What's new

16th December, 1971 : Lieutenant-General A. A. K. Niazi signs the instrument of surrender in Dhaka

Did you watch the video? He admits he is one of the those who discriminated against Bengali's in his youth at university, which he justified by saying he was a "Bacha".

You see it as justification, I see it as admission of wrong done out of not knowing better. You put the separation to a singular event, he says it was a culmination of the attitude of the west Pakistani elite.
 
If it is any consolation, the TNT theory was only partially correct. The proponents of the theory were correct about their assessment that Muslims and Hindus cannot coexist, but it was extremely wrong about the assessment that Muslims can coexist.

They cannot as long as there are sociocultural differences.

The question you must ask is, who has an easier time to coexist in the subcontinent. People of different ethnicities and same religion. Or people of same ethnicities, and different religion?

Like would Punjabi Hindus coexist better with Kashmiri, Sindhi, Hindi Speaking Hindus or Punjabi Muslims?
Would Punjabi Muslims coexist better with Kashmiri, Sindhi, Urdu Speaking Muslims or Punjabi Hindus?
 
You see it as justification, I see it as admission of wrong done out of not knowing better. You put the separation to a singular event, he says it was a culmination of the attitude of the west Pakistani elite.

Yes, because had Mujib been Prime Minister, had power been transferred to the Bengali's, they would never separate. They could dominate a united Pakistan, as they were the majority.

Even if west Pakistani elite did not like Bengalis, they would have to accept their rule. And if they didn't then the military operation should have been against them, and not East Pakistan. Thats why i blame the Military dictatorship.
 
Yes, because had Mujib been Prime Minister, had power been transferred to the Bengali's, they would never separate. They could dominate a united Pakistan, as they were the majority.

Even if west Pakistani elite did not like Bengalis, they would have to accept their rule. And if they didn't then the military operation should have been against them, and not East Pakistan. Thats why i blame the Military dictatorship.

Who knows what would have happened. Maybe West Pakistan would have separated because of bengali dominance.
 
Who knows what would have happened. Maybe West Pakistan would have separated because of bengali dominance.

I dont think Punjabi establishment would've ever let Bengalis rule over them. In an Ideal democratic scenario, West would've then come out of the Pakistan & create their own separate state.
 
Yes, because had Mujib been Prime Minister, had power been transferred to the Bengali's, they would never separate. They could dominate a united Pakistan, as they were the majority.

Even if west Pakistani elite did not like Bengalis, they would have to accept their rule. And if they didn't then the military operation should have been against them, and not East Pakistan. Thats why i blame the Military dictatorship.

If power were transferred to the elected Awami League, Sheikh Mujib would've went on with his 6 point model of the nation and Pakistan would've turned into a two state loose Federation anyway. In every possible scenario, separation was the only viable solution. Letting the elected party's ascension to power wouldn't have stopped the separation but the war would've been avoided and a healthy relation between the two newly formed states would've existed.
 
If power were transferred to the elected Awami League, Sheikh Mujib would've went on with his 6 point model of the nation and Pakistan would've turned into a two state loose Federation anyway. In every possible scenario, separation was the only viable solution. Letting the elected party's ascension to power wouldn't have stopped the separation but the war would've been avoided and a healthy relation between the two newly formed states would've existed.

Agreed. I am a big believer in fixing your own locality first, and now Bangladesh and Pakistan have went their separate ways, my wellwishes are for Bengal to be reunited as the magnificent state it once was by dismantling the ugly fence which has cleaved it in two.
 
I dont think Punjabi establishment would've ever let Bengalis rule over them. In an Ideal democratic scenario, West would've then come out of the Pakistan & create their own separate state.

The two military dictators, Ayub and Yahya, were Pashtun. Bhutto was a Sindhi. And Punjabis are to blame?

If power were transferred to the elected Awami League, Sheikh Mujib would've went on with his 6 point model of the nation and Pakistan would've turned into a two state loose Federation anyway. In every possible scenario, separation was the only viable solution. Letting the elected party's ascension to power wouldn't have stopped the separation but the war would've been avoided and a healthy relation between the two newly formed states would've existed.

Most non Punjabis in Pakistan want the country to be a loose federation, where the power lies with the provinces. Even in South Punjab, the people there call themselves Seraikis and want to be separate from Punjab.

So if Bengali's were given true power, and as the majority they choose to give most of that power to the respective provinces, majority of West Pakistan would welcome it.

The thing is Punjabi's now are the majority, and alot of them want a strong Center which they dominate. The questions is if Bengalis were able to dominate Pakistan, would they still want a loose federation? Or would they prefer to keep power with them?
 
General Niazi acted alone. No order to surrender came from GHQ and the presidency, Niazi was a coward
 
General Niazi acted alone. No order to surrender came from GHQ and the presidency, Niazi was a coward

Niazi was very highly thought of by the Pakistani army. His nickname was “Tiger”.
 
General Niazi acted alone. No order to surrender came from GHQ and the presidency, Niazi was a coward

Based on what I have read on the internet, Niazi decided to surrender to India instead of Mukti Bahini.

The reason was Mukti Bahini didn't sign any treaty like Geneva Convention. Therefore, Mukti Bahini could've done war crimes and executed Niazi's men.

India signed Geneva Convention and hence they were bound by rules and regulations. Niazi and his men probably wanted to return home alive.

This is the explanation I got from internet. I don't know how accurate this is.
 
General Niazi acted alone. No order to surrender came from GHQ and the presidency, Niazi was a coward

Found this, [MENTION=2501]Savak[/MENTION].

