Home Blog Page 15

Kulbhashan Jadhav had also planned attack on Pakistani Consulate in Zahedan

Dr. Moeed Pirzada

Islamabad – Indian saboteur, RAW’s Commander Kulbhashan Jadhav had also planned to blow up Pakistani consulate in Zahedan, Iran in a military style attack – Pakistani media learnt this, amidst other unnerving details in background briefings and question answer sessions organized to explain Kulbhashan’s planned meeting with his wife and mother.

RAW officer’s wife and mother will finally meet him, in Pakistan’s foreign office, on Monday December 25, amidst increasing anxiety in Pakistani political and media circles as to what Pakistani government intends to achieve – through a gesture that is being described as “pure humanitarian grounds”, but which many fear will be used by Indian government for its own propaganda purposes. 

read more: Pakistan demands to see Kulbhushan Yadev retirement record

Though Pakistan’s Foreign Office, in its background briefings has denied that its under any kind of pressure from friendly western countries to provide this access, but the impression remains that this meeting is being granted under some sort of nod from the US  in hope of breaking ice with New Delhi – relations between India and Pakistan have been extremely tense ever since the Hindu fundamentalist government of Narendra Modi took office in June 2014. 

impression remains that this meeting is being granted under some sort of nod from the US  in hope of breaking ice with New Delhi

Indian government’s motivation to capitalize on this moment can be understood. Kulbhashan Jadhav presents an unusual challenge for India’s almost three decade old narrative on Pakistan and South Asia. Indian governments and powerful political establishment in New Delhi have invested heavily into this narrative and have convinced their media, intelligentsia and public at large and through them the whole world that India is an innocent victim of Pakistani sponsored terrorism from Kashmir to Delhi to Mumbai to Kabul. Bollywood has scripted several dozen powerful movies around this theme that have further deepened the sense of “victim hood” of Indian public. Pakistani government agencies kept crying on Indian sponsorship of a proxy war, with its footprint all across Pakistan, from FATA to Baluchistan to Karachi – but no one in the world ever wanted to believe them. 

Indian governments and powerful political establishment in New Delhi have invested heavily into this narrative and have convinced their media, intelligentsia and public at large and through them the whole world that India is an innocent victim of Pakistani sponsored terrorism from Kashmir to Delhi to Mumbai to Kabul.

But Jadhav, a senior officer in Indian Navy (Navy No: 41558Z), assigned to Research & Analysis Wing (RAW) from 2013 onwards, carrying carrying Indian passport (No: L9630722) was arrested from a compound in Mashkel, in Baluchistan, in an area not far from Iranian border in March 2016. A visibly shocked Indian government kept denying his existence for almost two months before admitting that he was indeed an officer with Indian Navy – but then insisted that he had retired and lived at the Iranian port of Chabahar on his own as a businessman. Diplomatic circles were planted with the idea that Pakistani ISI has seized him from high seas; social media sites in the region speculated that Afghan Taliban may have captured him and handed him to Pakistanis; after all “his carrying his passport with him on a covert mission makes no sense”.

But a Pakistani Letter of Assistance (LOA) in January 2017, before the finalization of trial against him, demanded to see evidence of his retirement from Indian Navy, statement of his former Naval Reporting officer and as to how he was in possession of an Indian passport under the Muslim name of “Hussain Mubarak Patel”, an identity he used for entering Iran. Indian government never officially responded – verbally it only demanded consular access. 

But a Pakistani Letter of Assistance (LOA) in January 2017, before the finalization of trial against him, demanded to see evidence of his retirement from Indian Navy,

On the separate front, Pakistani authorities took up the matter with their Iranian counterparts who assured them that the intelligence and covert operations cell Kulbhashan Jadhav headed, at Chabahar, under the umbrella of “Kaminda Trading Company” was identified and neutralized. 

read more: Indian conditions in response to Pakistan’s gesture to allow Yadev meet…

