Retired Lieutenant General of the Indian Army Kanwal Jeet Singh Dhillon has said that the date January 19, 1990 will be remembered as the black day in Indian history as the minority pandit community had to migrate from Kashmir.
“January 19, 1990 is the infamous and black date for Indian history. This is the day when the pandit exodus took place. I was a young captain in north Kashmir in September 1988 and also saved some of the pandit families in my area,” the retired army general said during an interview with The Mirrow Now about his recently released book ‘Kitne Ghazi Aaye Kitne Ghazi Gaye: My Life Story’.
The retired general said that there has been a false narrative building that the militancy started on January 19, 1990 in Kashmir.
“This is not the case. I have given data, figures and percentages in my book,” the retired general said.
He said that militancy was prevalent much before January 18, 2019 and in 1988.
“The feeling of animosity, angst against the Indians and anger was there even before 1988 and prevalent in Kashmir. The killings were happening; the militants were getting enrolled and getting training from Pakistan. All this was happening in 1987-1988,” he said during the interview.
When asked why the army was not called in January 1990 to “protect” the minority community, the general said that ‘it was not the army’s domain’.
“There is this question always, why was the army not called? There are laws and regulations which the army follows across the world. Maintenance of law and order in any state where the Disturbed Areas Act or AFSPA Act is not there, the maintenance of that state is for state administration to look after. And the state police have to ensure the protection of the citizens,” he said.
He said that however there are provisions and regulations in the army where the army can be called in by the civil administration.
“If called-in by the civil administration they (army) can be called in for anything starting from man-made or natural disasters, militancy related activities or the blast for maintenance of essential services or in health emergencies.”
“But the state administration has to give it in writing the number of the columns which are required, the duration (when it will start and when it will finish); the location (when and where it can be employed); and after all the work is done they are supposed to requisitioned and the army goes back to barracks,” he said.
He said that the army cannot do things on its own and come out and do things. “It is the responsibility of the state to protect the lives and infrastructure of the people,” he said.
He said that there were additional forces in the state at that time (pandit migration) and ‘if the state would have utilized it some lives would have been saved’.
The retired general said that so and so was the chief minister and ‘he cannot be absolved of all the responsibilities’.

Militancy in Kashmir

Talking about militancy in Kashmir, the retired general said that there was an ecosystem in place and beneficiaries would benefit from that ecosystem.
“There was an ecosystem that was working in Kashmir and there were beneficiaries of that ecosystem within the system. People were not sincere enough,” he said.
He said that after the abrogation of Article 370 all the indices related to militancy are down in Jammu and Kashmir while all the other civil administration indices are in upward trend.
“If this could be done now it could have been done in the past too. We lost soldiers; we lost Kashmiris and the innocent Indian because of this ecosystem. We lost a lot of progress. Economically, we also lost a lot of narrative to a lot of false propaganda to the international community,” the retired general said in the interview.

Pakistan Army

When asked to comment about the professionalism of India’s arch-rival Pakistan’s army, the retired general said that the Pakistan army has no ‘ethos of a professional army’.

“Since 1947, the Pakistan army has never won a single war with India. During the Kargil war in 1999, the Pakistan army refused to take back the dead bodies of its army. It was the Indian army who gave them (deceased Pakistan soldiers) proper burial. Same thing happened in the Kupwara sector. They again refused to take the dead back. These are not ethos of the professional army,” he said.
He said that the professionalism of any defense forces or the army around the world depends on how well they can do the task assigned to them.
“Second, is how well they (armed forces) fall in the constitutional framework of that nation? Like in India, civil control is supreme. The army works on the directions of the civilians and thereafter how to conduct a military operation is up to the military commanders. But in Pakistan, the civilian government is under military control.”
He said that around 93,000 Pakistan army surrendered in 1971. “This is the biggest surrender of a standing army with weapons and equipment,” Dhillon said.

He said that this surrender is the biggest surrender in history after World War II. “If this type of stigma they (Pakistan army) are carrying, I leave it to the judgment of the viewers,” the retired Indian army general said.