Recently, we celebrated the 50th anniversary of the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. The ruling dispensation conveniently left out mentioning India’s only woman Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi, and honouring her contribution. I will not delve into their pettiness. They perhaps have their reasons to ignore historical facts because they have far too little from their own past to write home about.
We must never lose sight of the circumstances under which the war, which was among the shortest in the world, was fought. India won freedom for Bangladesh in just 13 days. The war began on December 3 and ended on December 16 when the Eastern Command of the Pakistan military signed the Instrument of Surrender in Dhaka. India was not an economic or a military superpower.
A fighter pilot
I grew up listening to the stories that my father, Rajesh Pilot, narrated about his own experiences as a fighter pilot in the war. He was posted in the eastern sector at Jorhat, Assam. In October that year, less than two months before the war broke out, he was promoted as Squadron Leader.
My father and his colleagues flew a modified de Havilland Canada DHC-4 Caribou for the bombing missions. We didn’t have enough fighter aircraft to do the job, which is why Caribou, a transport aircraft, was pressed into action. I still vividly remember stories of his mission. On December 8, five days into the war, he was leading a mission to bomb 10 crucial locations controlled by the Pakistani military. His call sign was 40 and the radar’s call sign was Good Wife. Somehow the Pakistani side learned about the imminent attack. Few minutes into the sortie, the Air Traffic Control (ATC) told him to begin the descent as opposed to the schedule decided at the pre-flight briefing. As he began the descent, he thought something was amiss. His intuition served him well because down below, the anti-aircraft guns of the Pakistani side were waiting. Inside the cockpit, with his mates tailing him in a formation, he pulled the stick with all the strength. The aircraft shot up. Just then, another message came, “40, this the original Good Wife, please maintain your height as was discussed during the briefing.” The Indian ATC deliberately did not disclose the height. On their way back to the airfield, another message crackled, this time with a distinct Punjabi twang. “40, where are you off to?” And he replied, “Don’t you worry, I’ll be back again tomorrow.”
Meaning of nationalism
The bonhomie, love and respect that I saw between my father and his colleagues in the Indian Air Force was unmissable. They would sit together to chat about the 1971 experiences, and ribbing and calling out each other for the slightest exaggeration in their respective roles.
My father was a second-generation military man. His father was a havildar in the Indian Army and his dream was to see his son become a commissioned officer, something that he could never achieve. Though I joined politics very early on, I too craved to follow my father and grandfather. I wanted to feel the same pride, and the exhilaration of wearing that uniform. That was why I joined the Indian Territorial Army (Unit-124 Sikh) in 2012.
Nationalism is not and cannot be imposed on you; it is something that you grow and live with. It is as organic as a child learning to walk. The chest-beating variety of nationalists may want you to believe otherwise. They forget that Indira Gandhi was an Indian Prime Minister, not a Congress Prime Minister. It is unfortunate that attempts are made to try and diminish her role. The past simply cannot be erased. The military leadership in 1971 was guided by political will from Delhi. It was an unparalleled symphony between the military and political leadership.
Some say that the Congress does not do enough drum beating; that we fail to own our own heroes. I would say nationalism is not and should not be reduced to a competition.
Above the political divide
The 1971 war was not a Congress victory, it was India’s victory. It is a disservice to the country and to all the men who lost their lives in 1971 when the government of the day indulges in a shallow tug-of-war for credit. The country’s sovereignty and integrity are not up for debate; they should remain over and above the political divide.
To this day, the Indian armed forces remains the most well-preserved institution because successive governments have not interfered with its working. And we must do all that we can to maintain this tradition. The Bharatiya Janata Party government was swift to take ownership of India’s air strike at Balakot in 2019, but did it accept or apologise for the intelligence failure that led to the Pulwama terror attack that year?
In 1996, when Deve Gowda was in the Prime Minister’s chair, the government, knowing fully well my father’s connection to the Northeast where he had served for 15 years, roped him in to speak to the National Socialist Council of Nagaland-Isak-Muivah (NSCN-IM) faction. He flew out of the country to carry out the behind-the-scenes talks. After that, Mr. Gowda met the NSCN-IM leaders on February 3, 1997, in Zurich, Switzerland. In August 1997, the NSCN-IM entered into a ceasefire agreement with the Centre, starting what became one of the longest-running peace talks in India. That is Indian politics.
In winter 2001, the Naga leaders returned to India. My father was not around to see his effort bear fruit; he had passed away in a road accident in June 2000. They came to our home, paid their respects to him and candidly said that they returned to India largely because of the initiative taken under the previous government. It was a remarkable moment and left an indelible impression on me.
The current government suffers from incurable amnesia. It forgets the united front that the political leadership put up in face of the worst attack on Indian democracy when terrorists stormed Parliament just over 20 years ago, on December 13, 2001.
Congress president Sonia Gandhi was the Leader of the Opposition. She told Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, “Mr. Prime Minister, this is an assault on Indian democracy. You take whatever action you deem fit. We will support you.” Ideological barriers do not come in the way of national security.
Political manoeuvring in the name of national security can be detrimental for our country. Policies and priorities for national security can’t be compromised because of political advantages or disadvantages.
In the short run, you may make a few gains. The jingoism may seem to provide some political dividends, but in the long run, it will harm the very edifice on which our country and its proud history was built.
Sachin Pilot is a Congress MLA from Tonk
