What's new

CIA declassified documents Air War 1971 - PAF v IAF

Lol. Lost East Pakistan. Lost Turtuk in Gilgit Baltistan. Lost 5000 sq km in Sindh, West Pakistan. Surrendered 90k + troops. Lost 55% of population. Signed a humiliating Treaty of Surrender in a public display in former capital of East Wing. Evacuated from East Pakistan by Indian troops under protection.

And yet... "Hey look at this CIA report. We did so well!".
 
Niazi didn't have enough regulars in the Dhaka Bowl - most of them were tied up in the fortress towns. Hence the overall commander in the city was MG Jamshed Khan, GOC of the 36 Ad-Hoc Division, who was actually DG EPCAF earlier.

Here is what the Indian Official History says. The 20K story is baloney.View attachment 629681

Here it the account of Lt Gen Jacob from The longest 30 minutes

On December 16, General Jacob flew from Calcutta. Touching down on Dhaka, he went directly to the Headquarters of Pakistani Eastern Command and showed Niazi the written instrument of surrender which he had drafted all by himself and waited for the final approval that eventually did not come.

All the generals including Rao Farman Ali protested. They said it was a ceasefire arrangement they could sit for, not a surrender, let alone in a public ceremony and to the Joint Forces.

In his memoir "Surrender at Dacca" Gen Jacob has an elaborate description of the tough negotiation:"I was a little annoyed and pulled Niazi aside. 'I have been talking to you for three days,' I told him. 'I have offered you terms that you will be treated with respect and under Geneva Convention. We will protect all ethnic minorities and everyone. If you surrender, we can protect you. If you do not surrender, I wash my hands off anything that happens.'"

Then Gen Jacob conveyed the 30 minutes ultimatum to decide on a surrender or face the consequences and he then left the room.

Gen Jacob wrote:"Once outside, doubts assailed me. 'What have I done?' I thought. 'I have nothing in my hand. He has 26,400 troops in Dhaka and we only have 3,000, and that too thirty miles away.'"
For quite some time, Gen Jacob paced the veranda of the military headquarters in a city behind enemy lines. He was alone and unarmed.

He wrote:"The other officers present with him had in no uncertain terms voiced their extreme displeasure at my demand, but I remained unfazed. Logic was my sword, faith the shield. The fate of millions hinged on the reply of the enemy commander to my no-nonsense threat. Only I knew I had been bluffing. For me, this was a defining moment of my life. I used all my control to appear calm as I paced back and forth. I was completely alone. I wondered what would happen if he said no."
 
Here it the account of Lt Gen Jacob from The longest 30 minutes

On December 16, General Jacob flew from Calcutta. Touching down on Dhaka, he went directly to the Headquarters of Pakistani Eastern Command and showed Niazi the written instrument of surrender which he had drafted all by himself and waited for the final approval that eventually did not come.

All the generals including Rao Farman Ali protested. They said it was a ceasefire arrangement they could sit for, not a surrender, let alone in a public ceremony and to the Joint Forces.

In his memoir "Surrender at Dacca" Gen Jacob has an elaborate description of the tough negotiation:"I was a little annoyed and pulled Niazi aside. 'I have been talking to you for three days,' I told him. 'I have offered you terms that you will be treated with respect and under Geneva Convention. We will protect all ethnic minorities and everyone. If you surrender, we can protect you. If you do not surrender, I wash my hands off anything that happens.'"

Then Gen Jacob conveyed the 30 minutes ultimatum to decide on a surrender or face the consequences and he then left the room.

Gen Jacob wrote:"Once outside, doubts assailed me. 'What have I done?' I thought. 'I have nothing in my hand. He has 26,400 troops in Dhaka and we only have 3,000, and that too thirty miles away.'"
For quite some time, Gen Jacob paced the veranda of the military headquarters in a city behind enemy lines. He was alone and unarmed.

He wrote:"The other officers present with him had in no uncertain terms voiced their extreme displeasure at my demand, but I remained unfazed. Logic was my sword, faith the shield. The fate of millions hinged on the reply of the enemy commander to my no-nonsense threat. Only I knew I had been bluffing. For me, this was a defining moment of my life. I used all my control to appear calm as I paced back and forth. I was completely alone. I wondered what would happen if he said no."
I'd rather stick to my source than jump on to a questionable figure - accused of hyping his own contribution in the war. A whole lot of criticism on Eastern Command planners is done on this fact that their strategy didn't leave enough forces to defend Dhaka itself.
 
Performance of Pakistan airforce in 1971? Worst. Around 94k troops surrendered during 1971 and because they didn't trust their own government, there airforce and navy too due to there poor performance in war. Most of the time Pakistan was ruled by army unlike India and the army always tried to make themselves strong so Pakistan also invested in fighter plans and navy too much. They had modern equipment of that time for all the three branches of the army. But the machine didn't fight. It needs man skill and bravery and Pakistan army lacking of that. Despite of all modern aircraft 94k solder surrendered !
Another ignorant jumps in.
First those were not 94k but less than 45k combat troops, the rest were family and staff.
Secondly the thread is about air force performance.

