Exclusive: Details of LoC killings that came before Poonch ambush
Even as fresh skirmishes rage along the northern reaches of the Line of Control, new details are emerging on the controversial killing of four Pakistani men on the Line of Control, an incident which is believed to have set off a spiral of clashes culminating in Monday’s lethal ambush of troops near Chakan-da-Bagh in Poonch. Pakistan has alleged that the four men were kidnapped by Indian troops operating across the Line of Control.
Police documentation exclusively obtained by Firstpost suggests that Zafran Ghulam Sarwar, Shah Zaman, Muhammad Faisal and Wajid Akbar may have been killed near Katwar Post, a forward position along the Line of Control in the Macchel sector, along the Neelam river, late on the night of 29 July.
Firstpost had broken news, on Tuesday, about concerns that the alleged killings and skirmishes which followed it may have triggered off a cycle leading to the killings of five Indian troops in Poonch-sparking off the worst India-Pakistan crisis in months.
In a First Information Report filed on 30 July, Indian troops said they had killed four unidentified Pakistani intruders. The FIR records the army’s statement that it recovered a AK-56 assault rifle, three pistols and a 12-bore shotgun from the group.
“You would expect terrorists to carry weapons like the AK-56″, a senior Jammu and Kashmir-based army officer said, “but I can’t understand what they’d be doing with a 12-bore gun, which is typically used for hunting small prey”.
He also noted it was unusual for an infiltrating group of four terrorists to possess only one assault rifle, and no grenades or communication equipment.
The army is accused of abducting four Pakistani men and killing them. PTI
Local residents, who helped bury the bodies after they were handed over to local police through a special police officer attached to the army, said at least two of the men were wearing rubber flip-flops-again, unusual gear for men who had infiltrated mountain passes leading through the rugged Neelam valley.
The FIR was signed on behalf of the 56 Rashtriya Rifles by its adjutant. The Rashtriya Rifles, drawn from various army formations, is generally deployed on counter-insurgency duties inside Jammu and Kashmir. However, the 56 Rashtriya Rifles operates up to the fencing running along the Line of Control.
It remains unclear, though, if the four men were, as Pakistan claims, innocent local residents who strayed close to the Line of Control while collecting herbs. Local residents say the men could also have been out poaching musk-deer, a common-if illegal activity. Intelligence officials based in Jammu and Kashmir had earlier told Firstpost that there was reason to believe the four men had been kidnapped in a cross-border operation, targettng individuals helping cross-border infiltrators.
The alleged kidnapping took place in the midst of a series of sweeps targeting groups of jihadists who had made their way across the Line of Control into the Hafruda forests above the north Kashmir town of Kupwara. In the last week of July alone, twelve jihadists were killed in northern Kashmir’s Kupwara district–levels of infiltration
not seen in years. Five terrorists were killed short of Hema Post, on the Line of Control in Kupwara. The infiltration surge,
as Firstpost recently revealed, has led to the first uptick in violence levels through Jammu and Kashmir since the near-war of 2001-2002.
New Delhi has so far offered no official comment on the controversy, while Jammu and Kashmir Director-General of Police Ashok Prasad will be probed only if the government orders an investigation.
Fighting between the two armies continues along the Line of Control, with both sides trading small-arms fire at Kamalkot, near Uri, last night and this morning. Two Pakistani soldiers
are reported to have been injured in the latest exchanges.
Low-grade skirmishes have broken out regularly since January, when Pakistani troops beheaded two Indian soldiers, Lance-Naik Hem Raj and Lance-Naik Sudhakar Naik, in an ambush.
Later, in February,
Pakistan alleged that one of its soldiers had been executed in cold blood after accidentally straying across the Line of Control and being taken prisoner. India, however, disputed this version of events.
“We detected some suspicious movement near the LoC inside our territory and the challengers from our side fired”, said Lieutenant-Colonel Rajesh Kalia, a spokesperson for the Indian army.
Late last month,
Pakistan complained that “unprovoked” Indian fire had led to the death of Sepoy Asim Iqbal in the Nazia Peer sector, near the town of Rawlakote. India, however, said the firing began in response to an infiltration attempt.
Experts say the fighting is driven by both sides jockeying for tactical advantage along the Line of Control-a process in turn underpinned by the need of Indian troops to dominate possible infiltration routes, and the Pakistan army’s efforts to deny them those vantage positions.
Last year, in October, an escalatory spiral developed when Pakistan complained of new Indian border works at Charunda, in Uri. India responded that the works were purely defensive, intended to prevent illegal border crossings–among them, one of an elderly villager who left Charunda to be with her sons across the Line of Control. The unresolved dispute led to exchanges of fire, which eventually escalated into shelling and the killings of soldiers on both sides.
The November 2003 ceasefire, Indian diplomatic sources say, was based on an unwritten “agreement,” which in essence stipulated that neither side would reinforce its fortifications along the Line of Control –a measure first agreed to after the 1971 war. In 2006, the two sides exchanged drafts for a formal agreement–but the talks have stalled.
