Indo-Pak War (Sept 6-23, 1965) One is particularly reminded now of this war, as Pakistan seems to be reenacting these days the post-war political drama of that period, giving the people a feeling of déjà vu.

Carried away by their chauvinism and enthusiasm, the spin-doctors of that period projected the outcome of the ‘65 war as a great victory of a small army over a five times bigger force. The claim was not without substance. Pakistan’s armed forces did give an excellent account of their courage and mettle. But, the war did not succeed in its basic objective of wrenching Kashmir from the grip of India.

The media, which had been totally tamed and made to abdicate its adversary role, continued to play up the euphoria of victory on the behest of official media managers. In such a milieu came the Tashkent Declaration of January 1966 signed by President Ayub and Prime Minister Shastri. This objectively statesman-like act elicited an adverse reaction, an anti-climax, in West Pakistan which was in a victorious, celebratory mood.

The Tashkent Declaration was characterized as Ayub Khan’s unnecessary capitulation to India.

The people of East Pakistan, on the other hand, had felt abandoned during the war and left in the lurch by the Punjab-dominated armed forces. The seeds of secession had started germinating.

The political parties, particularly the newly set up PPP of Z.A. Bhutto, jumped upon the opportunity to pressure Ayub to quit. Within a month of the Declaration, a national conference was held in Lahore where opposition parties convened in February 1966 to identify points of common interest. The ensuing agitation forced President Ayub to quit. He handed over power to the then C-in-C, Gen.Yahya, instead of the Speaker of the Parliament as required under the Constitution.

Déjà vu:- This scenario bears many common features to what is happening these days in Pakistan. The failure of Kargil to attract Security Council interference, the Washington Accord, the consequent climb down from the Kargil heights, projection of the Accord,nevertheless, as a step forward in the solution of the Kashmir conflict, and the over-emphasis on the term “personal interest” have all combined to promote a reaction among the people of a capitulation of Nawaz Sharif before the US President. Media hype this time too has proved equally counter-productive

Nineteen political parties have agreed at a conference, held again in Lahore, on a one-point agenda: “Get Nawaz- Save the Federation”. If history is thus repeating itself, dramatic changes might be expected to ensue. Let us hope that whoever emerges as the caretaker leader –civilian or military- goes out of his way to assuage the frustration being felt in the smaller provinces, particularly in Sindh where the situation has become highly volatile, and as earnestly hounds out the loan defaulters, tax-evaders and the palpably corrupt. Such measures would rehabilitate the badly eroded confidence of the people in their government and the Federation.

The Second World War (Sept. 1, 1939 to Sept. 2, 1945):- More has been written about this than about any other war. It claimed more than 50 million lives, decimated great centers of civilization, cost an enormous amount of $1.154 trillion, and changed the course of history such as few events before or after. Its legacy still grips mankind. It ended the ascendancy of Europe that had endured since the collapse of Muslim Spain in 1592 and the halt to the expansion of the Ottoman Empire following the death of Suleyman the Magnificent in 1566. The war sapped the intellectual vitality of Europe, brought its vast empires on the brink of collapse, and passed world leadership to two new giants –the USA and the Soviet Union.

The war also served as a midwife for inventions including the jet engine, the microwave oven, the tape recorder and the radar. It gave the students the ballpoint pen which was developed when fountain-pens proved impractical during high altitude flights. Its role as a catalyst for change, innovation, research and development has really changed the shape of things as never before in human history.

For the US, the war was a blessing in disguise. The demand for consumer goods, apart from arms and ammunition, transport and fighter planes, war vessels and other equipment, pulled the country out of the ruined and colorless landscape of the Depression. It cemented its final rise to world power with relatively light losses, about 300,000 casualties. This figure is dwarfed when compared with the losses of Germany: 5.6 million, Japan: 2.3 million, China: 10 million, and the Soviet Union: a staggering 20 million. The US was unique among the combatants in being neither invaded nor bombed.

Germany and Japan, though defeated and humiliated in the war, have succeeded, over the past half a century, in emerging as economic giants of modern world. They have vindicated the finding of Prof. Arnold Toynbee, the well-known historian, that the rise or fall of a nation depends on how it responds to a critical national challenge. It was evidently the unremitting struggle of these two great and gifted nations that enabled them to come out of their darkest period. Both have been registering for years enormous surpluses in their trade with the US. And, both have had a great advantage. The disarmament imposed on them by victorious allies had obviated the need for them to spend money on defense. They have achieved in peace what they had failed to get through war – a substantial share in world market. The victors of Europe, on the other hand, have lost their colonies and the captive markets.

A Pakistani student of history relating to his own country’s current circumstances the events of these two wars and their aftermath might be led to, inter alia, the following points.

• War is the “story of senseless butchery” in the words of historian John Green. Tolstoy’s epic “War and Peace”, portrays eminently the horrors of the Napoleonic war in which the great military leader’s army was ruthlessly destroyed in 1812 in Russia. No army is thus invincible. The ruthless butchery should be avoided in enlightened self-interest.
• The challenges posed by the 1965 and 1971 wars and the recent Kargil conflict could have been turned into fruitful responses of an inherently dynamic people had they been led not by puny or self-serving politicians who saw light on the other side of the tunnel and fooled the people by drawing visions of a glorious future. The leaders must be made to realize that they should come clean with the people and take them into confidence. The people will astonish them by rising up to the challenge and working harder than expected to achieve national goals and by making sacrifices.
• Many of the ills of the society may be traced to poverty and illiteracy. Priorities of national effort and expenditure will have to be reworked to overcome these. Feudalism which thrives on the illiteracy of the serfs will have to be done away with. Defense expenditure will have to be cut down to divert the savings towards education. What is needed is a well-planned army of scientists, technicians, engineers of the lowest to the highest level. Forty-five per cent of all software engineers in the US now are of Indian origin. According to estimates, the US economy can absorb another 50,000 such engineers. Would Pakistan continue missing the era of digital technology as it did the industrial? Why has the army of the mighty Soviet Union been reduced to a position where it has to forage for food? Wrong priorities?