news details |
|
|
| Army and Ramzan ceasefire | | | Early Times Report
jaMMU, June 1: At whose behest unilateral ceasefire was announced during the month of Ramzan? Reports suggest that "initially, army authorities were not on board but when their serious concerns were addressed at the highest level in the union government the ceasefire was announced with a rider that the Indian army would not initiate operations on its own but if fired upon they would hit back".
As the Ramzan ceasefire announcement came close on the heels of "operation all out" launched by the Indian army many eyebrows were raised and the corridors of power and in the security establishment.
Reports say that "since army had achieved major successes by eliminating a majority of local militant leadership in clinical strikes in the densely populated areas of South Kashmir and parts of North Kashmir security experts warned against the move". "They wanted the Indian army to maintain its supremacy over militant commanders and not give them an opportunity to regroup and refurbish to launch more lethal strikes on the security apparatus. But a section of the political establishment in the state and in the centre prevailed and convinced the decision makers at the top to test the waters in Kashmir valley," reports further say.
Initial assessment clearly suggested the "union government may have won hearts of Kashmiri residents but compromised the security of our armed forces" and that "while these operations were on hatred against the Indian armed forces also came to the fore".
At the same time, during the same time, the army also intensified its cordon and search operations (CASO) to track down the footprints of local militant commanders, reports say, adding that "as joint teams of security forces went on to eliminate key commanders, large crowds started turning up during funeral processions of these militant commanders".
"Sensing more trouble, the security forces set the alarm bells ringing and called for more result oriented operations. As more and more youth were getting radicalized across Kashmir valley, the army authorities had to review their strategy on ground zero and they also started offering militants the option to lay down their arms and even organized direct chats between militants and their families to win them back into the mainstream," reports say.
Reports further say that as part of their counter strategy, "separatist leaders in the valley tried to channelize people's anger against the security forces and mobilized a large number of youth to disrupt anti-terrorist operations in the hinterland" and that in some cases, the youth also pelted stones and disrupted the movement of the Indian army and facilitated easy movement of holed up militants from the encounter site.
It was under these circumstances that the ceasefire was announced. However, one thing is clear: it was the PDP-BJP coalition government which raked up the issue of ceasefire during the month of Ramzan. This notwithstanding the fact that Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharama, and J&K BJP had opposed the idea of unilateral ceasefire taking into consideration the security concerns.
In the meantime, Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh has said there was no ceasefire; it was just a suspension of operations and that the Government of India had not tied the hands of the army and security forces.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