But real information poured out of Kulbhashan who had revealed his identity the moment he realized that his captors in Mashkel were ISI officers. Those familiar with the circumstances told media that he had calmly asserted in sophisticated English: “I am an officer with Indian Navy, and you need to treat me as an officer”. Realizing that his luck has ran out, and consular access will not be available to him, any time soon; information then quickly poured out of him. He told his Pakistani investigators that he joined Indian Navy in 1991, and became part of Naval Intelligence soon after the attack on Indian parliament, he started undercover operations, with Naval Intelligence, from Iranian port of Chabahar in 2003, but was not formally inducted into RAW till 2013 – however he was familiar with how the TTP attack on Mehran Base was organized by RAW in 2011; an attack in which terrorists had specifically targeted Pakistan’s expensive and limited naval surveillance capability by destroying its P3-Orion planes. (though its not clear, if he played a direct role in its organization) 

“I am an officer with Indian Navy, and you need to treat me as an officer”.

Kulbhashan’s expertise lay in naval warfare; the nature of his set up, under the cover of “Kaminda Trading Company” reveals RAW’s forward strategic thinking – and a clear sense of direction. With the buildup of Gawadar port, in Musharraf’s time, Pak-China vision on regional trade integration was unfolding; RAW’s strategic mandate was to create sufficient destabilization inside Baluchistan and especially along the coastline so that Pak-China strategic design could be frustrated – and cell under Kulbhashan was just one element of that wider game plan.

RAW’s strategy included political, financial, technical and logistical support to Baluch insurgents to beef up their sabotage capacities to paralyze Pakistani law enforcement agencies, to disrupt gas installations, electricity supples, road transport, construction works and to play up with sectarian fault lines. Kulbhashan told his interrogators that how RAW encouraged, planned and facilitated attacks on Shia pilgrims to Iran – and that was to be further beefed up. 

read more: ICJ verdict allows Pakistan to show the real Machiavellian India

Attack on Pakistani Consulate in Zahedan, Iran?

The military style attack planned, by RAW, on Pakistani Consulate in Zahedan, Iran, was to be implemented and later claimed by the Blauch insurgents. Events like these were not only designed to inflame the insurgency, and support by sparking popular imagination of restive sections of Baluch youth but also to create more and more bad blood between Pakistan and Iran – another goal on which RAW worked diligently; and something that has not been understood by most in Pakistani media. During one briefing, which I attended with few others, it was obvious that media persons wanted to hear critical comments on Iran’s role, but Pakistan’s Foreign Office was clear that Iran is far too important and a “No Go Area” for any comment that can be misconstrued. 

But Kulbhashan till his arrest could not manage what could have been his biggest achievement.

RAW’s Strategic Plan for Mekran Coast

Cell operating under the cover of “Kaminda Trading Company” successfully directed grenade and IED attacks in areas of Gawadar, Turbat, Punjgur, Pasni and Jiwani during 2014-15, and attacks against the Radar stations as part of its overall strategy of creating a violent political insurgency. Kulbhashan has given details of the Hundi/Hawala connections, the informal network of money transactions that Indian agency operated from Mumbai to Baluchistan and Karachi via Dubai to support the insurgents like BLA, BSO and others.

But Kulbhashan till his arrest could not manage what could have been his biggest achievement. He was tasked with implementing a plan under which Baluch insurgents who are land locked away from sea board had to be positioned along the coast of Mekran. This could have transformed the nature and capacity of insurgency by providing a bridgehead, and access point from the sea side. RAW had to infiltrate 30-40 highly trained men to facilitate this process and to support the Baluch insurgents who are not the kind of hardened fierce fighters, Islamist minded Pashtun Taliban have been. 

He was tasked with implementing a plan under which Baluch insurgents who are land locked away from sea board had to be positioned along the coast of Mekran.

Meeting with Alok Joshi, Head of RAW

Before his arrest, Kulbshan was reporting to Anil Kumar Gupta, Joint Secretary RAW and with him he met, Alok Joshi, IPS and IB officer, who headed RAW between 2012 and 2014. Plans of Mekran coast destabilization were discussed – the plans that could  not be completed and perhaps forced Kulbhashan to take undue risks. It is believed that, by beginning of 2016, his Baluch insurgent contacts were effectively penetrated by Pakistani ISI and he was lured into the meeting in which he was seized in March 2016. 