When Indian Army soldiers crossed the borders and charged towards Dhaka, General Niazi panicked when he came to realise the real nature of the Indian strategy and became frantically nervous when the Indian Army successfully penetrated the defence of the East.[31]: 304  Niazi's military staff further regretted not heeding the intelligence warnings issued 20 years earlier in the 1952 Cable 1971 report compiled by Major K. M. Arif, the military intelligence official on Niazi's staff.[34]

According to the testimonies provided by Major-General Farman Ali in the War Enquiry Commission, Niazi's morale collapsed as early as 7 December and he cried frantically over the progress report presented to Governor Abdul Motaleb.[35]: 183  Niazi ultimately blamed Lieutenant-General Tikka Khan for the army's oppressive strategy.[36] Major accusations were also directed toward Lieutenant-General Yakob Ali Khan, Admiral S. M. Ahsan and Major-General Ali for aggravating the crisis, but Niazi had to bear most responsibility for all that happened in the East.[citation needed]

General Niazi, alongside with his deputy Rear-Admiral Mohammad Shariff, nervously tried reassessing the situation to halt the Indian Army's penetration by directing joint army-navy operations with no success.[37][38] The Pakistani military combat units found themselves involved in a guerrilla war with the Mukti Bahini under Atul Osmani, and were unprepared and untrained for such warfare.[39]

On 9 December, the Indian Government accepted the sovereignty of Bangladesh and extended its diplomatic mission to the Provisional Government of Bangladesh.[40] This eventually led Governor Abdul Motaleb to resign from his post and he took refuge with his entire cabinet at the Red Cross shelter at the Inter-Continental Dacca on 14 December.[19]

Niazi eventually took control of the civilian government and received a telegram on 16 December 1971 from President Yahya Khan: "You have fought a heroic battle against overwhelming odds. The nation is proud of you ... You have now reached a stage where further resistance is no longer humanly possible nor will it serve any useful purpose ... You should now take all necessary measures to stop the fighting and preserve the lives of armed forces personnel, all those from West Pakistan and all loyal elements".[3]: 73–74 

During this time, the Special Branch of the East Pakistan Police notified Niazi of the joint Indo-Bengali siege of Dhaka as the Eastern Command led by Lieutenant-General Jagjit Singh Aurora began encircling Dhaka.[41] Niazi then appealed for a conditional ceasefire to Lieutenant-General Jagjit Singh Aurora which called for transferring power to the elected government, but without the surrender of the Eastern Command led by Niazi.[41] This offer was rejected by Indian Army's Chief of Army Staff General Sam Manekshaw and he set a deadline for surrender, President Yahya Khan considered it as "illegitimate.[17] [41] Niazi then once again appealed for a cease-fire, but Manekshaw set a deadline for surrender, failing which Dhaka would come under siege.[17]

Subsequently, the Indian Army began encircling Dhaka and Lieutenant-General Jagjit Singh Aurora sent a message through Major-General Rafael Jacob that issued an ultimatum to surrender in a "30-minutes" time window on 16 December 1971.[42] Niazi agreed to surrender and sent a message to Manekshaw despite many army officers declined to obey, although they were legally bound.[43] The Indian Army commanders, Lieutenant General Sagat Singh, Lieutenant General J.S. Aurora, and Major-General Rafael Farj Jacob arrived at Dhaka via helicopter with the surrender documents.[42]

The surrender took place at Ramna Race Course, in Dhaka at local time 16:31 on 16 December 1971. Niazi signed the Instrument of Surrender and handed over his personal weapon to J. S. Aurora in the presence of Indian and Bangladesh force commanders. With Niazi, nearly 90,000 personnel of the Eastern Command surrendered to the joint Indian and Bangladesh Army.[44]

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._A._K._Niazi#Surrendering_of_Eastern_Command.
 
Last edited:
Based on what I have read on the internet, Niazi decided to surrender to India instead of Mukti Bahini.

The reason was Mukti Bahini didn't sign any treaty like Geneva Convention. Therefore, Mukti Bahini could've done war crimes and executed Niazi's men.

India signed Geneva Convention and hence they were bound by rules and regulations. Niazi and his men probably wanted to return home alive.

This is the explanation I got from internet. I don't know how accurate this is.

That is true. After all that had happened in East Pakistan prior to the independence, the Mukti Bahini were baying for blood of the Pakistani soldiers. The Indian army actually had to provide protection to the surrendered Pakistani soldiers from the wrath of the Mukti Bahini or the common Bangladeshis. After it became apparent that winning the war was impossible, one of the biggest reasons for the surrender was that the Indian army would provide them protection as they'd be stranded in hostile territory after East Pakistan had gained independence.

I read a fascinating story about a 29 year old Indian soldier who was tasked with rescuing Mujibur Rahman's family who was kept hostage in Dhaka. The soldier apparently used the same reasons of safety to negotiate with the Pakistani soldiers and free Mujibur Rahman's family.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

The Indian soldier who saved the future Prime Minister of Bangladesh

Kolkata, Dec 14 (IANS): History was created on December 16, 1971 when a free Bangladesh emerged after the surrender of Pakistani armed forces in Dhaka but very people know that on the next day, a 29-year-old unarmed Indian Army officer single-handedly saved the family of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman including his daughter Sheikh Hasina – the present Prime Minister of Bangladesh.

Colonel Ashoke Kumar Tara (retd), Vir Chakra, who was only then 29 years old, was entrusted with the job of rescuing Sheikh Mujib’s family, sequestered in their home in Dhanmondi, from the clutches of the Pakistani Army. Sheikh Mujib was himself in a jail in then west Pakistan, having been arrested and flown out in the crackdown under Pakistan Army’s “Operation Searchlight” earlier that year.

