for at least, 20–30 years, until you have developed your economy and consolidated your national power'."[254] General Majid maintained inEating Grass that the "sane, philosophical and political critical thinking" was missing in Pakistan, and that the country had lost extensive human resources by fighting the war.[254]
Pakistan was surprised by the lack of support from the United States, an ally with whom the country had signed an Agreement of Cooperation. The US turned neutral in the war when it cut off military supplies to Pakistan (and India);[citation needed] an action that the Pakistanis took as a sign of betrayal.[255] After the war, Pakistan would increasingly look towards China as a major source of military hardware and political support.
Another negative consequence of the war was growing resentment against the Pakistani government inEast Pakistan (present dayBangladesh),[202] particularly for West Pakistan's obsession with Kashmir.[256]Bengali leaders accused the central government of not providing adequate security for East Pakistan during the conflict, even though large sums of money were taken from the east to finance the war for Kashmir.[257] In fact, despite some Pakistan Air Force attacks being launched from bases in East Pakistan during the war, India did not retaliate in that sector,[258] although East Pakistan was defended only by an understrengthed infantry division (14th Division), sixteen planes and no tanks.[259]Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was critical of the disparity in military resources deployed in East and West Pakistan, calling for greater autonomy for East Pakistan, an action that ultimately led to theBangladesh Liberation War andanother war between India and Pakistan in 1971.
Pakistan celebratesDefence Day every year to commemorate 6 September 1965 to pay tribute to the soldiers killed in the war.[260] However, Pakistani journalists, includingTaha Siddiqui[261] and Haseeb Asif[262] have criticised the celebration of Defence Day.
Joginder Singh Dhillon, Lt. Gen, awarded thePadma Bhushan in 1966 by the Government of India for his role in the 1965 war,[269] becoming the first Indian Army officer to receive the award.[270]
Gallantry awards
For bravery, the following soldiers were awarded the highest gallantry award of their respective countries, the Indian awardParam Vir Chakra and the Pakistani awardNishan-e-Haider:
^abTucker, Spencer (2004). Tanks: An Illustrated History of Their Impact. ABC-CLIO.PAGE 172. ISBN 978-1-57607-995-9.ARCHIVED from the original on 5 February 2023. Retrieved 15 November 2015.
^Dijink, Gertjan (2002).National Identity and Geopolitical Visions: Maps of Pride and Pain. Routledge.ISBN978-1-134-77129-5.The superior Indian forces, however, won a decisive victory and the army could have even marched on into Pakistani territory had external pressure not forced both combatants to cease their war efforts.
^abcPakistan: The Indo-Pakistani War of 1965.Library of Congress Country Studies, United States of America. April 1994.Archived from the original on 7 January 2016. Retrieved2 October 2010. "Losses were relatively heavy—on the Pakistani side, twenty aircraft, 200 tanks, and 3,800 troops. Pakistan's army had been able to withstand Indian pressure, but a continuation of the fighting would only have led to further losses and ultimate defeat for Pakistan."
^Hagerty, Devin (2005).South Asia in world politics. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 26.ISBN978-0-7425-2587-0.Archived from the original on 7 February 2023. Retrieved12 November 2020. Quote: The invading Indian forces outfought their Pakistani counterparts and halted their attack on the outskirts of Lahore, Pakistan's second-largest city. By the time theUnited Nations intervened on 20 September, Pakistan had suffered a clear defeat.
^Wolpert, Stanley (2005).India (3rd ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press. p. 235.ISBN978-0-520-24696-6.Archived from the original on 17 January 2023. Retrieved15 November 2015. Quote: India, however, was in a position to inflict grave damage to, if not capture, Pakistan's capital of the Punjab when the cease-fire was called, and controlled Kashmir's strategic Uri-Poonch bulge, much to Ayub's chagrin.
