This document provides background information and key details about the 1965 war between India and Pakistan over the disputed Kashmir region. It discusses the causes of the war, including territorial disputes and Pakistan's desire to take Kashmir by force. It describes some major battles between Indian and Pakistani forces, and notes that the war ended in a stalemate. The aftermath saw international pressure and a ceasefire negotiated in Tashkent that restored the pre-war status quo.

1. Name: Soha Bukhari.
Major: LLB.
Subject: Pakistan studies.
Sub-mitted too: Miss Saba Mushtaq.
Assignment: 1
Date: April, 2018.
Topic: write causes of war 1965

2. 1965 War:
What is war:
Wars have been fought since the beginning of time for a multitude of different reasons. Basically
though, whenever leaders of nations cannot come to a peaceful negotiation to solve a dispute,
other avenues are taken. Unfortunately, these different avenues often result in violent hostilities
called war, where leaders pit their mercenaries or militaries against each other in clashes that can
cost thousands or even millions of lives.
Causes of War
There are many different causes of war and take a look at some historical examples.
1) Imperialism:
One reason for war is when one nation seeks to take advantage of another nation's natural
resources. For example, imperialism is when a developed nation colonizes a less developed
nation for trade or extraction. In 1898, the United States went to war with Spain and took over
Puerto Rico, Guam, Cuba, and the Philippines from Spain. Imperialism can also lead to revenge,
and sometimes the exploited or wronged nation seeks retribution through warfare.
2) Territory:
Ownership of land is a common cause of war. For example, think of all the wars in North
America between Native American tribes and Europeans, and even the European nations
themselves. In the Seven Years War (1756 - 1763), England and France both coveted the Ohio
River Valley, while England and Spain had long been in contention over Florida. With Native
American tribes declaring for either the English or the French and British colonists, the melee
was a truly global conflict. England emerged victorious, gaining Florida and control of the Ohio
3) Resources:
Access to resources can also lead to war. Post World War I, Japan modernized their nation's
military, which depended on gaining new sources of oil for their island nation. Japan also desired
more room to expand their borders to accommodate their exploding population. In the 1930s
and 40s, Japan grabbed Manchuria (China), French Indochina (Vietnam), and the
Philippines. This aggression prompted the United States to issue sanctions, including restricting
the Japanese's access to American oil. As a response, Japan attacked American-held Pearl Harbor
in Hawaii in December of 1941, and essentially spurred the United State o officially join the war
on the side of the Allies against Japan.

3. 4) Nationalism:
Nationalism, or the extreme pride in one's own nation and culture, can be an instigator of war as
well. Nationalism predicated the start of World War I. Europe and the Middle East looked
much different in 1914. Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, and even Germany had different
borders that all included ethnicities like the Slavs and the Turks who all wanted to be
independent. These ethnicities tried to break away from their larger and stronger parent nations.
This led to the start of the greatest war the world had ever known, which dragged all of Europe,
the Middle East, parts of Asia, and eventually the United States into a four year war that claimed
the lives of millions.
5) Religion:
Religion has caused many wars. By the 1600s, the Holy Roman Empire had become a full-
fledged nation that included many European nations who all practiced Catholicism and owed
fealty to the Holy Roman Emperor. However, other factions of Christianity had emerged across
Europe that attracted followers in droves and contradicted Catholic tenets.These factions (called
Protestants) and the Catholic nations of the Holy Roman Empire did battle mainly in Europe
during the Thirty Years War until 1648.The Thirty Years War was over religion. Thirty Years
War Finally, many nations signed many treaties called the Peace of Westphalia that ended the
war, expanded religious tolerance somewhat, and concluded some territorial disputes.
Causes of 1965 War
Introduction 1965 War:
The second Indo-Pakistani conflict (1965) was also fought over Kashmir and started without a
formal declaration of war. The war began in August 5, 1965 and was ended Sept 22, 1965.The
war was initiated by Pakistan who since the defeat of India by China in 1962 had come to believe
that Indian military would be unable or unwilling to defend against a quick military campaign in
Kashmir, and because the Pakistani government was becoming increasingly alarmed by Indian
efforts to integrate Kashmir within India. There was also a perception that there was widespread
popular support within for Pakistani rule and that the Kashmiri people were dissatisfied with
Indian rule.
Background:
The Indian forces intruded into Pakistani area in the Rann of Kutch in April 1965. In a sharp and
short conflict, the Indian forces were ejected. Both the armies had fully mobilized, with eyeball
to eyeball contact. Pakistan proposed cease-fire, India accepted. An agreement was signed: the
forces disengaged. The Award by the Arbitration Tribunal vindicated Pakistan’s Position. Past
midnight on 5/6 September, without a formal declaration of war, Indian Army crossed the
international border and attacked Lahore and Kasur fronts. Pakistan Army and Pakistan Air