Wife & Mother: Media Talk in Islamabad?

Pakistan Foreign Office has offered Indian government that Kulbhashan’s mother and wife can talk to media (Pakistani, Indian and International Media in Islamabad) after the meeting, but it looks unlikely that Indian government will allow that. This episode is the first chink in New Delhi’s narrative war and the mandarins in South Block must be thinking hard how to wriggle out of it. Pakistani foreign office is eagerly waiting for whatever position South Block will adopt after the meeting. 

Note from the Editor: This report is the result of writer’s several separate interactions; background briefings from Pakistani law enforcement, intelligence and Foreign Office; no fact can be ascribed to any single agency. 

A Meeting on Christmas Night Dacca, 25 Dec 1962

Dr. Moeed Pirzada |

“Mujibur Rahman was now in his elements. He said that the purpose of calling the meeting was to hand over to me a top secret letter to be forwarded to the Prime Minister of India in a diplomatic bag…I told him that apart from me, more importantly, it would be seen by two other officers in the Indian Diplomatic Mission in Dhaka before it was forwarded to the Prime Minister. Mujib asked who the two officers would be in the High Commission in Dhaka. With some hesitation but only to earn their trust I gave Mujib and Manik Mia the names: Mr Sourja Kumar Choudhury, the Deputy High Commissioner of India who was the Head of Mission in Dhaka and Colonel SC Ghosh, the Station Chief of Indian Intelligence in East Pakistan…” Banerjee, Mr. Sashanka S. India, Mujibur Rahman, Bangladesh Liberation & Pakistan (A Political Treatise) Kindle Edition.

Few in Pakistan or for that matter in India, have ever heard the name of Sashanka S. Bannerjee. And they can certainly be forgiven; he was not a Bollywood celebrity, nor a famous politician, nor the kind of intellectual that matters. His writing is full of self glorifying pontification, nauseating bigotry and hatred for Pakistanis, more specifically Punjabi Muslims of Pakistan; he hides his religious and racial prejudices under several confused notions of democracy, secularism and ambiguous mantras of “shared values” – but he definitely earns a bit of place, a few centimeters may be, in the intertwined, twisted and painful histories of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Sashanka Bannerjee tells us that Pundit Nehru’s team had told Mujib in 1963, that India would be ready to come forward to offer a “wholesome strategic support when a critical mass was achieved”.

Bannerjee deserves these few centimeters, not because his book represents scholarship or great ideas, but because of one strange meeting he happened to be a part of. It was a cold Christmas night in Dacca, on Dec 25, 1962 – exactly nine years before the fateful surrender of Pakistani garrison in the former East Pakistan to Indian forces. Meeting with Sheikh Mujib ur Rehman, on that fateful Christmas night, was arranged by Tofazzal Hossain, remembered in Bangladesh’s history as Manik Miah; he was a Bengali journalist and politician, editor of fiery “Ittefaq” in early 1960’s. His editorial “Rajnoitik Moncho” or “The political stage” was immensely popular and influential at that time – Manik Mian Avenue of Dacca city was named after him, by a grateful Sheikh Mujib after the creation of Bangladesh. Sashanka Bannerjee, was then political counsellor in Indian consulate of Dacca – and someone known to Manik Miah.

Read more: Bangladesh vs Pakistan: What is Hasina’s Real Problem?

Mujib-ur-Rehman was then, in December 1962, not the Bangabandhu, of later years; he was not even the president of Awami League. And this is two years before his supporting Fatima Jinnah in 1964 elections, three years before the 1965 Indo-Pakistan war and almost four years before he came up with his famous “Six Points” – but he was an important charismatic Bengali leader, marked for his fiery oratory; someone destined to play a role in South Asian history. Bannerjee describes this Mujib, pleading for PM Nehru’s material support to declare the independence of Bangladesh from London at the earliest by 1 February 1963 or latest by 1 March 1963, setting up a Provisional Government of a Sovereign Democratic Republic of Bangladesh in exile in London.

