The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewEric Margolis Archive
India and Pakistan Rattle Their Nuclear Sabres
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks


While Americans were obsessing over a third-rate actor’s fake claims of a racial assault, old foes India and Pakistan were rattling their nuclear weapons in a very dangerous crisis over Kashmir. But hardly anyone noticed that nuclear war could break out in South Asia.

India and Pakistan, both nuclear-armed, have fought four wars over divided Kashmir since 1947, the lovely mountain state of forests and lakes whose population is predominantly Muslim. India controls two thirds of Kashmir; Pakistan and China the rest. This bitter dispute, one of the world’s oldest confrontations, has defied all attempts to resolve it.

The United Nations called on India to hold a plebiscite to determine Kashmir’s future, but Delhi ignored this demand, knowing it would probably lose the vote.

Muslim Kashmiris have been in armed revolt against harsh Indian occupation since the 1980’s. Some 70,000 civilians, mostly Muslims, have died to date. Today, India stations a million soldiers and paramilitary forces in Kashmir to repress popular demands by Muslim Kashmiris for either union with neighboring Pakistan or an independent Kashmiri state.

India’s human rights groups accuse Delhi of grave human rights violations, including torture, murder, rape and collective punishment. Delhi says it is protecting Kashmir’s Hindus and Sikhs from Muslim reprisals, and blames the uprising on what it calls ‘cross border terrorism’ initiated by old enemy, Pakistan.

Last week, a Kashmiri ‘mujahidin’ rammed his explosive-laden car into a bus filled with paramilitary Indian troops at Pulwama, killing over 40 and provoking outrage across India.

Unable to crush the decades-old uprising in Kashmir, India threatens major reprisal attacks on Pakistan. However, Kashmir is mountainous, offering poor terrain for India’s overwhelming superiority in tanks and artillery. So Indian commanders have long pressed Delhi to allow them to attack further south on the flat plains of Punjab.

Powerful Indian armored strike corps are poised to slice into vulnerable Pakistan and chop it up into pieces. India has also considered heavy air strikes into Pakistani Punjab and even a naval blockade to cut off Pakistan’s oil imports.

Outnumbered and outgunned six to one by India, Pakistan has developed a potent arsenal of nuclear weapons that can be delivered by aircraft, short and medium-ranged missiles and artillery. Pakistan says it will riposte almost immediately with tactical nuclear weapons to a major Indian attack. Both sides’ nuclear forces are on a hair-trigger alert, greatly increasing the risks of an accidental nuclear exchange.

More detail on this threat scenario may be found in my ground-breaking book on the region’s many dangers, ‘War at the Top of the World.’ Rand Corp estimated a decade ago that an Indo-Pak nuclear exchange would kill two million immediately and 100 million in ensuing weeks. India’s and Pakistan’s major water sources would be contaminated. Clouds of radioactive dust would blow around the globe.


India is deeply frustrated by its inability to crush the independence movement in Kashmir, labeling it ‘terrorism.’ True enough, Pakistan’s crack intelligence service, ISI, has links to the many Kashmiri mujahidin groups. But the uprising is also due to often brutal, corrupt Indian rule over Kashmir and the desire by Muslims for self-rule. As I have often written, every people has a god-given right to be misruled by their own people.

Right now, India is debating a major punitive strike against Pakistan. India national elections are imminent. The Hindu nationalist government in Delhi fears being accused of being soft on Pakistan. It was during a similar crisis in the 1980’s that Pakistan’s tough leader, Gen. Zia ul-Haq, flew to Delhi in a surprise visit and averted a war being planned by India.

If India does launch attacks they will likely be large in scale and involve heavy use of tactical air power. If units on either side become bogged down in fighting, commanders may call for the use of tactical nuclear weapons. Far outgunned Pakistan has been clear about such recourse. The urge to be first to strike with nuclear arms will be powerful.

Once again, the bitter Kashmir dispute endangers the rest of the world. The great powers should be pressing both India and Pakistan to reach a compromise on this problem. But India has long opposed internationalization of the issue, saying it is a domestic Indian matter. It is difficult to imagine the current Hindu nationalist government in Delhi backing down over Kashmir. But India must be very cautious because behind Pakistan stands its ally China which shares a long, often poorly-defined border with India. Kashmir, not Korea, is the world’s most dangerous border.