“They (the family) were kept in house arrest at a place called Dhanmondi in Dhaka. I went to the place with only two soldiers and I didn’t have any arms,” Col Tara told IANS in an interview.

Recounting the incident, he said: “I understood one thing that if I went with arms and many soldiers, then the Pakistani Army might get scared and start firing on the people. This might cause harm to the family. There were 12 people. I took the risk and went there on December 17 at 9 a.m.

“I decided to face the Pakistanis with my guts and wits. I left my weapon with my 2 jawans and told them to stay behind. I, alone without a weapon, moved towards the house. I reached near the house and asked if there was anyone. They (the soldiers there) replied in Punjabi and being a Punjabi, I can understand the language. They told me to stop or otherwise, they will fire,” Tara said.

“I told them I am an army officer and have come to tell you that the Pakistani Army has surrendered. They did not believe it and in response, they abused me in nasty language, but I kept quiet as I knew what my task is, what my aim is. I later again told them to understand the situation, by chance, by luck an Indian helicopter flew over the house. I immediately told them to look at the helicopter… ‘Have you ever seen an Indian helicopter over your head’, I asked. They were impressed but said they will ask their senior officers about the surrender,” he recalled.

“During that time, I was just at the gate, the bayonet of the rifle was touching the right side of my body. I told them there was no communication, as the telephone lines had been cut. I told them if you delay, the Mukti Bahini will come, and the Indian Army will come and kill you. Your family, which is waiting in Pakistan, will not be able to meet you and what will happen to your body, you can’t imagine,” he said.

“This talk continued for 25 minutes. They even fired at the house. I was unmoved and told them this will not impact me because it will damage you more than me. You are 12 people, you all will be killed and never reach your home. If you surrender, I, as an Indian Army officer, promise you that I will take you to the headquarters so that you could reach your home in Pakistan. Somehow, they agreed and surrendered.”

“I then opened the door of the house, and the first lady who came out was the wife of Sheikh Mujibur Rehman. She embraced me and said ‘you are my son and God has sent you to save us’. She was followed by, Sheikh Hasina with her 3-year-old son Rasul and her sister,” he said.

In October 2012, he was invited to Bangladesh to be bestowed with an award by Sheikh Hasina. The award was the honour of ‘Friend of the Liberation War’.

“There has been some correspondence, the High Commission in Delhi always invites me for ceremonies,” he said, adding that during her 2017 India visit, Sheikh Hasina met Tara and exchanged pleasantries.

Asked about the India-Bangladesh relationship, Tara said: “The relations immediately after the war were very close. But after three years, when Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was assassinated and then during the military rule, the relationship was in a bad shape. However, when present PM Sheikh Hasina came back to power, the relationship became very good again. The present government also wants a very good relationship with them. There is a brotherhood between the two nations. PM Narendra Modi has said this number of times.

“At present, the relationship is very good and I wish that such relationship carries on."

https://kalingatv.com/features/the-indian-soldier-who-saved-the-future-prime-minister-of-bangladesh/
 
Wouldn't have happened had we treated the Bengali's more respectfully. The bigger enemy took advantage of the situation. Such things happen in history.
 
Based on what I have read on the internet, Niazi decided to surrender to India instead of Mukti Bahini.

The reason was Mukti Bahini didn't sign any treaty like Geneva Convention. Therefore, Mukti Bahini could've done war crimes and executed Niazi's men.

India signed Geneva Convention and hence they were bound by rules and regulations. Niazi and his men probably wanted to return home alive.

This is the explanation I got from internet. I don't know how accurate this is.

This is true. Riots had broken out in Dacca where Biharis were brutally massacred by Mukti Bahini militia. Niazi saw the writing on the wall and realized surrender to India was preferable than the Mukti Bahini

Bit like how most German units preferred surrender to the Americans than the Russians in 1945
 
General Niazi acted alone. No order to surrender came from GHQ and the presidency, Niazi was a coward

ok internet fouji what would had you done?

Yahyah Khan was having a party when we were losing East Pakistan. General Niazi was there who knew the ground realities.

General Niazi was afterwards made a scapegoat, they removed him from the army and eliminated his pension aswell. He was made the fall guy while Yahyah Khan continue to enjoy his drinking and womenizing.
 
Niazi's military staff further regretted not heeding the intelligence warnings issued 20 years earlier in the 1952 Cable 1971 report compiled by Major K. M. Arif, the military intelligence official on Niazi's staff.

This quote prompted me to google about the "Cable 1971" which I had never heard before, and it proved fascinating reading.

Cable 1971, otherwise known as Priority Signal or File 1971 was a high profile and secret military signal communicated in December 1952 between the two main inter-services branches of Pakistan–the Pakistan Army and the Pakistan Navy. It is notable for the fact that it essentially predicted the separation of Pakistan and Bangladesh and by coincidence its title contained the year in which the separation actually happened, almost 20 years later.

The military cable was directed through the Naval Intelligence and Military Intelligence to ISI sent to its headquarter and came in the wake of reactionary of Basic Principles Committee's first report towards the writing of the first set of the Constitution of Pakistan. The cable was sent by then-Commodore S.M. Ahsan to DG ISI Major-General R. Cawthome on a file coincidentally numbered 1971. The cable discussed the implication of One Unit, religious fanaticism, and the economic parity between the West and East Pakistan that will ultimately result in the division of Pakistan into two different groups.

The Cable's message read as:

"1. The creation of Committee of Ulema to veto the decisions taken in the House of People on religious matters, gives excess of powers to Ulema over the rights of elected representatives of the people. This gives an impression of Pakistan as being a Theocratic State.