This meeting was followed by series of meetings between Sheikh Mujib, Sourja Kumar Choudhury, the Deputy High Commissioner of India (Head of Mission in Dhaka), Colonel SC Ghosh, the Station Chief of Indian Intelligence in East Pakistan and Bannerjee – all in utmost secrecy. Mujib’s top secret letter, addressed by name to Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Prime Minister of India, was forwarded, after some weeks, to Delhi in a triple coded cypher message, delivered to Nehru in his office in South Bloc on the Raisina Hill. Nehru, was then, according to Bannerjee, “in a state of personal shock” after Indian humiliation at the hands of Chinese in Himalayas; hands of Chinese in Himalayas; yet he saw to it that there was no delay in calling a meeting of his top security advisers including his foreign secretary, his intelligence chiefs and military advisers.

Pakistan and Bangladesh started to overcome the agonies of civil war and separation even in Sheikh Mujib’s time, before his painful end.

In the weeks that followed, Mujib became impatient and in his desperation to reach out to Nehru crossed border to have series of meetings with Tripura’s Chief Minister, Sachin Singh, in Agartala – what became famous as “Agartala Conspiracy Case”, since Intelligence Bureau (IB) of then East Pakistan intercepted him on his return journey. Did Mujib’s Agartala meetings with Sachin Singh crystallized action in Delhi is not clear; but a comprehensive response from Pundit Nehru was waiting for him in Dhaka. Our narrator, Bannerjee, was initially disappointed by Nehru’s response to Sheikh Mujib. Shrewd Pundit, Gandhi’s able pupil, and Mountbatten’s trained statesman, conveyed to an eager Sheikh, that the “international situation was neither propitious nor opportune” for Mujib to declare independence just at that time. If Mujib wanted India’s support to be “effective and resolute”, India’s thinking was that he would have to wait for the right moment – Indian PM asserted.

Read more: ‘Let Us Bury the Past, Not the Future’: Pakistan and Bangladesh

But, Nehru clarified: New Delhi stood ready to extend “multi-tiered moral, political, and material support” as needed. However, for the safety and security of the leadership, the strategic partnership must be run within a framework of utmost secrecy with a right of denial as and when required. Indian PM’s team advised that Bangladesh’s road map to freedom should not be rushed. It must be properly calibrated to avoid pitfalls; they argued that Mujib’s heading to London to declare an “Independent Bangladesh” at this stage would not serve any purpose.

It was assessed, by South block, that international opinion would side with Pakistan – a receptive atmosphere was to be created. Mujib was thus advised that he would have to spend a few years building his mass base on a countrywide basis, he had to organize Awami league, on the patterns of Gandhi’s door to door fund raising movement against British; Delhi was prepared to help him train how to conduct “campaigns for enhanced mass membership”- especially in the “rural heartland of East Pakistan”; he had to “create congenial conditions for political action”- an atmosphere in which world would take him seriously and India could act decisively.

Bengali Muslims – inheritors to a proud history, distinct culture, fiery political consciousness and a unique geographical situation surrounded by India from three sides- could not have been governed from “West Pakistan”.

Bannerjee, our narrator, who enjoys few centimeters in South Asian history, thus becomes important, not because of his research but, because he was a direct witness to those interactions and correspondences that took place between an aspiring Sheikh Mujib and Nehru’s core team from the December of 1962 till the end of 1963. His place in history was definitely assured when in early 2011 – while living in London – on 40th anniversary of the creation of Bangladesh, he received a phone call for writing a book; his memoirs. On the other end of the line was Bangladesh’s Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. “She gave me access to her personal archives as she wanted me to write about the liberation of a nation about which little had been written so far,” Bannerjee told, Smitha Verma of Telegraph.

The outcome of his efforts was: “India, Mujibur Rehman, Bangladesh Liberation & Pakistan”, published by Amazon, online, as a kindle edition in end 2011 – to coincide with Bangladesh’s 40th anniversary. Fast forward to March 1971; Pundit Nehru’s daughter and then Prime Minister of India, Indira Gandhi, on 27 March 1971, two days after the ill fated Operation Search Light, by Pakistani forces, in Dacca, thundered in her parliament: expressing full support of her government for the independence struggle of the people of East Pakistan and argued that instead of taking in millions of refugees, it was economical to go to war against Pakistan. On 28 April 1971, the Gandhi cabinet ordered the Chief of the Army Staff General Sam Manekshaw to “Go into East Pakistan”.

Read more: Bangladeshi lawyer challenges the country’s constitutional provision on president appointing SC…

University students, across the world – from LUMS in Lahore to London School of Economics or Oxford in the UK – are taught that it was only then that Indian Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) started using the Indian refugee camps for recruitment and training of Mukti Bahini guerrillas that were to be trained against Pakistani army. But most of the official records of the 1971 war, held at Kolkota, had been destroyed immediately after the war by the Indian Army’s Eastern Command.

The destroyed files, according to army sources, included those on the creation of the Mukti Bahini — the Bangladesh freedom fighters — and all appreciation and assessments made by the Indian army during the war period, the orders issued to fighting formations, and other sensitive operational details. Times of India discovered that only in 2010, when preparations were being made by Indian army itself to welcome the old Mukti Bahni veterans. Army sources discovered that the destruction may have happened when Lt General Jagjit Singh Aurora, the Indian army’s commanding officer on the eastern front, headed the Eastern Command.

Bannerjee, our narrator, who enjoys few centimeters in South Asian history, thus becomes important, not because of his research but, because he was a direct witness to those interactions and correspondences.

Those records, if not systematically shredded, would have revealed when exactly the initial training of Mukti Bahni fighters had started; who trained them, who ordered them, who guided them in the theatre of conflict and how much killing had they done. Politics in Pakistan, Bangladesh and India has prevented a finer understanding of the nature and direction of political change in former East Pakistan – and Delhi’s role in it – that ultimately led to its emergence as an independent state, supported by India. In Pakistan’s peculiar civil- military divide politicians and liberals used widely exaggerated narratives of “genocide” and “rapes” and “surrender” -often referring to Army as if it’s not an institution but a race – to shift blame to their favorite punching bags: generals.

A narrow cast debate, each year on 16th December, focused on the events, of few months leading up to the fall of Dacca, and centered around the personalities of Bhutto, Mujib and Gen. Yahya Khan has prevented to this day a realization that Bengali Muslims – inheritors to a proud history, distinct culture, fiery political consciousness and a unique geographical situation surrounded by India from three sides- could not have been governed from “West Pakistan”.

This disrespect to the disciplines of political science and geography, and inability to learn lessons of history, also fails politicians, civil servants, academics, civil society and media pundits to grasp that Pakistan today needs effective devolution in the form of smaller provinces, (3 million massacre & 3 million rapes) independent city governments like London and meaningful local governments to take its diverse population of 210 million into 21st century. William Drummond, Prof of Journalism at University of California, had also served as Associate Press Secretary to President Jimmy Carter.

A life long awarded journalist, he was Los Angeles Times, Bureau Chief in New Delhi, in 1971-72. In his piece, “The Missing Millions” that appeared in June 1972, (also in The Guardian) he described the frustration of Sheikh Mujib’s government when it repeatedly failed to find any evidence to substantiate “genocide” which Sheikh, Indian politicians and media had been claiming for the past several months. Office of the Inspector General in Bangladesh’s Home Ministry had started its field enquiries in third week of March 1972; till June only around 2000 people came forward with any credible claims of killings of relatives or near ones at the hands of Pakistani Army.

Shrewd Pundit, Gandhi’s able pupil, and Mountbatten’s trained statesman, conveyed to an eager Sheikh, that the “international situation was neither propitious nor opportune” for Mujib to declare independence just at that time. If Mujib wanted India’s support to be “effective and resolute”.

A commission set up by Sheikh Mujib, ended up similarly and realizing that it was only creating embarrassment, it was wound up before the end of 1972. No wonder that Pakistan army’s discipline broke down at several places and ugly incidents of soldiers killing young men treating them as “Mukti Bahni” happened – to institution’s lasting shame to this day. But the narratives of “genocide” Indian political establishment was as true as the story of “Weapons of Mass Destruction” Bush and Blair weaved to justify their attack on Saddam’s Iraq. Pakistan and Bangladesh started to overcome the agonies of civil war and separation even in Sheikh Mujib’s time, before his painful end.

Read more: Islamic parties of Bangladesh threaten countrywide movement if sculpture of Lady…

And in the period 1980-1990’s both states together created and pushed the forum of “SAARC” to balance India’s hegemonic position in the region. When Dr. Sharmilla Bose’s authoritative research, “Dead Reckoning” appeared in 2011, many in Bangladesh and India described that as “revisionist history” and “Blood Telegram” came as a sort of rejoinder in 2013– from some one (Gary Bass) who had no direct relation or ability to judge the events of 1971.

On the contrary, Sarmilla Bose, University of Oxford Fellow, grand niece of Bengal’s famous son, Subhas Chnadra Bose, (nick named Neta Ji), President of Congress in 1930’s, had deep roots in the region – and Bengal. Few have realized that “Shahbag movement” was in reality the “quintessential revisionist effort” that purposefully reenacted a narrative that had died, for want of evidence, even in the life of Sheikh Mujib. But, prime minister, Hasina, backed by an establishment in Delhi, forcefully reconfigured Bangladesh’s politics; by targeting Jammat-e-Islami through witch hunt, sham trials and hangings forty years after the civil war of 1971. Political field was ruthlessly shifted turning Bangladesh effectively into a one party state.

At the beginning of 21st century, both Muslim nations– progenies of the vision of Lahore Declaration of 1940 – await the visions of a new generation of politicians, academics and media to heal the wounds and exorcise demons created by the politics, and strategic goals, of a difficult region. Sashanka Bannerjee tells us that Pundit Nehru’s team had told Mujib in 1963, that India would be ready to come forward to offer a “wholesome strategic support when a critical mass was achieved”.

He, who was initially disappointed by Pundit’s strategic plan, in 1963, argues, while reflecting back after 40 years, that it “was amazing that the road map laid on the table by India and agreed to by Mujib happened to tick like clockwork.

From conceptualization to completion of the mission, both sides worked smartly and with dedication, which helped the liberation struggle take a little over seven short years, beginning in 1963 and ending in 1971, to complete its mission”

Moeed Pirzada is prominent TV Anchor & commentator; he studied international relations at Columbia Univ, New York and law at London School of Economics. Twitter: MoeedNj. This well researched piece has appeared in the December 2017 issue of Magazine “Global Village Space”

Massacre at Army Public School: Questions that continue to haunt?

Dr. Moeed Pirzada |

For Pakistanis, December 16, was always a day of tragedy – and unforgettable pain. On 16th December 1971, Pakistani garrison in Dacca surrendered to invading Indian forces. For past four decades, newspapers and now private TV channels have marked the day by articles, supplements and heated discussions, kind of self-flagellation, on what went wrong. But since the nightmare at Army Public School (APS), on Dec 16, 2014, this has become a day of “Twin Tragedies”.

Pakistanis, after 9/11, once Musharraf sided with the US’s war against Taliban in Afghanistan, has suffered hundreds of terrorist attacks on garrisons, check posts, intelligence headquarters, government offices, mosques, train stations, courts, colleges, parks, and schools but still nothing had prepared them for what transpired in the morning of Dec 16, 2014 at APS, Peshawar. Gunmen of Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), an umbrella group of terrorist outfits, believed to be deriving support from Afghan Intelligence, NDS, barged into the Army Public School (APS), at Warsak Road, Peshawar, around 10am in the morning and started killing.

Mullah Fazlullah, TTP leader, who had claimed responsibility for the attack, two days later, on 18th Dec, 2014, through a video, made on a hill top, somewhere in Afghanistan is still at large.

Survivors and soldiers that fought them out were unanimous, in their description, that these gunmen did not want to take any hostages. They had no demands; they were only interested in killing. By the time, this orgy of flood and fire ended they had killed almost 150 students and teachers – their victims were as young as 6; most ranged in ages between 13 and 16.

Read more: Defeating Terrorism: Pakistan needs new “Road Maps” & a “Visionary Leadership”…?

Much has been written on the barbarity of this blood bath – but none is more moving than an account, “I witnessed the Peshawar Massacre” by Kiran Nazish, of Al Jazeera. She, writing on Dec 17, one day later, reproduced the account of several students who survived; and this reads something like this:

“..We were in between lessons during our first class, when we suddenly heard the sound of shooting, It was very aggressive noise. We did not have time to even imagine what it could be. Within moments as the noise got closer to our class room our teacher told us to hide beneath our desks.’ Get under your desk, fast, get under your desk,’ she said. Some of us cowered. Some of us stood confused and panicked. The whole classroom started asking our teacher “what is happening”. Screaming children from the classrooms next door shocked us. It scared me so much, I could not even scream…Our teacher was just about to lock the door when three militants stormed in the door. They were already shooting, and I saw my teacher and class fellows immediately get hurt. Some of my friends started falling down (after being hit).I played dead for several hours. When the soldiers came to rescue, I could not move and remained still. I did not know if they were real soldiers. And I could not speak. I was very scared…When someone picked me up I kept my eyes closed. It was the army soldiers, I started crying. They took me to my parents…”

TTP gunmen – adjectives like terrorists lose meaning – shot the young students in the head, in the chest, on their arms, on the legs and in the stomach. Since everyone was on ground, and they suspected that among the fallen bodies, many are still alive so they started shooting the bodies- into the skulls.

They shot the teachers forcing students to watch; in at least two instances they burnt a teacher alive. The APS tragedy galvanized a nation leading to intensification of Operation Zarb-eAzb, a rare unity behind a new “National Action Plan” and resumption of hangings of terrorists and other criminals who had exhausted their appeal process and awaited capital punishment. These initiatives in combination lead to a marked reduction in overall terrorist activity across the country – though which action delivered most is less clear.

Read more: Indian proxies are the greatest threat to Pakistan

Despite the enormity of what happened, details are still at best murky. Were there seven attackers that morning or nine? Were all killed when commando units arrived or some of them escaped? Among those who were killed, were they shot or they blew themselves up? Did commandos arrive in 15 minutes as Wikipedia and some Pakistani papers claim or they arrived after couple of hours as some eyewitness accounts mention and as reported by international publications like Al Jazeera – while describing personal accounts.

The APS tragedy galvanized a nation leading to intensification of Operation Zarb-eAzb, a rare unity behind a new “National Action Plan” and resumption of hangings of terrorists and other criminals who had exhausted their appeal process and awaited capital punishment.

Finally, was there a substantive, open ended, enquiry on security lapses? After all it was a cantonment, with many sensitive government buildings around; was any one held responsible and punished? Parents of the children kept demanding a Judicial Inquiry – it never happened.

At least in KP, but nothing happened. Despite more than 20 plus 24/7 News channels, several English and Urdu paper and scores of online publications there is no clarity on these issues – to this day. On 17 December, next day after the APS massacre, Pakistan’s then Chief of Army Staff General Raheel Sharif, accompanied by the Director General of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Lieutenant-General Rizwan Akhtar, went to Kabul to meet with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani and General John F. Campbell, the commander of American and NATO forces in Afghanistan.

Read more: Survival in the age of information warfare

According to news sources in Pakistan, General Raheel had asked for the handover of the TTP leadership and asked the Afghan government to act against hideouts of the Taliban terrorists in its territory. What happened later, there is no clarity. Apparently, the mastermind of the attack, Umar Mansoor Khorasani, was reported to have been wounded in a United States drone strike in Paktia Province of Afghanistan, three years later, on 17 October 2017. He was shifted to an undisclosed location and reportedly succumbed to his injuries. However, Mullah Fazlullah, TTP leader, who had claimed responsibility for the attack, two days later, on 18th Dec, 2014, through a video, made on a hill top, somewhere in Afghanistan is still at large.

Moeed Pirzada is prominent TV Anchor & commentator; he studied international relations at Columbia Univ, New York and law at London School of Economics. Twitter: MoeedNj. This piece appeared in the December 2017 issue of “Global Village Space Magazine”