4. Force halted the attack in its tracks, inflicting heavy casualties on the aggressor. On 7 September
a single Pakistan Air Force Pilot, Squadron Leader M.M. Alam, Sitara-i-Juraat, in his F-86 Sabre
shot down five Indian Air Force attacking Hunter aircraft in a single sortie, an unbeaten world
record “On night 6/7 September three teams of our Special Services Groups were para-dropped
on Indian Air Force bases at Pathankot, Adampur and Halwara to neutralize them. To relieve
pressure on Lahore front, on night 7/8 September, after crossing two major water obstacles in a
bold thrust, Pakistani armored and mechanized formations supported by artillery and Pakistan
Air Force overran area Khem Karn, 6 to 8 miles inside Indian territory. Vital Indian positions at
Sulemanki and across Rajasthan and Sindh were also captured in bold, swift attacks .On night
7/8 September, 1 Corps of Indian Army launched its main effort east of Sialkot with one
armored and three infantry divisions on our extended 15 Division front, screened only by gallant
3 Frontier Force and B Company 13 Frontier Force (Reconnaissance & Support). 24 Infantry
Brigade (Brigadier A.A Malik, Hilal-i-Juraat) on the move in area Pasrur, rushed 25 Cavalry
(Lieutenant Colonel Nasir Ahmad, Sitara-i-Juraat), on 8 September to delay and disrupt enemy
thrusts. As soon as the presence of Indian 1 Armored Division was confirmed, Pakistan Army
rushed forward to stop the onslaught on a 30-mile front. The biggest tank battle since World War
II was fought on the Chwinda front by 6 Armored Division with under command 24 Infantry
Brigade Groups and valiantly supported by 4 Corps Artillery (Brigadier A.A.K. Choudhry, Hilal-
i-Juraat). The main effort of the Indian Army was blunted, inflicting heavy and troop casualties.
Pakistan Air Force support helped turn the tide of the battle. Before a counter offensive by 6
Armored Division on 22 September could be launched, Indian asked for cease-fire in the United
Nations. India aggression against our international borders without a formal declaration of war
had cost it, apart from heavy personnel, material land economic losses, 1617 sq. miles of
territory as compared to 446 sq. miles of our open and undefended territory. Pakistan Army
captured 20 officers, 19 Junior Commissioned Officers, and 569 Other Ranks.
The war was militarily inconclusive:
The each side held prisoners and some territory belonging to the other. Losses were relatively
heavy--on the Pakistani side, twenty aircraft, 200 tanks, and 3,800 troops. Pakistan's army had
been able to withstand Indian pressure, but a continuation of the fighting would only have led to
further losses and ultimate defeat for Pakistan. Most Pakistanis, schooled in the belief of their
own martial prowess, refused to accept the possibility of their country's military defeat by
"Hindu India" and were, instead, quick to blame their failure to attain their military aims on what
they considered to be the ineptitude of Ayub Khan and his government.
Reaction of Pakistan:
Pakistan was rudely shocked by the reaction of the United States to the war. Judging the matter
to be largely Pakistan s fault, the United States not only refused to come to Pakistan aid under
the terms of the Agreement of Cooperation, but issued a statement declaring its neutrality while
also cutting off military supplies. The Pakistanis were embittered at what they considered a

5. friend's betrayal, and the experience taught them to avoid relying on any single source of
support. For its part, the United States was disillusioned by a war in which both sides used
United States-supplied equipment. The war brought other repercussions for the security
relationship as well. The United States withdrew its military assistance advisory group in July
1967. In response to these events, Pakistan declined to renew the lease on the Peshawar military
facility, which ended in 1969. Eventually, United States-Pakistan relations grew measurably
weaker as the United States became more deeply involved in Vietnam and as its broader interest
in the security of South Asia waned. Iran, Indonesia, and especially China gave political support
to Pakistan during the war, thus suggesting new directions in Pakistan that might translate into
support for its security concerns. Most striking was the attitude of the Soviet Union. Its post
Khrushchev leadership, rather than rallying reflexively to India's side, adopted a neutral position
and ultimately provided the good offices at Tashkent, which led to the January 1966 Tashkent
Declaration that restored the status quo ante. Conflict resumed again in early 1965, when
Pakistani and Indian forces clashed over disputed territory along the border between the two
nations. Hostilities intensified that August when the Pakistani Army attempted to take Kashmir
by force. The attempt to seize the state was unsuccessful, and the second India-Pakistan War
reached a stalemate. This time, the international politics of the Cold War affected the nature of
the conflict.
After war 1965:
The aftermath of the 1965 war saw a dramatic shift in Pakistan's security environment. Instead of
a single alignment with the United States against China and the Soviet Union, Pakistan found
itself cut off from United States military support, on increasingly warm terms with China, and
treated equitably by the Soviet Union. Unchanged was the enmity with which India and Pakistan
regarded each other over Kashmir. The result was the elaboration of a new security approach,
called by Ayub Khan the "triangular tightrope"--a tricky endeavor to maintain good ties with the
United States while cultivating China and the Soviet Union. Support from other developing
nations was also welcome. None of the new relationships carried the weight of previous ties with
the United States, but, taken together, they at least provided Pakistan with a political
counterbalance to India. After Pakistani troops invaded Kashmir, India moved quickly to
internationalize the regional dispute. It asked the United Nations to reprise its role in the First
India-Pakistan War and end the current conflict. The Security Council passed Resolution 211 on
September 20 calling for an end to the fighting and negotiations on the settlement of the Kashmir
problem, and the United States and the United Kingdom supported the UN decision by cutting
off arms supplies to both belligerents. This ban affected both belligerents, but Pakistan felt the
effects more keenly since it had a much weaker military in comparison to India. The UN
resolution and the halting of arms sales had an immediate impact. India accepted the ceasefire on
September 21 and Pakistan on September 22. The ceasefire alone did not resolve the status of
Kashmir, and both sides accepted the Soviet Union as a third-party mediator. Negotiations in
Tashkent concluded in January 1966, with both sides giving up territorial claims, withdrawing