^Jogindar Singh (1993).Behind the Scene:An Analysis of India's Military Operations, 1947–1971. p. 238.In the final analysis Pakistan maintained air superiority over the combat zones from 6 September onwards
^John Andreas Olsen (2018).Routledge Handbook of Air Power. Routledge.Careful analysis available in the public domain tends to list IAF losses as sixty-five aircraft to all causes and PAF losses at twenty-five aircraft….Finally, there was agreement that the losses suffered by the IAF were not commensurate with the value gained in terms of the effect on the adversary and its combat efficiency.
^Kaushik Roy (2017).Conventional Warfare in South Asia, 1947 to the present. Routledge.point that the PAF's superior strategy enabled it to win air superiority by 5 September bears serious consideration. The preemptive air strike over the Indian air fields and the subsequent provocation of the IAF to fight over the heavily defended Pakistani airfields did indeed result in heavy attrition of the IAF's aircraft.
^Jeremy Black (2016).Air Power:A Global History. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.ISBN9781442250970.In the brief 1965 war between India and Pakistan, the two air forces were heavily engaged. The Pakistan Air Force (PAF) was able to inflict greater casualties despite being smaller. This owed much to the technical superiority of the PAF's F-86 Sabres over the IAF's Hunters and Mysteres.
^Kux, Dennis (2006).India-Pakistan Negotiations: Is Past Still Prologue?. US Institute of Peace Press. p. 30.ISBN978-1-929223-87-9.The conflict was short, but nasty. After seventeen days, both sides accepted a UN Security Council call for a cease-fire. Although the two militaries fought to a standoff, India won by not losing.
^abSmall, Andrew (2015).The China-Pakistan Axis: Asia's New Geopolitics. Oxford University Press. p. 17.ISBN978-0-19-021075-5. "... the war itself was a disaster for Pakistan, from the first failed attempts by Pakistani troops to precipitate an insurgency in Kashmir to the appearance of Indian artillery within range of Lahore International Airport."
^abConley, Jerome (2001).Indo-Russian military and nuclear cooperation: lessons and options for U.S. policy in South Asia. Lexington Books.ISBN978-0-7391-0217-6.
^Ganguly, Sumit (1990) [Published online: 24 Jan 2008]. "Deterrence failure revisited: The Indo-Pakistani war of 1965".Journal of Strategic Studies.13 (4):77–93.doi:10.1080/01402399008437432.ISSN0140-2390.
^abcBrecher, Michael; Wilkenfeld, Jonathan (November 1997).A study of crisis. University of Michigan Press. pp. 170–172.ISBN978-0-472-10806-0. Retrieved3 November 2011.
^Thomas, Raju G. C. (14 July 2014).Indian Security Policy: Foreword by Joseph S. Nye. Princeton University Press. p. 21.ISBN978-1-4008-5819-4.Archived from the original on 7 February 2023. Retrieved8 March 2022.The transfer of American arms under these two pacts included… Patton… Star fighter…Sabre…Canberra…estimated about $700 million.
^"The Double Game".The New Yorker. 8 May 2011.Archived from the original on 20 March 2022. Retrieved26 February 2022.
^ab"India and the United States estranged democracies", 1941–1991,ISBN1-4289-8189-6, DIANE Publishing, pp 235, 238
^Schofield, Julian (2000). "Militarized Decision-Making for War in Pakistan: 1947–1971".Armed Forces & Society.27 (1): 140.doi:10.1177/0095327X0002700108.ISSN0095-327X.JSTOR45346403.S2CID144532810.…and the balance of military capabilities: India was in the early stages of a military buildup against China, which prompted Pakistani military decision-makers to exploit what they saw as a window of opportunity.
^abJames Rapson, Edward; Wolseley Haig;Sir Richard Burn; Henry Dodwell; Robert Eric Mortimer Wheeler;Vidya Dhar Mahajan. "Political Developments Since 1919 (India and Pakistan)".The Cambridge History of India. Vol. 6. S. Chand. p. 1013.
^A Western Sunrise : India's War With Pakistan by Kunal Verma ISBN 978-93-90652-46-4p.319
^Zaloga, Steve (1999)The M47 and M48 Patton tanksISBN1-85532-825-9 pg.34–35.