2. To recommend that the head of the state should be a Muslim will unnecessarily create suspicions in minds of the minorities in Pakistan. The choice to select the head of the state should be left entirely to the people, to select without prejudice to caste, colour and creed.

3. It is maintained by same officers that a single House elected on population basis should have been envisaged, and we should cease to think in terms of Bengalis and Punjabis etc. The parity between West & East Pakistan will ultimately result in the division of Pakistan into two different groups, therefore, it is the very negation of one people, one country and one culture."


The cable's message was further extended and discussed at the Army GHQ by MI's officer Major KM Arif when he compiled an "Intelligence Report No. 7894 of the Office of Intelligence Research and Analysis" in December 1970.

The cable is notable for its highlighted title and many historians found strange that the cable was coincidentally numbered: Cable/File 1971.

Apart from the extraordinary coincidence of the Cable's name, the actual message of the cable really caught my attention. It showed how the elite in the Pakistan armed forces were uncomfortable with the move for Pakistan turning into a religious state, and how they favoured a secular state instead which was a bit surprising to me. Certainly not something I'd imagine happening now, but it makes you wonder if their view was because of the fact that they trained along with their hindu and sikh co-soldiers under the British system after which they would go on their separate ways. I heard many of the heads of Indian and Pakistani armed forces immediately after independence were close friends as they had trained together as colleagues before partition.
 
Fast forward 20 years later, you had a very Islamicised army and the nation itself. A territorial war was seen as a religious war, despite the war was for the liberation of a muslim majority region. Advertisements calling for public funding for the war efforts were also made under the banner of a religious war.

FGqnPS4VkAMB4KK.jpg

FGqnP6YVgAEGAqV.jpg

FGqnOl-VQAIjPCb.jpg

Wonder what happened in the intervening 20 years that made the ideology of the armed forces transition from a secular position to a largely religious one.
 
Fast forward 20 years later, you had a very Islamicised army and the nation itself. A territorial war was seen as a religious war, despite the war was for the liberation of a muslim majority region. Advertisements calling for public funding for the war efforts were also made under the banner of a religious war.

View attachment 113693

View attachment 113694

View attachment 113695

Wonder what happened in the intervening 20 years that made the ideology of the armed forces transition from a secular position to a largely religious one.

read up on the rawalpindi conspiracy. That was the first and only time when we had a liberal or left wing army take over that was about to take off.
 
I think in the middle of Indians gloating about this and Pakistanis getting defensive, I think the more important things get lost in the debate.

The displacement of people and refugee problem due to this conflict, the thousands if not more Bangladeshis who lost their lives in this.

In fact this has even managed to cloud the brains of younger Bangladeshis too. They seemed to have moved on which is not a bad thing but still have these ideas of ummah etc despite once being treated as 2nd class citizens in the same “ummah”
 
As tragic as it was the division of India in 1947 was much sweeter. That is what I celebrate on August 14 every year:qdkcheeky.
 
Javed Jabbar directed this - will be an interesting one from a Pakistan pov.

<iframe width="800" height="713" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/FZ1JBtL0Zn4" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
I think in the middle of Indians gloating about this and Pakistanis getting defensive, I think the more important things get lost in the debate.

The displacement of people and refugee problem due to this conflict, the thousands if not more Bangladeshis who lost their lives in this.

In fact this has even managed to cloud the brains of younger Bangladeshis too. They seemed to have moved on which is not a bad thing but still have these ideas of ummah etc despite once being treated as 2nd class citizens in the same “ummah”

The Ummah isn't restricted to only Pakistan and Bangladesh, there are Muslim countries from Europe to Africa. Perhaps that is why the Bangladeshis have not relinquished their religion to the dismay of some neighbours.
 
Javed Jabbar directed this - will be an interesting one from a Pakistan pov.

<iframe width="800" height="713" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/FZ1JBtL0Zn4" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Looks interesting. Where can this be watched ?
 
Javed Jabbar directed this - will be an interesting one from a Pakistan pov.

<iframe width="800" height="713" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/FZ1JBtL0Zn4" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Looks well produced.

Over the past 3 years, the Pakistani think tank and government ( do not know if Pakistani government or think tank has any role in production of this factual documentary) has tried to adapt back the narrative that had been maligned by the usual suspects.

Over the past 3 years, Pakistan has been honest in accepting their role while correcting the narrative that had been maligned.

Obviously, there will be few, Pakistani and Indian, coming back with, "no one care internationally what Pakistani believe or say despite it being factually correct", that is not the point, the point is, first Pakistani has to know and correct maligned facts within Pakistan first, rest of the world, particularly what India spread in India is irrelevant.

Moed Yusuf has been great in this regard and also can't disregard current government hand in it. May be one of the many reasons we see RSS/BJP supporters particularly flocking to every thread related to PTI and IK domestic or international well designed policies with unrelated economy issue comments.
 
In fact this has even managed to cloud the brains of younger Bangladeshis too. They seemed to have moved on which is not a bad thing but still have these ideas of ummah etc despite once being treated as 2nd class citizens in the same “ummah”

Pakistan was not a khilafah. There hasn't been a khilafah since the dissolution of Ottoman Empire.

Also, it is a misconception that all Bengalis were treated like 2nd class citizens. First president of Pakistan (Iskander Mirza) was a Bengali. I believe there were some Bengalis who were in top positions.

I don't know why some Indians want Bangladeshis to hate Pakistan. LOL. Don't involve other nationalities in your dirty game.
 
Last edited:
On December 13, 1971, Wing Commander Hersern Singh Gill, known as “High-Speed Gill” by his colleagues, had just returned from a strike mission on an underground Ops room and communication centre at Badin in Pakistan’s Sindh province.

He immediately went into a strategy meeting with the station commander of the Jamnagar air base, in India’s Gujarat state, from where his squadron of MiG fighters had been operating.

India and Pakistan had been at war with each other for 10 days – part of a conflict that would result in the independence of Bangladesh three days later, on December 16. Over the previous two days, Gill had conducted several air attacks on the heavily guarded Badin complex, but the Indian military’s 57mm rockets had been unable to penetrate its formidable concrete structure. At the meeting, it was decided to employ the more powerful S-24 rockets. But before the aircraft could be loaded with the new ammunition, the Western Air Command responsible for conducting air operations along the western front with Pakistan, ordered the squadron to carry out one more urgent strike.

Thirty-eight-year-old Gill, the commanding officer of No 47 Squadron (Black Archers), was angry and frustrated at the idea of going on another mission with the old ammunition. His wingman, Flight Lieutenant (later Air Commodore) IJS Boparai, recalled how he “was upset at not being given time to arm himself with the S-24 rockets because the bunkers at Badin were proving resistant as they were heavily protected with earthen embankments. A ring of 36 ack-ack guns also defended the signal complex.”

It would be a four-aircraft mission with two strike planes – one flown by Gill and the other by flight commander Squadron Leader Viney Kapila – and two escort planes, flown by Boparai and Flight Lieutenant BB Soni.

Kapila, who was organising the details of the flight, put his commanding officer Gill in the first strike aircraft and himself in the second. But Gill switched places with him. His flight mates were puzzled by his remark that: “The Black Archers must always come back with the leader.”

Some later suspected that Gill, who had already become somewhat of a legend in air force circles for his skill and the stunts he would perform, had had a premonition that he might not return.

Soon after the aircraft had released their bombs, Soni indicated that he was low on fuel, which was a signal for everyone to head back to base. But, as the others pulled away, Gill made one last, lone pass over the complex.

Realising that he could no longer see Gill’s aircraft, Boparai returned to the target area. On the ground below, he saw a dust trail, about one and a half kilometres long. Gill’s downed aircraft had scuffed along the ground before splitting into three parts – with the middle portion that had held the fuel tanks catching fire. Boparai saw no sign of a parachute but felt that Gill could have ejected from the plane.

That evening, a broadcast on Pakistan’s Hyderabad radio station announced that an ace Indian Air Force (IAF) pilot had been shot down over Badin and captured. It said the pilot was from the Hindon airbase (the peacetime location of Gill’s squadron).

An announcement later that day, however, said that Wing Commander Gill had died with the aircraft and could not be identified. A year later when Indian prisoners of war (POWs) captured on the western front were being repatriated, Indian authorities asked their Pakistani counterparts through the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), which handled all communication regarding missing personnel, how they had known the pilot was Gill when his remains could not be identified. There was no answer and he is still listed as missing in action.

According to India’s official records, Pakistan took 616 POWs during the 14-day war, including 12 air force officers and eight civilians. India took 92,753 Pakistani POWs.


All POWs on both sides were finally repatriated after protracted negotiations stretching over three years. Once this had been completed, India began to compile a list of its soldiers who were still missing. It presented the first list to parliament in 1979. It contained 40 names, including that of Wing Commander Gill.

Pakistan has consistently denied that it holds any Indian POWs after the repatriations.

“Tall and wiry”, “a hard taskmaster” and “superbly fit” are how Gill’s former colleagues have described the passionate flyer who specialised in breathtaking aerobatics.

Gurbir Singh Gill, who has never stopped searching for his older brother, remembers him as being “happiest watching the sunrise from his perch up in the sky, in the cockpit of a MiG or a Hunter”.

Those who knew him well say that a pilot with such superb skills “who understood even the body language of the MiGs” could not have died unless there had been a direct hit to the cockpit.

Group Captain N Krishnamurthy, who is now retired, was an air traffic control officer who provided support to Gill several times and said in a tribute some years ago: “He evolved procedures – steeper approaches and higher speeds to get around the inherent limitations of the MiG.”

In 1972, Gill’s wife, Basanti, asked the Indian government to trace her missing husband. The IAF sent her the following information it had received from the ICRC, which was engaged in identifying, locating and helping to repatriate captured and displaced soldiers and civilians from all three warring countries – India, Pakistan and Bangladesh: “One MiG-21 aircraft was shot down near Badin on 13th December 1971. The pilot did not eject. The aircraft crashed and caught fire. The body or any other personal effects could not be recovered, therefore the identity of the pilot could only be established through Indian reports which declared him missing in that area. The radio report is incorrect.”

But the IAF was not convinced by this explanation and expressed its reservations to Basanti in a letter. It read: “If as the report states the identity of the pilot could only be established through Indian reports, then it would mean that his identity could only be established after 12th May 1972 when we first told the ICRC of the date/area in which your husband was missing. And yet, it was broadcast by Pakistani radio on 13th December 1971 that he has been captured. We have asked the Pakistan government to get further information to reconcile this discrepancy.”

Keeping hope alive

In the years that followed, Gill’s family never gave up hope that he might still be alive. Two accounts helped to fuel this hope.

Basanti’s sister was a flight attendant with the British Overseas Airways Corporation and in the late seventies, often flew from India to the United Kingdom via Pakistan. She struck up a friendship with a Pakistani flight attendant whose fiancé was from Badin. The colleague mentioned Gill’s case to his fiancé’s family and they told him a story about an Indian pilot who had ejected from his aircraft and landed near their home during the war. The Indian pilot had been captured. The family added an additional detail – that the captured pilot had been bald.