6. their armies from the disputed territory. Nevertheless, although the Tashkent agreement achieved
its short-term aims, conflict in South Asia would reignite a few years later.
Highlights
1.The 1965 war between India and Pakistan is said to be the the one of the most fiercely fought
wars to be fought after World War II. The war was fought on the western front of India starting
from Rann of Kutch to Kashmir.
2. It all started in the month of January 1965 when Pakistani Army started 'Operation Desert
Hawk' in the Rann of Kutch. The main motive of the Pakistan army establishment was to keep
the Indian forces engaged in Kutch so that the Pakistani Army could launch an attack in Kashmir
3.After the misson in Rann of Kutch a force of around 33,000 infiltrators who were mostly from
the Pakistan Army crossed the Line of Control (LoC) from Kashmir in the month of August
and gave it the name 'Operation Gibraltar'. However it's a bitter truth that the Indian defense
establishment came to know about the aggression of Pakistani soldiers only after a week.
4. It was on 28th August 1965, that Indian army opened up its front and went eight kilometers
inside the Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) and took control of strategically important Haji Pir
Pass. It was an important victory for Indian forces since the control in Haji Pir Pass meant that
Indian Army can take control over Muzaffarad.
5. The Pakistani Army also started 'Operation Grand Slam' on 01st September in the Akhnoor
sector of Jammu & Kashmir. The idea was to cut all supply line of the Indian Army and take
Akhnoor under their control. The Pakistani Army started heavy shelling in the Champ and Jerian
region.
6. The Pakistani Army launched a counter attack with its newly acquired Patton Tank the 1965
Indo-Pakistani War was witness to the largest tank battle in military history between World War
II and 1965. The Pakistani army with its fleet of 97 Patton tanks were moved towards Amritsar
after they took control of Khemu Karan and Munnabao.The tank were weighing about 60 tons
and also equipped with 105mm cannon and M60 rifle. The battle of Asal Uttar turned the tide
and also became the graveyard for the Patton tanks in the 1965 India-Pakistan war in favor of
India and ultimately led to the surrender of Pakistan.
7. Hawaldar Abdul Hamid played a crucial role when he in a jeep fitted with a recoilless gun
attacked the heavy Patton tanks in their most vulnerable position and destroyed them. This battle
led to the creation of Patton Nagar (or "Patton City") at the site of the battle. This is because a
large number of Patton tanks fielded by the Pakistani forces were either captured or destroyed at
the scene. He destroyed a total of seven Patton tanks. He was posthumously awarded with the
highest gallantry award of the Country - Paramvir Chakra.

7. 8. However Indian forces were able to subdue the Pakistani tanks and scored a decisive win in
1965. By Sept 22 both sides had agreed to a UN mandated cease-fire ending the war that had by
that point reached a stalemate.
Conclusion:
The official history and the series of books published in the 1990s, a simplistic narrative has
dominated the debate on the decision to agree to a ceasefire. But this narrative is not only based
on one erroneous claim and another unverified assumption, but it also fails to take into account
the stalemate on the war front as well as other military and diplomatic factors that ultimately
influenced the ceasefire decision. As a result, myth had usurped the place of history and the
context in which that history unfolded. The history is that the ceasefire decision was influenced
not by Chaudhuri’s ‘erroneous’ belief that the army had run out of ammunition but by the
combination of the absence of the prospect of a swift victory, concerns about Chinese military
intervention and its consequences, and concerted diplomatic pressure from the major powers.