^Singh, Harbaksh (1991).War Despatches. New Delhi: Lancer International. p. 147.ISBN81-7062-117-8.
^Edward V. Coggins; Ed Coggins (15 May 2000).Wings That Stay on. Turner Publishing Company. pp. 164–.ISBN978-1-56311-568-4.Archived from the original on 5 February 2023. Retrieved14 April 2011.
^SS Sashi (2008).Encyclopaedia Indica: Independent India and wars – III. Anmol Publications. p. 15.Pakistan had been seeking urgent help from Indonesia, Iraq, Iran, Turkey and China, for additional aircraft within 10 days of the war.
^abThe Encyclopedia of 20th Century Air Warfare Edited by Chris Bishop (amber publishing 1997, republished 2004 pages 384–387ISBN1-904687-26-1)
^Hagerty, Devin T.The Consequences of Nuclear Proliferation: Lessons from South Asia. MIT Press. p. 70.
^abHeginbotham, Stanley J; Wriggins, William Howard (1971).India and Japan: The Emerging Balance of Power in Asia. Columbia University East Asian Institute. p. 254.
^Pakistan Intelligence, Security Activities & Operations Handbook By IBP USA
^India's Quest for Security: defense policies, 1947–1965 By Lorne John Kavic, 1967, University of California Press, pp 190
^Working paper, Issue 192, Australian National University. Strategic and Defense Studies Center, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University, 1989,ISBN0-7315-0806-8, 9780-7315-0806-8
^Bajwa 2013, pp. 303–304: "There was now a deadline for Pakistan, 0700 hours GMT, 22 September, to either accept or reject this resolution, barely 48 hours for Ayub to decide what to do…"
^Joshi, Manoj (2008),Kashmir, 1947–1965: A Story Retold, India Research Press, p. 215,ISBN978-81-87943-52-5,archived from the original on 7 February 2023, retrieved18 April 2021: "After his meetings, [U Thant] made an appeal for an unconditional and immediate ceasefire to be effect as of September 14. India immediately accepted the proposal, but not Pakistan, which having gambled, now wanted to take something away from the table."
^Bajwa 2013, p. 311: "In a dramatic and emotional speech, Bhutto declared that Pakistan was bound to prevail as justice was with it, but concluded the speech by confirming that Pakistan would give the UN a final chance to resolve the Kashmir issue and would observe the ceasefire call and would 'stop firing' on 0300 hours, 23 September."
^Dilger, Robert (2003).American transportation policy. Greenwood Publishing Group.ISBN978-0-275-97853-2.
^Kashmir in Conflict: India, Pakistan and the Unending War By Victoria Schofield Published 2003, by I.B.TaurisISBN1-86064-898-3 pp112
^CONTROVERSY: Why Gohar Ayub is wrong about 1965 – Khalid HasanArchived 23 July 2012 atarchive.today quoting Pakistan authorHusain Haqqani:"The Pakistani people were told by the state that they had been victims of aggression and that the aggression had been repelled thanks to God. … official propaganda convinced the people of Pakistan that their military had won the war.” Daily Times, 10 June 2005
^Can the ISI change its spots? By Akhtar Payami,Dawn (newspaper) 7 October 2006
^Riedel, Bruce (2013).Avoiding Armageddon: America, India, and Pakistan to the Brink and Back. Brookings Institution Press. p. 55.ISBN978-0-8157-2408-7.
^Dimitrakis, Panagiotis (2012).Failed Alliances of the Cold War: Britain's Strategy and Ambitions in Asia and the Middle East. Tauris & Co. pp. 39–44.ISBN978-1-84885-974-6. "Defense aid was restricted to the extent that Pakistan would be able to present only a limited defense in the event of communist aggression … Western strategists sought to keep Pakistan … in a position where it did not feel itself powerful enough to initiate a confrontation with India."
^Dimitrakis, Panagiotis (2012).Failed Alliances of the Cold War: Britain's Strategy and Ambitions in Asia and the Middle East. Tauris & Co. pp. 53–55.ISBN978-1-84885-974-6.