(Republished from by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: India, Nuclear War, Pakistan 
Hide 53 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Alistair says:

    Pakistan is the most volatile country on the planet, it’s a nuclear tinderbox.

    Unliked Arab states; Iraq, Syria, Libya, who are generally peaceful if left alone – but pitted against one another for the US-Israel strategic objectives in the middle east – Pakistan is not peaceful, but a nation of muslim warriors, deeply religious people, where identity of the state revolves around religious honnor and militant muslim warriorism. Pakistanis are a proud Sunni-muslim nation who will punch back, but they are not idiot, they will play their card wisely, and perhaps making some money in the process too, just as they did in the post 9/11 out of the George W. Bush Administration.

    Yet Trump Administration; John Bolton is trying to pit Pakistan against Iran by capitalizing on the ethics Baluchis’ aspiration for an independent Balochistan; sadly though, Mr. Bolton’s ignorance will cost the region dearly, Bolton is playing with fire in Pakistan, he has no clue how unpredictable the South East Asia could become; Bolton must stop poking the Pakistanis in the eyes, there will never fight against Iranians for the account of Israel-Saudis; Pakistanis respect Persians; they share centuries of common history and religious affinity, so, Mr. Bolton needs to find another sucker in the region to do his dirty betting for the account of Israel.

    Pakistan is a nuclear tinderbox, let’s not poke them in the eyes, they punch back and we will all regret it.

    • Replies: @Lin
  2. DB Cooper says:

    Which side is in the wrong here? I would say most people think Pakistan because of the stereotype that India is a peaceful country. India is perhaps the most misunderstood country in the world. India is not peaceful at all. The view of the political establishment in India in regards to the country’s foreign policy orientation towards its immediate neighbors is basically a continuation of the British Raj. India sees itself as the rightful successor to the land grabbing expansionist Raj and behave as such. This means a lot of bullying, meddling and intimidation. This is the reason India has testy relations with all its neighbors and all its smaller neighbors resent India, for good reasons.

    • Agree: Rabbitnexus
  3. Lin says:

    “Pakistan is the most volatile country on the planet, it’s a nuclear tinderbox. ”
    That tinderbox is created by the Indians themselves.

    China has been under mortal nuke threats from at least one superpower since the Korean war, so for deterrence, the first Chinese nuke bomb was tested in 1964. The rest is history.One thing is obvious that china nuke arsenal is quite small considering Chinese tech and economic ability.

    India exploded its 1st nuke bomb in 1974(using unauthorized plutonium from a Canadian built reactor) but claimed it was a peaceful bomb for purpose like earth moving and there was no attempt to weaponize even though their war scar inflicted during the 1962 china-india war still hurted like hell because they knew they were not the targets(of small number of)Chinese nukes.

    Twenty years later in the 1990s, the BJP came to power and they started to weaponize their nukes to demonstrate ‘India Shining’. Then the paks also followed suit and have their nuke bombs too.

    Mind you India due to size of economy and budget has traditionally conventional war fighting edge over the paks; it means india could beat Pakistan in an all out war.

    Now with nuke weapons available to both india and Pakistan, a conventional major war could easily lead to nuke exchange–a very undesirable scenario or their nukes actually diminish their traditional war capacity.
    Its a classic example of Dr. Strangelove or how I stop worrying and learn to love the bomb
    An all-out war between India and Pakistan is VERY VERY unlikely;
    However its a golden opportunity for the yanks to voice support for the Indians for the purpose of arms sales to the latter.

  4. anon[225] • Disclaimer says:

    Nehru ‘s love for Jinnah or Bhtto and weakness on Kashmiri leader Abdullhah led to this mess His garnting of speacial status to kshmir has cuased all the ensuing problems. Nehru was equaaly dewy eyed liberal in case of China. Patel would have beena beter PM of India .

    • Replies: @Lin
    , @Joji Cherian
    , @anon
  5. fenestol says:

    Why can’t both countries agree that, however much they hate each other, a worse country is worth their ultimate wrath: Israel. They should compete for who can obliterate more of Tel Aviv.

