According to a recent Pakistan publication named,
From a Head, through a Head, to a Head authored by FS Aijazuddin,
it was the late Chou-en-lai who suggested to the Pakistani military
delegation which called upon him in 1966 that instead of short term
wars, Pakistan must prepare for a prolonged conflict with India.
In order to do this, the late Premier advised
the visiting Generals to raise a Pakistan Militia Force to act behind
the enemy’s rear, to cut off its logistics and destroy strategic centres
and prepare to take over operational control, once the first line
of defence broke. On the eve of the 1965 War, General Ayub Khan who
felt panicked was advised to resort to a long war with India, keeping
in view the latter’s numerical superiority in Armed Forces. When the
Pakistani President explained that the flat terrain of Punjab was
not suitable for mounting guerrilla attacks on an advancing enemy,
he was told to use all available natural obstacles like small rivers
and high ground as a cover. Above all, the author says, the late Chou-en-lai
reassured Ayub Khan that China would be maintaining pressure all the
time. When asked categorically for how long, Chou-en-lai said, "As
long as necessary, but Pakistan must keep fighting."
This concept of warfare involving the citizenry
of Pakistan was in fact totally alien to the Pakistani Generals. It
was contrary to the military doctrine they had learnt at Quetta. However,
the use of unorthodox tactics, the late Premier explained, was considered
better suited to nations lacking a military-industrial complex. The
Chinese had learnt it from their own long drawn struggle for liberation,
the author quoted. It thus became clear to Pakistan leaders that if
they wanted Chinese support they had to prepare for a prolonged war
with India.
In fact Pakistan needed Chinese support much
more than that of the United States who did not prove to be a friend
in deed in their wars against India. It was notwithstanding the fact
that Pakistan was their military partner in CENTO, a frontrunner in
the US war against communism besides acting later as a bridge between
China and America. China on the other hand was believed to be a natural
ally with a commonality of interests. While the friendly relations
between the two varied initially depending on each country’s estimate
of the utility of the other, their mutual marked hostility towards
India had remained constant. The strategic linkage between China and
Pakistan was forged in 1963.
For instance, the creation of tension on Sikkim-Tibet
border in September 1965 was to immobilise the Indian forces in the
eastern sector. During the Bangladesh War, Chinese support to Pakistan
was equally vigorous. On the other hand, General Musharraf’s visit
to Beijing, more recently, when Pakistan was building defences in
Dras, Kargil and Batalik sectors was to take Chinese approval, something
that was considered both essential and mandatory.
Further, as the events have unfolded, India is
fighting a low intensity war with Pakistan for over two decades, proving
the Chinese contention that it is only through prolonged conflict
with India that Pakistan could overcome her military handicaps in
the numbers game. This was proved by the expedition in Kargil which
was another blow to Pakistan. In any direct war a country must possess
3:1 superiority in military but by undertaking irregular warfare against
India, endorsing the Chinese strategy, Pakistan has not only surmounted
the conventional superiority of India but has also circumvented the
Indian nuclear deterrent.
According to General VP Malik, former Indian
Army Chief, India has lost nearly 35,000 lives fighting the unending
war-like situation. This is more than the casualty rate of all the
wars put together, that the country has fought both with China and
Pakistan. The Union Law Minister has remarked that India is fighting
a high intensity war on its borders with Pakistan, in contrast to
the operations being dubbed as being of low intensity nature.
The hidden strategic linkage between China and
Pakistan amply proves that everything being done in India in terms
of terrorism and cross border infiltration is not Pakistan’s doing
alone. The players are different and Pakistan is being used only as
a stooge. Imagine a country with a population of sixteen crores, a
growth rate of less than 4.6 per cent and a debt of $35billion having
let loose a rein of terror in India which is considerably bigger in
size, population, resources and capabilities. However, where we draw
a blank is on the political front. This factor has even put a question
mark on the credibility of our over-a-million army by inanely deploying
them on the borders and fatiguing them.
The recent statistics show that there are nearly
2,500 Madrassas in different parts of Pakistan producing nearly 3
lakh fighters annually; ready to kill and die for Islam. Lashkar-e-Toiba
and Jaish-e-Mohammed included, over a dozen organisations supported
by ISI are engaged in terrorist activities against India on a permanent
basis.