^Dimitrakis, Panagiotis (2012).Failed Alliances of the Cold War: Britain's Strategy and Ambitions in Asia and the Middle East. Tauris & Co. pp. 55–58.ISBN978-1-84885-974-6.
^abSmall, Andrew (2015).The China-Pakistan Axis: Asia's New Geopolitics. Oxford University Press. pp. 17–19.ISBN978-0-19-021075-5. "Mao had decided that China would intervene under two conditions—that India attacked East Pakistan, and that Pakistan requested Chinese intervention. In the end, neither of them [were] obtained."
^abButt, Usama; Schofield, Julian (2012).Pakistan: the U.S., geopolitics and grand strategies. Pluto Press. p. 156.ISBN978-0-7453-3206-2.
^Dimitrakis, Panagiotis (2012).Failed Alliances of the Cold War: Britain's Strategy and Ambitions in Asia and the Middle East. Tauris & Co. p. 58.ISBN978-1-84885-974-6.
^Political Survival in Pakistan: Beyond Ideology, By Anas Malik page 84
^abRiedel, Bruce (2013).Avoiding Armageddon: America, India, and Pakistan to the Brink and Back. Brookings Institution Press. pp. 66–68.ISBN978-0-8157-2408-7.
^Political Survival in Pakistan: Beyond Ideology, By Anas Malik page 85
^Dimitrakis, Panagiotis (2012).Failed Alliances of the Cold War: Britain's Strategy and Ambitions in Asia and the Middle East. Tauris & Co. p. 57.ISBN978-1-84885-974-6.
^Perkovich, George (26 February 2002).India's nuclear bomb: the impact on global proliferation. University of California Press, 1999.ISBN978-0-520-23210-5.
^Title: India and the United States estranged democracies, 1941–1991,ISBN1-4289-8189-6, DIANE Publishing
^Brzoska, Michael (1994).Women's and Gender History in Global Perspective. University of South Carolina Press, 1994.ISBN978-0-87249-982-9.
^abDixit, J.N. (2 September 2003).India-Pakistan in War and Peace. Routledge.ISBN1-134-40757-2.One notes an almost geometrical progression in the defense expenditure in both countries between 1966 and 1971. In 1966–1967, Pakistan's budget was US $473 million, or about 19 percent of government revenue. India's defense expenditure was US$ 1171 million or 17 percent of its budget. By 1970–1971, Pakistan's military budget had grown to 32 percent of its revenue, that is US$625 million. India's defense budget had increased by 25 percent to US$1466 million.
^Inter-Services Public Relations (2015) [first published 1966],Indo-Pakistan War of 1965: A Flashback(PDF) (3rd ed.), Government of Pakistan, Department of Films and Publications,archived(PDF) from the original on 28 January 2019, retrieved27 January 2019
^Insurgents, Terrorists, and Militias: The Warriors of Contemporary CombatRichard H. Shultz, Andrea Dew: "The Martial Races Theory had firm adherents in Pakistan and this factor played a major role in the under-estimation of the Indian Army by Pakistani soldiers as well as civilian decision makers in 1965."
^Greg Cashman, Leonard C. Robinson (2007).An introduction to the causes of war: patterns of interstate conflict from World War I to Iraq. Rowman & Littlefield.ISBN978-0-7425-5510-5.
^abcdKhan, Feroz Hassan (7 November 2012)."The Reluctant Phase".Eating grass : the making of the Pakistani bomb. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press. pp. 45–48 [48].ISBN978-0-8047-7601-1.Archived from the original on 7 February 2023. Retrieved21 February 2013.
^Richard N. Haass "Economic Sanctions and American Diplomacy", 1998, Council on Foreign Relations,ISBN0-87609-212-1 pp172
^Makers of Modern Strategy: From Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age By Peter Paret, 1986, Oxford University Press,ISBN0-19-820097-8 pp802
McGarr, Paul (2013).The Cold War in South Asia: Britain, the United States and the Indian Subcontinent, 1945–1965. Cambridge University Press.ISBN978-1-139-02207-1.
.jpg)
.jpg)