  6. Lin says:

    Jinnah was a phoney muslim and a whisky addict. Why he did was the biggest mistake in Islamic history. Lets contemplate an alternative time-space ‘world-line’ that the 1947 partition didn’t happen:
    By 2018,the united india would be a country with 1.7 billion people of which 700 millions are muslims. Within 2 generations,Insh Allah, United India will be a muslim majority country.
    –Armed with nukes, every generals from Russia to China to USA will be shaking in their boots.
    –United Islamic India will be the undisputed Kaliphah Terra and will take over the oil resources in the middle east and nullify the western oil interests there.
    –The indian nationalists’ dream of India as superpower will be more than fulfilled.
    –Bollywood will displace Hollywood as the ‘Mecca’ of popular entertainment.
    Let people be reminded that
    **the modern hindi language actually is Urdu (the official Islamic language of Pakistan)written in a traditional indian script.
    **The hindus and the arabs/muslims have the common tradition of urine therapy(cow urine to hindus and camel urine to arabs/muslims)
    **Hindus gods likely were ancient Prophets mistakenly deified

  7. Anonymous[383] • Disclaimer says:

    As one profoundly wise Englishman of my acquaintance once said after a previous bout of Into/Pak saber rattling (the ‘Kargil War’), “let them blow each other to bits”.

    Just think of all the fraudulent so-called ‘immigrants’ the west will avoid.

    • Agree: anon1
  8. @Lin

    Ah, “Muslim India”. That would be a nation of child molesters with open sewers for streets. Truly a power to rule the world.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  9. @fenestol

    In the alternative, they could just blow each other out of existence.
    That would be safer for young White British girls.

  10. anon1 says:

    Margolis articles always tend to have a number of common traits. A Pavlovian sympathy and bias in favour of Muslims, a mocking disdain of Americans (trust me Mr. Margolis, 99% of Americans don’t give a S*** about Smollett. They worry about their familes and paying their mortgages.) and a lack of details and specifics on the subject he writes about.

    “The great powers should be pressing both India and Pakistan to reach a compromise on this matter”.

    Which great powers precisely? What kind of “compromise”? How do you force two nuclear armed countries to “compromise”? How long would such a “compromise” endure given twelve centuries of Muslim-Hindu violence and animosity? One might just as easily argue that nuclear weapons have kept the peace.

  11. I’ve been predicting since 2013 – a year before Narendrabhai Damodardasbhai Modi took power in the 2014 election in India – that by early 2019, the Modi regime, mired in a corruption scandal, faced with a united opposition, and staring defeat in the face, would look for a casus belli to start a war against Pakistan. I had also predicted that this war would go nuclear after Pakistan used tactical nuclear weapons to smash Indian armoured thrusts and India retaliated by nuclear attacks on Pakistani cities. The simple fact is that the militarily illiterate Modi worshipping paid trolls who are clamouring for war would never, ever, attempt to join the military and so can afford to be as jingoistic as they want. And Modi needs a war desperately.

    That said, there are major holes in the article. Not all Kashmiri Muslims are even anti India: Muslim Bakarwals, Shia, Gujjars, Dogris and others are pro India. Anti Indian sentiment is restricted to ethnic Kashmiri Sunnis and even they, like people everywhere, mostly want peace.

    Secondly, Pakistan could have easily taken Kashmir in the winter of 1989-90 when Indian authority had all but disappeared in the state; but it chose instead to “bleed India by a thousand cuts” by creating and funding multiple badly trained, ill led, competing rebel groups, none of which was permitted to grow too strong. As they withered, Pakistan sent in professional jihadis (temporarily unemployed in Afghanistan from 1991-94) to take over the “struggle”. By 2005-6 they had been mostly eliminated. And if India had then gone for a political settlement in Kashmir, by, for example, restoring part of the autonomy Kashmir enjoyed from 1948-53, the whole issue would have been long over. Instead, by doubling down on treating the state as a de facto colony, using human shields, blinding protestors with pellet guns, and such other charming behaviour, it alienated a whole new generation of Kashmiris, reignited the local rebellion, and did Pakistan’s mischief for it. Again.

  12. @anon1

    One might just as easily argue that nuclear weapons have kept the peace.

    Let’s see! Between 1972 and 1998, with the exception of limited platoon level battles on the Siachen glacier in the extreme North, India (not overtly nuclear) and Pakistan (ditto) fought not at all, despite Pakistan supporting rebels in Kashmir and Punjab and India doing the same in Baluchistan. In May 1998 the Vajpayee regime in India tested nuclear weapons (allegedly including a thermonuclear device). Pakistan, a few days later, followed suit.

    Did that keep the peace?