Basanti called Boparai, who relayed their conversation to this writer before Boparai died in 2019, to ask if it could have been Gill because, as far as she had been aware, her husband had not been bald. He told her that Gill had, indeed, shaved his head. “I confirmed to her that this was true and the realisation of what the news conveyed by the Pakistani flight attendant meant, shook us all,” he said.

Another account Boparai relayed was one he heard when working as an instructor in Baghdad from 1979 to 1981. It was a time when Iraq was rebuilding after the Baathist revolution and India had sent senior defence personnel to provide training at the country’s National Defence College. Boparai was among them. Some of the cadets he was teaching had returned from a training assignment in Italy, where soldiers from different countries were based as part of the United Nations. He said one of these cadets relayed a conversation he said he’d had with a US officer in Italy, in which the officer had mentioned an ace IAF pilot handed to the US after the 1971 war to help test MiG-21 aircraft.

It was a far-fetched story and one that could not be independently verified, but Boparai, who said Gill was the only ace MiG pilot who had been missing since the war, was not prepared to dismiss it completely.

Gurbir Singh Gill, brother of Wing Commander Gill, opens a museum and HS Gill Motivation Hall in the pilot’s memory on February 15, 2020, during the Diamond Jubilee celebrations of the No 47 Squadron (Black Archers) [Photo courtesy of Chander Suta Dogra]
If still alive, Gill would now be in his eighties. His wife and son died some years ago, but his 77-year-old brother Gurbir has not given up hope. Even now he rushes to verify any scrap of information he finds that could help him find out what happened to his brother.

“He is not just my elder brother, but my role model and best friend. He loved me dearly and despite the age gap, we shared a close bond,” he said. “So many years on, many people tell me that I should give up as he may not be alive any more. It may be a fruitless endeavour, but my heart tells me he is out there somewhere.”

https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2021/12/16/1971-india-my-heart-tells-me-he-is-out-there
 
On this day in 1971, what was believed to be a surrender, happened, and Pakistan seemed to be the one who surrendered in front of the Indian forces in Dhaka.
 
On this solemn day, we reflect on the separation of East Pakistan from Pakistan in 1971. The events of December 16th serve as a reminder of the historical complexities and the impact they had on the lives of many.
 
If you read Henry Kissinger's (US secretary of state) memoirs, you'll find that Indira Gandhi was very determined to capture Pakistan-occupied Kashmir immediately after the 1971 surrender but due to extreme pressure from the Soviets, she decided not to go ahead.

West Pakistan breathed a sigh of relief.
 
If you read Henry Kissinger's (US secretary of state) memoirs, you'll find that Indira Gandhi was very determined to capture Pakistan-occupied Kashmir immediately after the 1971 surrender but due to extreme pressure from the Soviets, she decided not to go ahead.

West Pakistan breathed a sigh of relief.
why didnt they go for it? they would have served Kashmiri Fantastic tea out there :p
 
One of the saddest days for Pakistan.

Tough to understand as a kid in those days but criminal in the way this was allowed to happen.


1971_Instrument_of_Surrender.jpg
This will be Pakistan when kartarpur starts being colonised
 
If you read Henry Kissinger's (US secretary of state) memoirs, you'll find that Indira Gandhi was very determined to capture Pakistan-occupied Kashmir immediately after the 1971 surrender but due to extreme pressure from the Soviets, she decided not to go ahead.

West Pakistan breathed a sigh of relief.
Hope you are not taking Henry Kissinger memoirs seriously.

He is on record encouraging chinese to attack india in 1971
 
If you read Henry Kissinger's (US secretary of state) memoirs, you'll find that Indira Gandhi was very determined to capture Pakistan-occupied Kashmir immediately after the 1971 surrender but due to extreme pressure from the Soviets, she decided not to go ahead.

West Pakistan breathed a sigh of relief.
There is an account that India did not have the resources to take Dhaka without major losses if Pakistanis had chosen to fight and that Indian general bluffed Niazi into surrendering.

The only way India even had enough resources to deal with the east was thro' a friendship treaty with soviets.

Not sure India had resources to secure POK. Not with US fleet in bay of bengal.
 
This General Niazi was a relative of cricketer Imran Khan Niazi? Bcoz in old times, on many occasions Imran said in interviews that he hurt by General Niazi’s surrender to India with 90000 Pakistani soldiers
 
The Fall of Dhaka was largely orchestrated by the triumvirate of General Ayub, General Yahya, and General Niazi, with Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and other key figures playing supporting roles in this pivotal moment in Pakistan's history.
 
The Fall of Dhaka was largely orchestrated by the triumvirate of General Ayub, General Yahya, and General Niazi, with Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and other key figures playing supporting roles in this pivotal moment in Pakistan's history.
Nah. All they orchestrated was the setting aside of election result and the massacre of bengalis.

The fall of Dhaka was thams to Mukti bahini and Indian army
 
If you read Henry Kissinger's (US secretary of state) memoirs, you'll find that Indira Gandhi was very determined to capture Pakistan-occupied Kashmir immediately after the 1971 surrender but due to extreme pressure from the Soviets, she decided not to go ahead.

West Pakistan breathed a sigh of relief.
reading material.


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.'"
 
reading material.


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.'"

Yeah I remember reading Gen Jacob's lengthy interview about his bluff many years ago - interesting stuff. Soviets were helpful but they refused to further support any incursion into Kashmir.
 
Yeah I remember reading Gen Jacob's lengthy interview about his bluff many years ago - interesting stuff. Soviets were helpful but they refused to further support any incursion into Kashmir.
So, If India didn't enough troops for their main mission, how do you figure Indira wanted to take on PoK at the same time?