Pakistan speaks with velvet tongue, attacks with iron fist
Escalating incidents of aggression on the western frontier make it imperative that we separate the wheat from the chaff of political rhetoric before we err into the abyss of diplomacy with a neighbour whose unprovoked hostility is once again being glossed over by the Congress-dominated UPA Government. Islamabad is speaking to New Delhi with a velvet tongue and an iron fist. We must not permit a lame duck Government to heap scorn upon our dead heroes by surreptitiously resorting to another ‘Sharm el-Shaikh’.
Note that despite the friendly noises emanating from Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif during his election campaign, the most memorable act of the new regime was the allocation of Rs 61.35 million to the Jamaat ud Dawa (JuD) by the Punjab Provincial Government in June 2013, ostensibly for social work at its Markaz-e-Taiba centre at Muridkey.
The province is governed by the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz. The JuD is the parent body of the banned Lashkar-e-Tayyeba, whose chief Hafiz Saeed is believed to have masterminded the November 2008 terror attack on Mumbai. Pakistan defended the allocation saying that the JuD was not proscribed by the UN Security Council, and that it had appointed an administrator to run the Markaz-e-Taiba, thought Pakistani media said JuD was effectively in control of the place.
This startling event should have set the paradigm for New Delhi’s assessment of the kind of set up Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif would be made to preside over by the powers that control the State and institutions in Pakistan. It does not take a rocket scientist to recall that Nawaz Sharif was reigning in Islamabad when the Kargil misadventure took place, either without his knowledge, or with his reluctant consent. His attempt to stand up against a formidable section of the Army resulted in his exile to Saudi Arabia. To expect such a man to deliver peace and goodwill is an exercise in self-delusion.
The latest outrage saw five Indian jawans (four of them from the 21 Bihar Regiment) ambushed and killed in Poonch sector on August 6. Yet, Defence Minister AK Anthony spoke of terrorists in Pakistani military uniforms, thus continuing the UPA’s policy of toeing the Western line of soft-peddling Pakistani terror attacks at the cost of the national interest. How can any terrorist organisation operate from Pakistani territory without the backing of the Army and the ISI? Even if there was no involvement of the Pakistan army in the Poonch incident, New Delhi knows it is incorrect to speak of non-State actors when we are suffering State-sponsored terror.
There seems an obvious link with the American attempt to exit from Afghanistan with dignity by discouraging Taliban attacks on its retreating soldiers. An obvious strategy is to divert the jihadis to another frontier by providing alternate ‘soft targets’ in India. It is well known that Washington is keen to talk to and clinch a deal with the Taliban which is causing discomfort in New Delhi. According the intelligence sources, Lakshar-e-Tayyeba is already operating in Kabul with logistic support from the Haqqani network, which is close to Pakistani intelligence. The attack on the Indian consulate in Jalalabad on August 3 is being seen in the light of this collaboration.
This is why one takes with a pinch of salt the claim that India initiated the ‘dirty war’ preceding the Poonch ambush by allegedly kidnapping four “innocent herb collectors” (Zafran Ghulam Sarwar, Wajid Akbar, Mohammad Wajid Akbar and Mohammad Faisal) in the Neelam valley on July 28, by crossing the Line of Control. This is supposed to be the reason for Pakistan’s ambush of August 6, much as the supposed beheading of Pakistani jawans by India (in Kargil and other places) was supposed to explain the beheading of an Indian jawan and murder of another in the Mendhar sector in January 2013.
Interestingly, both claims on behalf of Pakistan originated in India, and not in Pakistan. The same source claimed that after the disappearance of the herb gatherers, another five men (possibly guides for the jihadis trying to cross over) were shot dead by Indian troops in the same area, 500 metres on the Indian side of the LoC. The men are unidentified and the bodies have not been recovered.
It is pertinent that increasing ceasefire violations by Pakistan in Jammu & Kashmir seem to accompany the escalated rhetoric from Chief Minister Omar Abdullah for a political solution to the so-called problem of J&K and withdrawal of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act. The election of a new Government in Pakistan has seen increased attempts by jihadis to infiltrate into India; hence increased vigilance by the Army and increased skirmishes on the border.
In this context, Defence Minister Antony cut a sorry figure when he ascribed the attack to “terrorists along with persons dressed in Pakistan Army uniform”, even as the Army spokesman said that 20 heavily armed terrorists launched the attack in concert with “soldiers from Pak Army”. Sadly, the Army was probably pressured to revise its statement to conform to that of the Minister.
And the unseemly haste with which Foreign Minister Salman Khurshid ignored Islamabad’s insulting claim of ignorance of the attack and said the two neighbours should not treat each other as “untouchables”, betrays the UPA’s anxiety to resume the stalled dialogue, without any commensurate advantage to India. New Delhi has already agreed for a meeting between Prime Ministers Manmohan Singh and Nawaz Sharif at New York in September, on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly meeting, as well as for talks on the Tulbul navigation project / Wullar Barrage and Sir Creek issues.
It would be in the fitness of things to leave all dialogue to the next Government.