In this context, military operations conducted
by ISI have taken over the control of secessionist movements in Nagaland,
Manipur, Mizoram and Tripura. Earlier, insurgency elements in all
these states drew help from China. In Assam too, the problem with
ULFA and BODO tribals, which rose in arms through support by China
are now ISI active. In Punjab, the crisis generated by the demand
for greater decentralisaton of power, culminated in an armed uprising
helped by ISI. Once again the country is faced with a fairly high
intensity of terrorism with no sign of it abating.
Operations of such magnitude, that too on a sustained
basis, naturally cost extra money and resources. Keeping in view Pakistan’s
socio-economic perspective, the country is hard-pressed in terms of
economic growth, high inflation, rising debt, increasing poverty,
growing unemployment and low literacy. It is, therefore, hard to accept
that Pakistan is managing the confrontationist posture against India
exclusively, without getting help from outside.
On the other hand, the thrust of Chinese policy
continues to rest on Mao’s dictum that "Power grows from the
barrel of a gun." However, in its bid to prove to the world that
China has matured politically, it has refrained from entering into
a direct clash with other nations, unlike in the past. But given the
geostrategic location of India, China has continued to nibble at India,
in order to try and contain it at the level of a sub continental power.
In this context, going by their policy of indirect
approach of using Pakistan to maintain constant pressure on India,
China has been giving huge military aid to Karachi. Since September
1965 China has supplied Pakistan complete equipment for two infantry
divisions. The ordnance included battle tanks, fighter aircrafts,
naval ships and submarines. Later during General Tikka Khan’s visit
to Beijing in January 1978, talks were initiated for supply of missiles
to Pakistan. According to New York Times, China’s rivalry with
India was behind its arming of Pakistan with missiles. The report
added, that, if China helped Pakistan secure medium-range missiles
they would balance missiles that India, a large and more advanced
country, has already developed for itself. Chinese technicians have
been seen in Pakistan for the production of missiles including M-11,
rocket motors, propellants and guidance system. Pakistan has also
been seen testing Shaheen missile which has increased its ability
to strike India.
Again, as a matter of high strategy, the Chinese
resolve to further dig into the subcontinent, has helped Pakistan
in the construction of Karakoram highway by providing most of the
funds and manpower. In the event of Sino-Pak combined thrust on India,
this highway will pose a military and political threat to India’s
security by making Srinagar-Leh road extremely vulnerable. In this
regard Chinese clandestine help in providing logistics to Pakistan
Army during latter’s adventures in Kargil could not be ruled out,
due to proximity factor.
Of late Chinese covert assistance to Pakistan’s
nuclear weapon programme has completely aborted India’s plan of taking
a lead in acquiring effective nuclear deterrence in the region after
China; instead it has put India more in a state of quandary vis-à-vis
Pakistan. According to US military sources, Chinese nuclear scientists
are not only working in Pakistan’s nuclear facilities but have also
enabled Islamabad to produce a bomb. China has set up 300 mw Chashma
nuclear plant besides helping establish 40 mw Khushab Plutonium producing
reactor and facility for extracting weapon grade Plutonium from spent
fuel. It was intended to accord Pakistan taking a leap jump over India
in nuclear technology and this became quite apparent when Pakistan
carried out series of nuclear tests including thermonuclear as a sequel
to India’s Shakti-II at Pokhran.
Both the countries have travelled a long way
since 1962. Though there has not been a repeat of any direct conflict
between the two, Beijing has persistently maintained the posture of
a strategic adversary to India. After all, China continues to occupy
14,600 sq miles of Indian territory annexed during the Sino-Indian
War and is certainly in no mood to return it. She is a formidable
neighbour and a security risk. Of late, China has started hitting
at our domestic industry by flooding Indian markets with Chinese goods.
We may dismiss this but cannot ignore it completely.
So when George Fernandes, the Defence Minister
of India speaks out on China being a potential enemy of India - echoing
the voice of late Sardar Patel, that India has to reckon with a communist
China that has definite ambitions and aims not very friendly disposed
towards us - it carries substance, however awkward it may appear in
diplomatic jargon.
At the same time, the present long battle over Kashmir which
Pakistan is fighting with India through fomenting terrorist activities
by cross border infiltration is the last straw in the series of its
devious game plan as suggested by China.