Is it possible that Kissinger was making things up becos, a third world country like India embarrassed him and his crooked boss?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So, If India didn't enough troops for their main mission, how do you figure Indira wanted to take on PoK at the same time?

Is it possible that Kissinger was making things up becos, a third world country like India embarrassed him and his crooked boss?

It's possible he is lying but I doubt it.

I still have his memoirs with me and there's a lengthy chapter in there describing the back & forth diplomatic interactions between the US and Soviets on how to prevent India from attacking West Pakistan. Maybe I'll post some of the passages here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's possible he is lying but I doubt it.

I still have his memoirs with me and there's a lengthy chapter in there describing the back & forth diplomatic interactions between the US and Soviets on how to prevent India from attacking West Pakistan. Maybe I'll post some of the passages here.
I'll cross a crocodile infested river on mud horse with a bunch of scorpions on my back before I trust a single word uttered by Kissinger.
 
It's possible he is lying but I doubt it.

I still have his memoirs with me and there's a lengthy chapter in there describing the back & forth diplomatic interactions between the US and Soviets on how to prevent India from attacking West Pakistan. Maybe I'll post some of the passages here.
You have interesting situation in your hands..

One one hand you have general Jacob who asserts that he didn't have enough troops to take of main mission

One the other hand you have a genocidal maniac, who supported operation searchlight (so there could be secret US-China detente), secretly extended the vietnam war to cambodia and loas, making claims which don't add up and witah strong motivation to paint Indira in as bad light as possible.

you trust the genocidal maniac.
 
You have interesting situation in your hands..

One one hand you have general Jacob who asserts that he didn't have enough troops to take of main mission

There weren't enough soldiers in the eastern theatre of the war. But the Western border was well stocked with regiments and had heavy fighting. India captured land in PoK which they foolishly returned through the Shimla agreement.
 
There weren't enough soldiers in the eastern theatre of the war. But the Western border was well stocked with regiments and had heavy fighting.
Having a difficult time believing this.

are going based on good sources or simply whiffing it with Kissinger's assertions?

Unless you have solid sources, the main focus was liberation of bangladesh and I doubt there were enough forces to launch an offensive in the difficult terrain of PoK.
India captured land in PoK

I'm sure they captured a lot easy terrain similar to what happened in 1965. Good productive fertile land
which they foolishly returned through the Shimla agreement.
Repeat of Taskent and Bhutto lying thro' his teeth.

Then there is the lahore bus followed by Kargil

One more reason why I prefer no engagement of any kind with Pakistani establishment.
 
Should have let Pakistan army continue to do what they were doing to the Bangladeshiz.

Hindsight but many in Bharat believe this now.

The Bangladeshis were never good.
 
Should have let Pakistan army continue to do what they were doing to the Bangladeshiz.

Hindsight but many in Bharat believe this now.

The Bangladeshis were never good.
Neither Pakistan in 1971 nor India in 2024 succeeded in achieving complete control or domination over Bangladesh.
 
Should have let Pakistan army continue to do what they were doing to the Bangladeshiz.

Hindsight but many in Bharat believe this now.

The Bangladeshis were never good.

Not all Bangladeshis were harmed by Pakistani army. Pakistani army was mostly targeting Mukti Bahini. My father was detained and questioned by Pakistani army (he was 13 at that time) but they let him go after questioning for a few minutes. My father was a young kid who was not with Mukti Bahini. He was just a harmless nerd.

Militaries tend to target separatists. For example, in Bangladesh, there were separatists (Kuki-Chin National Front) in southeast. They were smashed by Bangladeshi army recently.

Anyway, this is 2024. We have removed that Indian agent known as Sheikh Hasina.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There are some Bangladeshis alive who have seen 3 liberations of their country. What a nation of warriors.

It won't be long till they march and liberate their brothers in Indian occupied Beng. Lal Saboj flag will be flying over Kolkata brothers this is my prediction it may not happen in my lifetime ( only 50%) so I have asked my eldest to bump this thread when the time comes and I am no longer here.
 
It won't be long till they march and liberate their brothers in Indian occupied Beng.

Sure, take it. West Bengal is filled with rowdies and dissidents anyway.

In return, we'd like to have Pakistan-occupied Kashmir please.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sure, take it. West Bengal is filled with rowdies and dissidents anyway.

In return, we'd like to have Pakistan-occupied Kashmir please.
I'm Pakistani.

This beef is between Bangladeshi and Indians. I'm just making a prediction.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There are some Bangladeshis alive who have seen 3 liberations of their country. What a nation of warriors.

It won't be long till they march and liberate their brothers in Indian occupied Beng. Lal Saboj flag will be flying over Kolkata brothers this is my prediction it may not happen in my lifetime ( only 50%) so I have asked my eldest to bump this thread when the time comes and I am no longer here.

My grandfather's generation received liberation from British Empire.

My father's generation received liberation from Pakistani establishment.

My generation received liberation from Sheikh Hasina. I consider Hasina far worse than British Empire and Pakistani establishment.

Alhamdulillah. Bangladesh is free now and may it remain that way.
 
There are some Bangladeshis alive who have seen 3 liberations of their country. What a nation of warriors.

It won't be long till they march and liberate their brothers in Indian occupied Beng. Lal Saboj flag will be flying over Kolkata brothers this is my prediction it may not happen in my lifetime ( only 50%) so I have asked my eldest to bump this thread when the time comes and I am no longer here.

We squash the Pakistanis in wars.
You think Bangladesh can withstand the Trishul for more than a few hours?
 
reading material.


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.'"

Bharat entered the Pakladesh war like Brock Lesnar in Royal Rumble.

Cleared house in no time. F5, supplex city and the white flags were out.
 
Bharat entered the Pakladesh war like Brock Lesnar in Royal Rumble.

Cleared house in no time. F5, supplex city and the white flags were out.

Not even close.

India entered the war at the end (when war was almost over). They won it same way Joginder Sharma bowled the final over of 2007 World T20.
 
There are some Bangladeshis alive who have seen 3 liberations of their country. What a nation of warriors.

It won't be long till they march and liberate their brothers in Indian occupied Beng. Lal Saboj flag will be flying over Kolkata brothers this is my prediction it may not happen in my lifetime ( only 50%) so I have asked my eldest to bump this thread when the time comes and I am no longer here.
understandable given pak miserable failure in taking on India.

I'd be hoping for things like this too if my country was a basketcase with a begging bowl.

Sad really
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Should have let Pakistan army continue to do what they were doing to the Bangladeshiz.

Hindsight but many in Bharat believe this now.

The Bangladeshis were never good.
Agree. IMO it was a bad idea to liberate all bangladeshis

West was desperate to keep Pakistan together. should have made deal for taking in Hindus with lots of funding and let Pakjabi muslims do what they wanted to bengali muslims.

Would have bled pak as country and taken them to their current state a lot sooner.
 
Can you show me which points you have made that you want me to address?
That India should have let Pak muslims slaughter Bengali muslims.

It might have broken down Pak faster and turned pak into the basket case it is now by as early as mid 80's possibly
 
That India should have let Pak muslims slaughter Bengali muslims.

It might have broken down Pak faster and turned pak into the basket case it is now by as early as mid 80's possibly
That's up to India isn't it?

Not sure what I can address here.
 
That's up to India isn't it?

Not sure what I can address here.
being a pakistani, would have it have been better for punjabi muslims to finish slaughtering bengali muslims?

I could be wrong, it might have actually been good for pakistan as country.

Whats your take?
 
being a pakistani, would have it have been better for punjabi muslims to finish slaughtering bengali muslims?

I could be wrong, it might have actually been good for pakistan as country.

Whats your take?
The slaughter of bangladeshis was wrong and they rightfully gained their freedom.
 
The slaughter of bangladeshis was wrong and they rightfully gained their freedom.
I'm not asking if it was right or wrong. I'm asking would it have better for pakistan to not be broken by India and suffer a humiliating surrender
 
I'm not asking if it was right or wrong. I'm asking would it have better for pakistan to not be broken by India and suffer a humiliating surrender
Long-term trying to maintain one country with India in the middle would have ended in disaster anyway.

Now, many years later, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis have made amends, and India is surrounded on both sides by nations that have an intense dislike.

So I think the situation worked out ok in the end.
 
Long-term trying to maintain one country with India in the middle would have ended in disaster anyway.

Now, many years later, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis have made amends, and India is surrounded on both sides by nations that have an intense dislike.

So I think the situation worked out ok in the end.
I think India is ok with being surrounded by Pak and bangladesh in their current state

both are basket case economy wise with no light at the end of the tunnel

coming back to the slaughhter of bengali muslims by punjabi muslims, was it sanctioned by the divine? or was god thinking it was ok for the slaughter to happen as punjabi muslims were helping US and China achieve peace?
 
I think India is ok with being surrounded by Pak and bangladesh in their current state

both are basket case economy wise with no light at the end of the tunnel

coming back to the slaughhter of bengali muslims by punjabi muslims, was it sanctioned by the divine? or was god thinking it was ok for the slaughter to happen as punjabi muslims were helping US and China achieve peace?
It was a heinous act.

I think its important to seperate religion and politics from these acts.

For example, someone thinking like you do could ask if it is sanctioned by Hinduism to prop up corrupt dictators, meddle in the affairs of your neighbours and then give those dictators refuge as Modi and the BJP have done. However, sensible people won't go down this route.
 
It was a heinous act.

I think its important to seperate religion and politics from these acts.

For example, someone thinking like you do could ask if it is sanctioned by Hinduism to prop up corrupt dictators, meddle in the affairs of your neighbours and then give those dictators refuge as Modi and the BJP have done. However, sensible people won't go down this route.


What you did to Bangladeshiz was brutal but look at them even after the phainty you have them they’re still inhumane and attacked vulnerable minority Hindus there. Maybe 1971 Pakistanis knew them better and were trying to eradicate the Bangladeshi community before they could be obnoxious people in the future.
 
India is surrounded on both sides by nations that have an intense dislike.
In case you were wondering why I think India should not be worried.

Pak and bangladesh is not going to fix this for a couple of decades even if they make a sincere effort.

Not that Pak or bang govt have ever been sincere about anything.OOSKidsMap.jpg
 
I think India is ok with being surrounded by Pak and bangladesh in their current state

both are basket case economy wise with no light at the end of the tunnel

coming back to the slaughhter of bengali muslims by punjabi muslims, was it sanctioned by the divine? or was god thinking it was ok for the slaughter to happen as punjabi muslims were helping US and China achieve peace?


Bharat surrounded by hostile and mighty Pakistan , Bangladesh. We are shivering. :yk


IMG_6019.jpeg
 
Long-term trying to maintain one country with India in the middle would have ended in disaster anyway.

Now, many years later, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis have made amends, and India is surrounded on both sides by nations that have an intense dislike.

So I think the situation worked out ok in the end.
I actually wouldn't mind it.

Let Bangladesh prosper so that these thousands and thousands of Bangladeshi immigrants entering into North East illegally changing whole demographic scenario could be stopped.

The more Bangladesh prospers, the better for all of us because it's time, other countries stop taking liabilities of Bangladesh.
 
Back
Top