    Just a year later, India and Pakistan were at war in Kashmir. Just two years after that, India mobilised its entire army for months on the Pakistani frontier after Pakistani supported Fidayeen attacked the Indian parliament. And ever since then there have been daily battles on the border, including beheading of enemy corpses on both sides.

    Nuclear weapons keep the peace? How interesting. Do tell me that again.

    • Replies: @anon1
  13. anon1 says:
    @Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist

    I was referring to a major-scale war or an all out one. In any case i was just raising the issue. But if neither country had any nuclear weapons would there be peace? I would wonder if that might not make war more likely since the stakes might be lower.

  14. @DB Cooper

    Thank the Beatles and other ’60s rockers and hippies for giving India such good but rubbish PR. Watch enough Indywood and you’ll see plenty of violence and vengeance portayed in Indian society.

    • Replies: @DB Cooper
  15. Gee, Mr. Margolis, why not hive Kashmir off and pair it with Bangladesh? Can’t be any stupider than what the Brits tried with East and West Pakistans.

    Seriously, Kashmir is a vital source of fresh water for both countries, so I don’t see much change to the status quo ante bellum, and India’s cities are a just as much a target-rich environment.

  16. mr meener says:

    first US should send all the pakis and indian snake charmers back to their countries then they can nuke each other to oblivion. that would open up 60 million hotels motels gas stations 7-11’s to american people to own

  17. peterike says:

    A nuclear war between India and Pakistan that took out, ohh, 400 million people, would be a vast benefit to the rest of the world. I hope it happens.

  18. Moi says:

    You must be a Christian in the footsteps of your man-god–or, perhaps, a Talmudist.

    • Replies: @mr meener
  19. Issac says:

    “The great powers should be pressing both India and Pakistan to reach a compromise on this problem.”

    This is the definition of colonialism you hypocritical sodomite.

  20. L Garou says:

    I wouldn’t trade the truth of Politcal Islam for all the Buddhists and Hindus in Afghanistan!
    Ohhhhh riiiiight, there are no Buddhists and Hindus in Afghanistan. Not anymore.
    Coming soon to a Pakistan/Kashmir near you..

  21. L Garou says:
    @DB Cooper

    India has never invaded or ccupiued or ethnically cleansed another nation in its history, knucklehead.

  22. mr meener says:

    no he is a white man concerned about his race and the women. got a problem with that?

  23. Moi says:

    No, but I prefer the mahogany sistas 🙂

  24. DB Cooper says:
    @L Garou

    Nonsense. India has invaded and land grabbed every single of its neighbors since its creation in 1947. Just because the main stream media not interested in India’s aggression (probably because it doesn’t fit the standard narrative of India) doesn’t mean it did not happen.

    Here is a selected list:


    1947 Annexation of Kashmir:

    1949 Annexation of Manipur:

    1949 Annexation of Tripura:

    1951 Annexation of South Tibet:

    1954 Annexation of Nagaland:

    1954 Attempt annexation of Sikkim and Bhutan (Failed):

    1961 Annexation of Goa:

    1962 Annexation of Kalapani, Nepal:

    1962 Aggression against China:

    1971 Annexation of Turtuk, Pakistan:

    1972 Annexation of Tin Bigha, Bangladesh:

    1975 Annexation of Sikkim (the whole country):

    1983 (Aborted) Attempted invasion of Mauritius:

    1987 Invasion of Sri Lanka

    1990 (Failed) First Attempted annexation of Bhutan:

    2006 Annexation of Duars, Bhutan:

    2013 Annexation of Moreh, Myanmar:

    2017 Aggression against China:

    2017 (Failed) Second Attempted annexation of Bhutan:

    2018 (Thwarted) Attempt invasion of the Maldives

    Ever wonder why your country is a $hithole?

    • Replies: @Escher
  25. @DB Cooper

    that’s true. India is now in the middle of a genocide in the Andaman islands where Indians are killing-off the black indigenous population and taking the lands

    Imran Khan, the new PM of Pakistan said that Pakistan is not responsible for the attack the killed all those Indian soldier. he further explained that Pakistan just came out of a dark period in its history and such behavior is not at all in its interest..that Pakistan does not benefit at all from that attack on the Indian Military in Kashmir.

    that makes a lot of sense..rings totally true. Khan went on to ask for direct dialog with the Indian leadership, to resolve this situation to find truth and to go about solving terrorism in the region. I thought by now that Modi and Khan would have been engaged in a dialogue, but that has not happened and war seems possibility. why in the hell? that’s nonsense and totally stupid and unnecessary

    the question begs: who benefits from that massive act of terrorism that led to this stage?

    I don’t know but I can only sense a Khazarian/American possibility here. if there is war between Pakistan and Indian China is bound to get hit and be forced to defend itself. if they do not destroy each other they would all be badly wounded and allow the west to remain dominant for longer that it should.

    that to my mind is the game and Modi should see that..he is being played. for sure. India will soon be the third or fourth economy in the world, competition for the west..major competition. they west would want Indian damaged too..beyond repair why not

    if the Indian leadership was thinking right this issue would never get to this point. Modi and Imran Khan should be in dialogue at this time, discussion this issue and setting up wider co-operative possibilities as they go

  26. @L Garou

    that’s not true at all. go check the Andaman islands right now.

    an Indian Invasion and genocide is taking place there as we speak.
    there was a whole lot of youtube vids exposing Indian Behavior towards the Andamanese.
    they have been taken down
    youtube is now the pits. India has taken all the Andamans and the indigenous are disappearing

  27. @anon1

    The stakes are not lower. A major non nuclear war would still cause massive destruction even to the so called victor’s economy from the expenditure on weapons, ammunition, reconstruction, etc. Also most of India’s industry and all of Pakistani industry are close to their mutual border so the damage to one’s own economy is going to be prohibitive.

    On the other hand having nuclear weapons allows one room for brinkmanship and risk taking. This isn’t the MAD scenario of the 1970s here.

  28. @ben sampson

    It was the Brutish who occupied the Andamans, the Brutish who exterminated the tribes, and the Indian government, after some time spent following the same policies, have belatedly taken steps to protect those tribes.

    What is left of them.

    And you didn’t even mention the Japanese occupation of 1941-45 and what that did to the tribes. Why is that?

  29. @L Garou

    The Assamese, Kashmiris, Nagas, Mizos, Arunachalis, and some Sikhs would beg to disagree.

    Of course we Indians have invaded and occupied other nations. Our history is one long tide of bloodshed. Pretending it hasn’t happened is puerile.

    • Replies: @L Garou
  30. There are no Buddhists in Afghanistan, but there are Sikhs and Hindus, who say they were much better off under the Taliban than under the current puppet child sex slaver warlord regime.

  31. @mr meener

    If he is, he shouldn’t have invaded,colonised, and looted the Indian subcontinent for 200 years.

    If he wants to reduce the equation to “white rights”, we can also play at that game.

  32. @Lin

    “the modern hindi language actually is Urdu (the official Islamic language of Pakistan)written in a traditional indian script.”

    Got it back to front. Urdu is Hindustani mixed with Persian and Turkish words, written in Persian script, evolved as a court language by the Turkic speaking Mughals.

    As for Jinnah, who was it who joined with him in demanding Pakistan? If the Muslim League hadn’t, he would just have been a crank shouting in the streets.

    I agree with you that Partition was a disaster, but for all Indians, and my conclusions about a united India would be quite different from yours.

    • Replies: @Malla
  33. @Curmudgeon

    “In the alternative, they could just blow each other out of existence.
    That would be safer for young White British girls.”

    If young white Brutish girls prefer us non whites to white Brutish men then perhaps the fault might lie with the white Brutish men. Just speculating.

    • Replies: @anon1
  34. @mr meener

    Can you charm a snake? No?

    Well, then, anyone who can is already better than you.

  35. we talking about India and its genocide…but it was not to late to mention the Japs. they shed some blood too..big blood

    but belatedly is recently too. I was following it man..I saw what Indian is doing straight up.
    so India is protecting the Andaman Black people now?
    that’s new! and better if true

    there are lots of Black people in India too…India still beating the hell out of them eh!

  36. anon1 says:
    @Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist

    First its British, not Brutish, and if you consider the horrors of Rotheringham a “preference” then you are deranged.

  37. @Ben Sampson

    What have racist attacks by North Indian morons on African students – which I have put my body, literally, on the line to oppose* – got to do with Indian government policy?

    *Having put myself between a mob and Kenyan students, successfully preventing violence.

  38. @Joji Cherian

    I think it’s a BJP IT Cell troll, actually.

  39. @anon1

    The behaviour of the Brutish Empire in its colonies causes me to use the exact terminology “Brutish” because it is far more accurate.

    If the “horrors of Rotheringham” bother you so much, how would the murder of 400 million people on the other side of the planet cure them?

    • Replies: @anon1
  40. @Issac

    Also, who are these “great powers” and how exactly are they supposed to impose their will on India and Pakistan?

  41. Via Eurasia Future, which unlike most alt-media sites doesn’t blindly make the classical false assumption that Pakistan is a Western ally (it isn’t) and India’s non-aligned (they’re 100% US allied right now):

    “As soon as the term “fake news” entered the public lexicon, governments began to invoke the phrase in order to censor opposition opinion. At the forefront of this drive towards censorship has been India’s BJP government of Narendra Modi. In late 2018, geopolitical expert Andrew Korybko wrote about the immense pressure that New Delhi is putting on mostly American owned social media companies as part of an anti-free speech campaign that could even see those outside of India censored for expressing peaceful views which run contrary to the BJP narrative.


    And yet, while governments perversely state that the free speech of ordinary civilians is a danger to governments and the public at large, the truth of the matter is quite the opposite. It is governments and their official and semi-official supporters that are the biggest liars in the world and it is their lies which are used to crush dissent, especially among opposition voices who have either found or stumbled onto the truth.

    A prime example of a government and its corporate supporters pretending to fear individuals expressing themselves on social media, whilst telling self-evident lies to the public, has been brought to the fore in respect of what India has claimed about its overnight “surgical strike 2.0” against Pakistan.

    Pro-government Indian mass media have reported that twelve Indian Air Force jets entered Pakistani airspace where they bombed an alleged base of an Indian proscribed terror group (Jaish-e-Mohammad) that just so happens to be banned in Pakistan (since 2002) and somehow killed 300 people (600 according to some estimates) in the process – all of whom are claimed by India to have been terrorists. Of course, there is one big problem. The Indian side has yet to produce a single piece of hard evidence regarding such substantial claims.

    By contrast, Pakistan has produced evidence which tells a very different story. Pakistan’s Armed Froces Spokesman Major General Asif Ghafoor has been transparent about the attack and has produced photographic evidence to support Pakistan’s assertions.

    Pakistan has officially stated that the Indian aircraft which violated Pakistani airspace were rapidly intercepted and chased away. The retreat of the Indian aircraft was apparently so rapid that the jets dropped their payloads as they fled back to Indian airspace, thus causing damage only to some plant life, whilst no one was injured, let alone killed.

    Maj Gen Asif Ghafoor

    Indian aircrafts’ intrusion across LOC in Muzafarabad Sector within AJ&K was 3-4 miles.Under forced hasty withdrawal aircrafts released payload which had free fall in open area. No infrastructure got hit, no casualties. Technical details and other important information to follow.

    09:29 – 26 Feb 2019
    Twitter Ads information and privacy
    18.9K people are talking about this
    View image on TwitterView image on TwitterView image on TwitterView image on Twitter

    Maj Gen Asif Ghafoor

    Payload of hastily escaping Indian aircrafts fell in open.

    08:11 – 26 Feb 2019
    17K people are talking about this
    Twitter Ads information and privacy
    Today’s events are therefore an materially milder incident than the original so-called “surgical strikes” that India carried out against Pakistan in 2016. At that time, two Pakistan soldiers died and in 2019, not even any infrastructure was damaged by the dropping of the Indian jets’ payload in a rural area.

    This however has not stopped the Indian Prime Minister, his BJP colleagues and those in multiple Indian parties, from declaring a supreme victory based on the unsubstantiated narratives told by the corporate media in India.

    To demonstrate the kind of evidence that India would have been able to produce if its government and mass media supporters were telling the truth: this is what a US airstrike looks like:

    And this is what a Russian airstrike looks like

    Why then has India not released cockpit footage of the strike in a manner consistent with the standards of 21st century warfare? The only video India has thus far released is footage apparently taken from someone’s mobile phone on the ground, which does not indicate that the jet in question has actually targeted anything at all. Moreover, many social media users from around the world have been quick to point out that the footage of said plane predates the 26th of February. Further apparent ground footage presented by India has also been exposed to be significantly older than this month and that further more the footage in question was from the Pakistani Air Force. Another video which purportedly showed India’s “attack” was also exposed as four year old footage from a video game. Lastly, why are there no photos of the hundreds of dead bodies that India claims number between 300 and 600? Something is self-evidently suspect.

    Embedded video


    #IndiaStrikesBack: Details of #IndianAirForce attack in Pakistan |

    13:42 – 26 Feb 2019
    42 people are talking about this
    Twitter Ads information and privacy
    And yet, India’s Prime Minister has already given a speech revelling in an apparent victory when all the evidence that has thus far been produced indicates that Pakistan is telling the truth and India is not.

    Of course, this is a rare moment in which a lie is safer than the truth. Had India actually killed lawful residents of Pakistan, on Pakistani soil, without consulting Pakistan’s government, without the approval of the United Nations and without being able to justify the attack based on the Caroline Test of imminent danger – India would have committed a war crime. As it stands, India’s “attack” was clearly a mild game of air born chicken whose real purpose was not military but political and party political at that.

    So long as India did enough to create a foundation upon which to wildly embellish the truth of the matter, Modi would have gotten what he wanted. The fact that Modi is now flying the flag of jingoism in spite of the fact that the “surgical strike” only damaged some trees, is proof positive that rather than risk a genuine conflict with Pakistan’s Armed Forces, one which could have seriously backfired upon India, Modi has instead decided to play politics with fighter jets, just as he did in 2016.

    Based on the BJP’s heavy electoral loses, even in its own northern heartlands during the 2018 regional elections, it is ultimately not surprising that Modi is now using every trick in the book in order to try and secure victory for the BJP in this Spring’s general election. Ultimately though “surgical strike 2.0″ was in the words of Shakespeare: …”a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury signifying nothing”.

    All that is now left to do is for Pakistan’s government to expose to the wider world, just how flawed and fictitious the Indian narrative is.”

    Indians are the nation who literally hyped themselves up as Superpower2020 before it blew up into a meme. These folk will believe in anything, and fake news disseminated to almost a billion worth of a populace is potent indeed!

  42. Moreover, resistance against occupation isn’t terrorism. Kashmiri resistance isn’t terrorism.

  43. anon[245] • Disclaimer says:
    @DB Cooper

    Millions of forest-dwelling indigenous people in India to be evicted

    Critics say supreme court ruling constitutes ‘mass eviction in name of conservation’

    Millions of Indians face eviction after the country’s supreme court ruled that indigenous people illegally living on forest land should move.

    Campaigners for the rights of tribal and forest-dwelling people have called the court’s decision on Wednesday “an unprecedented disaster” and “the biggest mass eviction in the name of conservation, ever”.

    Indian police use elephants to evict illegal settlers

    Read more
    The ruling came in response to petitions filed by various wildlife conservation groups, which wanted the court to declare the 2006 Forest Rights Act invalid. The act gives forest dwelling people the right to their ancestral lands, including those in specially “protected” areas that contain sanctuaries and wildlife parks to conserve wild life. The groups told the court that “tribal” people in 20 states had encroached illegally on these protected areas, jeopardising efforts to protect wildlife and forests.

    The conservation groups said state governments should see if families could prove their claim under the act and, if they could, they should be allowed to live and work on the land. If they failed to prove their claim, they should be evicted by the state government.

    The supreme court has ordered the 20 state governments – where claims were considered by special committees – to act on about 1.1m claims now rejected as bogus and evict the families. Depending on the size of the families, more than 1m claims could translate to about 5-7 million people being evicted by 27 July.

    Survival International’s director, Stephen Corry, said: “This judgment is a death sentence for millions of tribal people in India, land theft on an epic scale and a monumental injustice. It will lead to wholesale misery, impoverishment, disease and death, an urgent humanitarian crisis, and it will do nothing to save the forests which these tribespeople have protected for generations.”

    • Replies: @DB Cooper
  44. DB Cooper says:
    @The Alarmist

    I won’t blame the Beatles and other rockers too much. They just took cue from the main stream media in how to see India. Right after independence there were a lot of genuine goodwill from Britain and other Western countries towards India. Nehru, the one time trouble maker became a man of moral authority virtually overnight. Nehru was the Nelson Mandela of his days. (Both Nehru and Mandela went to jail for creating troubles and Mandela was brand a terrorist.) Whereas Mandela never saw the new South Africa as the imperial power in the block, Nehru saw India as the new hegemon in the region. Internationally Nehru was famous for his preachy holier than thou altitude towards Western leaders. He was never tired of lecturing Britain of its ‘sin’ towards India. But domestically Nehru continue to do to its neighbors what the Raj was doing all along when the British was running the show.

  45. DB Cooper says:

    Don’t worry. No ‘Human Rights Activist’ will give a rat arse about these people. India is the Teflon country. Whatever it did nothing will stick.

  46. Escher says:
    @DB Cooper

    You seem to have this list saved in a Word file somewhere to copy-paste into any forum about India.

  47. L Garou says:
    @Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist

    The reason mthere is an “India” is for common defenbse aqgainst, yeah, you know who..

  48. anon[418] • Disclaimer says:

    What was the death toll in the killing fields of Jammu? There are no official figures, so one has to go by reports in the British press of that period. Horace Alexander’s article on 16 January 1948 in The Spectator is much quoted; he put the number killed at 200,000.

    To quote a 10 August 1948 report published in The Times, London: “2,37,000 Muslims were systematically exterminated – unless they escaped to Pakistan along the border – by the forces of the Dogra State headed by the Maharaja in person and aided by Hindus and Sikhs. This happened in October 1947, five days before the Pathan invasion and nine days before the Maharaja’s accession to india.”

    India tried to capture Kashmir through ethnic cleansing long before Pakistan sent any army

  49. Malla says:
    @Fiendly Neighbourhood Terrorist

    Both Hindi and Urdu languages have the British to thank for. Earlier it was Persian that was the official language of the Indian subcontinent.

    Introducing Adam Gilchrist, the noted British linguist

    Adam Gilchrist: Father of both Hindi and Urdu.

    He is principally known for his study of the Hindustani language, which led to it being adopted as the lingua franca of northern India (including present-day Pakistan) by British colonists and indigenous people. He compiled and authored An English-Hindustani Dictionary, A Grammar of the Hindoostanee Language, The Oriental Linguist, and many more. His lexicon of Hindustani was published in Arabic script, Nāgarī script, and in Roman transliteration.

    Under Gilchrist’s leadership, Fort William also became a centre for Urdu prose. The language they taught was meant for young British people to acquire a general practical knowledge for administrative purposes, and not for native speakers of the language. He gathered around him writers from all over India who were able to produce a simple Urdu style that was “intelligible to British officers and merchants who had no use for poetry”.[4] One of Gilchrist’s pupils was the missionary Henry Martyn, an Anglican priest and chaplain for the East India Company, who revised the Hindustani version of the New Testament and later translated it, together with the Book of Psalms and Book of Common Prayer, into Urdu and Persian. By the early nineteenth century, the Persian language was gradually replaced by Urdu as the vernacular to serve as the administrative language in a growing colonial bureaucracy.[13]

    In 1803, Gilchrist inducted other writers into the college, who helped make rapid strides in Hindi language and literature. Subsequently, a Hindi translation of the Bible appeared in 1818 and Udant Martand, the first Hindi newspaper, was published in 1826 in Calcutta.

    Scholars debate Gilchrist’s role in the distillation of Hindustani into the modern languages of Hindi and Urdu, but according to Gilchrist, the rise of the new prose tradition was also the “bifurcation of Khariboli into two forms – the Hindustani language with Khariboli as the root resulted in two languages (Hindi and Urdu), each with its own character and script.“[16] He not only discovered/invented the Hindustani language, but he was credited as a great patron of Urdu and indirectly the reinvigoration of Hindi. During his time at Fort William College, he encouraged the use of the purer form of Khariboli from which contemporary Hindi evolved. In the words of K.B. Jindal, author of A history of Hindi literature: “Hindi as we know it today is the product of the nineteenth century.[17]

    Another view was that of George Abraham Grierson, an Irish linguist and Civil servant, who said that the standard or pure Hindi which contemporary Indians use is “an artificial dialect the mother tongue of no native-born Indian, a newly invented speech, that wonderful hybrid known to Europeans as Hindi and invented by them.”

    BTW the word ‘Urdu’ comes from the Mongol/Mughal word for Tent ‘Ordo’.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Eric Margolis Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Bin Laden is dead, but his strategy still bleeds the United States.
Egyptians revolted against American rule as well as Mubarak’s.
“America’s strategic and economic interests in the Mideast and Muslim world are being threatened by the agony in...
A menace grows from Bush’s Korean blind spot.
Far from being a model for a “liberated” Iraq, Afghanistan shows how the U.S. can get bogged down Soviet-style.