WE ARE STILL WINNING AFTER 1947......? WHILE PAKISTAN HAS LOST BANGLADESH, AND KASHMIR,

MY BRAIN CELLS ARE CONFUSED , BY THIS NARRITIVE OF PAK ARMY
Your comment shows you have no brain cells and keep used tissue papers in your skull.
Whatever part of Kashmir we have today was won by force and war, and that too a war by a less than an year old nation who had no weapons as India took all .
Also at the time Lord mount batton was ruling India as governor general and siding all the colonial powers with India.
Pakistan had a British army chief as all experienced generals went to India and the British guy only agreed to a very limited war with India.
With all those restrictions we did very well.

In 1965 India tried to block our rivers and Pakistan was supporting Kashmiri freedom fighters as we always have.
India in their superiority complex attacked Pakistan and we successfully protected our country. That's a victory.

Youth like you are bigger enemies of Pakistan than Indians as you lurk among us
 
Last edited:
I'd rather stick to my source than jump on to a questionable figure - accused of hyping his own contribution in the war. A whole lot of criticism on Eastern Command planners is done on this fact that their strategy didn't leave enough forces to defend Dhaka itself.

Not denying your numbers or source but highlighting the fact that both sides were bluffing. I'm sure Indians also had their limitations and were not in a position for a quick capture of Dhaka. But again there is no denying that the fall of Dhaka was imminent, how could we have negotiated a ceasefire than a surrender is debatable.
 
Another ignorant jumps in.
First those were not 94k but less than 45k combat troops, the rest were family and staff.
Secondly the thread is about air force performance.


Your comment shows you have no brain cells and keep used tissue papers in your skull.
Whatever part of Kashmir we have today was won by force and war, and that too a war by a less than an year old nation who had no weapons as India took all .
Also at the time Lord mount batton was ruling India as governor general and siding all the colonial powers with India.
Pakistan had a British army chief as all experienced generals went to India and the British guy only agreed to a very limited war with India.
With all those restrictions we did very well.

In 1965 India tried to block our rivers and Pakistan was supporting Kashmiri freedom fighters as we always have.
India in their superiority complex attacked Pakistan and we successfully protected our country. That's a victory.

Youth like you are bigger enemies of Pakistan than Indians as you lurk among us

Family and staff can't be PoWs. Only people in the armed forces can - both combatants and non combatants.
 
I have enclosed the CIA report. You don't completely level something if you can make it inoperable. According to the link I gave, Karachi port was completely neutralized. Completely leveling it would have required more time to be spent in extremely hostile enemy environment and would have meant taking losses.

If you read it, one of the sentence is "Several tankers standing off Karachi have been prevented from entering by the India blockade."

The US has a navy big enough to blockade a coastline as long as that of India's. When you blockade a country, you just blockade the major ports. Not the whole coastline.
The said report also clearly States that the third planned attack on Karachi was thwarted after Pakistan Navy counter attacked which resulted in the sinking of an Indian warship....... after that no attacks were executed on Karachi ........

now if Karachi was neutralized altogether then why the third attack was planned???
if karachi was left inoperable, then why the Pakistan Navy clearly outnumbered bothered to counter attack???


as I said before,
given the presence of resources.... Karachi was adequately defended....... unfortunately it happened later then it should have.

US being able to blockade is another conversation better left non-discussed.
 
The above source is not indian so is likely to be CREDIBLE and honest, not FAKE NEWS.
lol- you are an interesting one.

upload_2020-5-4_14-38-57.jpeg
 
Family and staff can't be PoWs. Only people in the armed forces can - both combatants and non combatants.
They were in 1971 as repatriation of all Pakistani citizens was the contract of surrender between General Niazi and General Makenshaw.
Bhutto wasn't bothered and was busy in his politics while forgetting the raging war in the east Pakistan.
General Niazi realised that they are fighting for nobody as neither the people nor the leadership of West Pakistan were bothered about east Pakistan and whatever happens to Pakistan army .
He made the right decision to surrender while making a contract with Indian general to repatriate all Pakistani soldiers and families.
There were no supplies coming and there was no moral support from West Pakistan.
Makenshaw and many Pakistani top brass at the time were course mates at Sandhurst Britain and knew each other and could trust each other.
 
Family and staff can't be PoWs. Only people in the armed forces can - both combatants and non combatants.
hence the number of PoWs much lower than claimed.
as the families of soldiers and other civil servants were also included in final draft signed in 1974.
 
Lol. Lost East Pakistan. Lost Turtuk in Gilgit Baltistan. Lost 5000 sq km in Sindh, West Pakistan. Surrendered 90k + troops. Lost 55% of population. Signed a humiliating Treaty of Surrender in a public display in former capital of East Wing. Evacuated from East Pakistan by Indian troops under protection.

And yet... "Hey look at this CIA report. We did so well!".





WHERE is the evidence that Pakistan lost 5000 square kms of Sindh and Turtuk? If what you say is true then remember to post the links here otherwise it's just another piece of indian FAKE NEWS. Like all the other million pieces of indian FAKE NEWS.

The bangladeshi population means nothing to us as they are the same race as you indians. Not us Pakistanis.

Talking about 1971 bangladesh is like saying india lost over 35% of it's territory in August the 14th 1947.
 
WE ARE STILL WINNING AFTER 1947......? WHILE PAKISTAN HAS LOST BANGLADESH, AND KASHMIR,

MY BRAIN CELLS ARE CONFUSED , BY THIS NARRITIVE OF PAK ARMY
that is because military action must always be backed by political follow up ........... which in Pakistan's case never happened??
remember war is only a continuation of politics
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom