Talk:Military history of Pakistan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Military history of Pakistan is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article Milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article Milestones Date Process Result April 21, 2006 Peer review Reviewed February 3, 2007 Featured article candidate Not promoted Current Status: Former featured article candidate

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met This article has had a peer review which is now archived.

Contents 1 Some Changes Needed 2 How to make this Article a Featured Article 3 1947 war 4 Occupied Vs Controlled 5 Title 6 I will get the proper citiations from Brian cloughley's new book 7 Possible improvements 8 93,000 POWs 9 Pakistani Forces in Bangladesh in 1971

[edit] Some Changes Needed

Over the past couple of days. I have tried to source a lot of statements in the article and have added 10 more sources in the footnotes section. However there is still a need to source more paragraphs.

Forexample The following statement was on the verge of POV and was unsourced and factually incorrect.

Pakistan's birth took place during the early days of the Cold War and in 1947, Pakistan’s founder Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah foresaw a great period of difficulty ahead for the young nation and asked the United States for aid.

It has been replaced with the following paragraph

With the failure of the United Statesto persuade India to join an anti-communist pact, it turned towards Pakistan which in contrast with India was prepared to join such an alliance in return of military and economic aid and also to find an equalizer against India. By 1954, the Americans had expressed that Pakistan along with Turkey and Iran would be ideal countries to counter Soviet influence. Therefore Pakistan and USA signed the Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement and American aid began to flow in Pakistan. This was followed by two more agreements. In 1955, Pakistan joined the South East Asian Treaty Organization(SEATO) and the Baghdad pact later to be renamed as Central Asian Treaty Organisation(CENTO) after Iraq left in 1959

Source: Author Nigel Kelly, The History and culture of Pakistan, pg. 143-144, ISBN 1 901458 67 9

I believe the following also needs to sourced ASAP

The Soviet Union continued the massive build-up of the Indian military and a US arms embargo forced Pakistan to look at other options. It turned to China, North Korea, Germany, Italy and France for military aid. China in particular gave Pakistan over 900 tanks, Mig-19 Fighters and enough equipment to fully equip 3 Infantry divisions. France supplied some Mirage aircraft, submarines and even the Soviet Union gave Pakistan around 100 T-55 tanks, Mi-8 helicopters but that aid was abruptly stopped under intense Indian pressure. Pakistan in this period was partially able to enhance its military capability but still was caught un-prepared for the 1971 War.

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Military_history_of_Pakistan#1965-1971

Pakistan’s defense spending rose by 200% during the Bhutto era but the military balance between India-Pakistan which was on parity during the 1960s was growing decisively in India’s favor. United States once again became a major source for military hardware following the lifting of the arms embargo in 1975 but by then Pakistan had become heavily dependent on China as an arms supplier. Heavy spending on defense re-energized the Army, which had sunk to its lowest morale following the debacle of the 1971 war. The high defense expenditure took money from other development projects such as education, health care and housing.

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Military_history_of_Pakistan#1971-1977

Because as far as I have read, defense spending rose by 33% in Bhutto’s regime.(http://www.abntv.com/PakDetail.asp?linked=544)

In addition statements like heavy defense spending reenergized the army seems to be POV. Is it the author’s point of view or did some analyst actually say that.Gambit 321 12:42, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I wrote this whole Article. If there are some flaws in it, then by all means change it as long as proper citation is given. Mercenary2k 08:03, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] How to make this Article a Featured Article

My goal is to make this article into a Featured Article.

I thought it was ready, but good users of wikipedia have pointed out glaring flaws which I will correct.

• 1 - 1st order of business. To turn the UN Missions from a sub-section into a table.
• 2 - Add an expanded opening paragraph with a picture
• 3 - expand short sub-sections such as the "Creation of the Taliban" and merge other small ones such as "1962-1965" into other topics.
• 4 - Add references, citiations, quotes.
• 5 - Fix the grammer problems. I need the help of others in this one.

And I think after this, this article should be ready as a Featured Article.

mercenary2k

I would also add that accurate sourcing might be a concern here as well. I will refrain from editing portions of this article for the time being, but I did note that the cited source for the statement on the Pakistani Airfore outperforming the Indian Airforce in the 1965 war is the Amazon Review Page for the Chuck Yeager autobiography. Would it not make more sense to cite a respected military journal or comprehensive account of the war? I don't want to get into some nationalistic argument here; I just want to make the point that if that statement holds true, please use a more appropriate source to support the statement.

Regards,

Devanampriya

[edit] 1947 war

"....but Kashmir had a very high strategic value and Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru was also from Kashmir and did not want to give up his place of birth.[citation needed] Fearing that India would take over the whole of Kashmir, the newly created Pakistani ..."

[edit] Occupied Vs Controlled

People keep on changing here the word "controlled" with "occupied" for indian context. Jammu kashmir was legally acceeded in Indian Union ,Hence the word occupied is utterly wrong. However it is disputed area according to UN. Hence in contrast of indian claim of "integral part", the correct word would be "controlled". And as there is absolutely no legal validity of pakistani claim of Kashmir, so it would correct for pakistan to write "Occupied" as it was only occupied by military operation in comparison to india which acceeded it legally.

So please refrain from reverting the word.

India decided to intervene on the behalf of Kashmir neither because of whimsical reasons like "Nehru was born there so he wanted it..." nor because Kashmir supposedly held strategic significance... It is only because the Maharaja of Kashmir (who (correctly or incorrectly ) was the supposed representative of Kashmiri people)authorised it to do so. So i deleted these sentences.Also I changed the wording from "fearing it will take over 'whole' of Kashmir" to "fearing it will takeover Kashmir".

cheers.

Scourgeofgod

[edit] Title

Should this article not be at History of the Pakistani Army? "Pakistan" is a noun, not an adjective. —Cuiviénen (Cuivië) 22:04, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I will get the proper citiations from Brian cloughley's new book

Brian Cloughley's new book, the history of the Pakistan Army with the updated version will be released in May 2006.

I will use that to get the proper citations for this article

[edit] Possible improvements

This article needs some changes but they shouldn't be too difficult to achieve. My suggestions are:

1. Make all images the same width and right-aligned
2. Consider condensing paragraphs and sections – especially one-line sentences do not look good
3. Avoid using too many templates - it clutters up the article.
4. Try to maintain as neutral a tone as possible – I’ll try to help with rewriting bits which may seem POV.
5. The maps should be as neutral as possible, especially with regard to Kashmir.
6. Check the copyright status on all images and remove any fair-use images and images with uncertain copyright.
7. Try to reduce the number of subheadings as this will not only reduce your table of contents but also make the article look more like prose.
8. Try to keep page size about 40-45 Kb as readers will tire of reading lengthy articles. (The average attention span is very low unfortunately)
9. Perhaps a mention of the role the armed forces played in the relief effort for the recent earthquake?
10. References – especially when you are dealing with sensitive or controversial points, it is important to have references to back up anything you write. There are several issues which affect Pakistan in this way – Partition in 1947 and communal violence following it, the Kashmir dispute, the Bengal war of 1971 and the events leading up to it, the whole Pakistan-Afghanistan problem (Durand line, Pakhtunistan, opium shipments, ISI involvement, the Taliban and Osama plus the war on terror and especially the recent operations in the tribal areas).
11. Fill in as many red links as possible
12. Replace hyphens with – (ndashes).
13. Once most of this is done, it is time for a good peer review. As this is a military history, I would recommend trying both the common peer review at Wikipedia:Peer_review and the Military History review at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Peer_review.

Most importantly don't tackle all of this alone as the best articles are collaborative efforts :) - I will try to help as much as I can with getting this sorted out. Green Giant 01:13, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 93,000 POWs

I remember reading somewhere in an article that the 93,000 POWs consisted of mostly Urdu-speaking civil servants who had settled in East Pakistan before the war. Pakistan Armed Forces prisoners were around 30,000 as compared to the 93,000 claimed by the Indian Army. Mercenary2k do you agree?? Advil 01:02, 27 July 2006

ya i do 68.48.164.178 07:14, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pakistani Forces in Bangladesh in 1971

There are paramilitary forces included in the 93,000 number. The Breakdown of the formations surrendered in Bangladesh is asl follows: Pakistan Army Formations: 3 Infantry Divisions (the 9th, 16th and the 14th) plus 2 adhoc divisions (36th and the 39th), 11 regular infantry brigades (23rd, 34th, 205th, 57th, 107th, 93rd, 313st, 27th, 117th, 53rd, 97th)and 4 adhoc infantry brigades (91st, 202nd, 314th and Rajshai ad hoc), 35 regular infantry battlions, 6 Field Art. Regiments, 5 Independent Mortar Battries, 1 Light Ack Ack Regiment, 1 Light Ack Ack Battery, 1 Armor Regiment. Approx. 49,973 personnel, including 1,022 non combatants.

Pakistan Navy: 1,413 Personnel.

Pakistan Air Force: 1,141 Personnel.

Para Military Forces: These formations are made of West Pakistani citizens, not part of the regular army but commanded by regular army officers:

West Pakistan Ranger: 70th Wing, 71st Wing, 60th Wing, 61st Wing and one wing each of Khyber Rifles, Tochi Scouts, Thal Scouts. Estimated 6,341 personnel.

Mujahid Battlions: 5. Estimated 5,000.

East Pakistan Civil Armed Forces: 7 Sector Hq Wings and 17 operational wings. Estimated 20,000 personnel.

Police and Civillians attached to Armed Forces: 7,721.

Not included in the number are the Razzakars, Al-Bader and Al Shams personnel and the Mizo Battalions which fought under Pakistan Army command.

The para military numbers are often confusing as some of them were serving i the army adhoc brigades.Sources are "Witness to Surrender" by Siddiq Salik, The Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report and "Surrender at Dacca: Birth of a Nation" by JFR Jacob. Maglorbd 14:56, 9 February 2007 (UTC)