Talk:Operation Desert Hawk

The result should be Pakistani victory based on the outcome
This was a clear Pakistani victory in the Rann of Kutch as India withdrew after Pakistan captured all the strategic outposts across the Rann. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ironman993 (talk • contribs) 11:46, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * @Ironman993 Yes LeUnOis (talk) 19:21, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Sources for rewrite

 * McGarr, P. (2013). Triumph and tragedy: The Rann of Kutch and the 1965 Indo-Pakistani War. In The Cold War in South Asia: Britain, the United States and the Indian Subcontinent, 1945–1965 (pp. 301-344). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
 * Rudra Chaudhuri (2019) ‘Just another border incident’: The Rann of Kutch and the 1965 India–Pakistan War, Journal of Strategic Studies, 42:5, 654-676
 * Farooq Bajwa (2013) From Kutch to Tashkent: The Indo-Pakistan War of 1965 (pp. 65-95) London: Hurst
 * Maganbhai Ishwarbhai Patel Vs. Union of India, SCI, 1969 AIR: 783
 * The arbitration award
 * Executive summary in “India and Pakistan: Award in Rann of Kutch Arbitration.” International Legal Materials, vol. 7, no. 3, 1968, pp. 633–705.
 * A summary (and reflection) by the Sec. Gen. in Wetter, J. Gillis. “The Rann of Kutch Arbitration” The American Journal of International Law, vol. 65, no. 2, 1971, pp. 346–57.

TrangaBellam (talk) 11:21, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Shaukat Riza's book on the 1965 melees.
 * https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/vlr34&div=20

"Operation Dessert hawk" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Operation_Dessert_hawk&redirect=no Operation Dessert hawk] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 19:38, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

The main headline should be operation dessert hawk
This is historically known as operation dessert hawk and it should only be named as such. Some user changed this to ran of kutch conflict. That is wrong as its named as operation dessert hawk in all history textbooks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.58.203.88 (talk) 02:39, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Reversion to Ceasefire
Hi there It appears you reverted an edit that cited a Pakistani victory in Operation Desert Hawk its self, with the mention of a ceasefire agreement as well. You claimed that there was cherrypicking, superseding of previous cited sources, POV pushing, and the result not needing that much elaboration. Lets address the cherrypicking. I quite literally included excerpts to provide a basis of the claim of a Pakistani victory in the operation its self due to the length of the sources, in which I still linked them if someone wished to research further. That's not "cherrypicking" when both such sources agree with the basis of a Pakistani victory in the Operation itself and I'm just quoting excerpts. If thats cherry-picking then majority of Wikipedia articles wouldn't exist by that logic. Secondly, I did not supersede previous cited sources. I maintained a ceasefire agreement in the result with cited sources and excerpts from them, as well as utilizing sources used previously in the article that backed a ceasefire. That just shatters the claim of superseding cited sources. Thirdly, you claimed this was POV Pushing. It seems you are the one POV Pushing leaving the status only as a "Ceasefire", ignoring Pakistan's success in their objectives and an Indian recognition of such, and the capture of posts along the Kanjarkot Stretch by Pakistan. This an article literally about the Operation itself, not the whole Indo-Pakistani War of 1965. Thats clear bias and cherrypicking. Lastly, you stated that the result did not need to be elaborated that much. If you didn't want a lengthy result, you just shorten it without cherrypicking. Leave the three most crucial factors. Pakistani victory (In reference to the Operation itself), Ceasefire Agreement (In reference to the agreement that ended hostilities between both countries), and the further deterioration of relations that led to the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965. With your points refuted, and my wish to avoid an edit war as to respect the rules and basic dignity of this encyclopedia, I request you to revert your edit as per points above, and simply shorten the result if you find it too long to the three factors mentioned above. Thank you. MrGreen1163 (talk) 15:21, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * No, what you have been told correctly identifies the problems with your edits. You do not address the issues flagged of misrepresenting and falsifying the source and POV pushing with your lengthy rejoinder, which thus falls flat. The source you have used did not make the claim of a Pakistani victory. It's an account of an official Indian historian that is encapsulating the Pakistani perspective of the war and how its false sense of one-upmanship led it to a war with India in which it suffered terribly.
 * How Pakistan construed the results is immaterial so long as scholars are not willing to agree with its assessment. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 20:25, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * There is no "construing of the result" unless you are making the implication that Pakistan failed to achieve its objectives? This article is not the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 in itself, this refers solely to the Operation conducted by Pakistan in which it achieved in its objectives of testing the capabilities of the Indian Army which it defeated in combat in the Rann. As we know, Pakistan used Operation Desert Hawk as a basis to launch the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965, which did not go as planned for the Pakistani army, as it failed to achieve its objectives in Kashmir. Your denial of Pakistan's successes is basic POV pushing in itself by highlighting the political resolution of this conflict but neglecting the military outcome. If you make the claim this is immaterial as per scholars not agreeing with this assessment, I can gladly provide additional sourcing to back Pakistan's victory in the Rann of Kutch in April 1965. MrGreen1163 (talk) 02:14, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I also forgot to bring up the following excerpt from the article its self. "On 24 April, Pakistan launched "Operation Desert Hawk" a decisive thrust towards the Indian posts in the area deploying an infantry division and two armored regiments equipped with Patton tanks and field guns. The Pakistan Army captured four more posts and claimed the whole Kanjarkot stretch. With poor logistics and inferior military hardware, India had no other option than to retreat after offering decent resistance.". This seizure of posts along the whole Kanjarkot stretch with an Indian retreat before the negotiation of a ceasefire is not what you warrant a military victory for one side? However it seems, in the 1947-1948 Indo-Pakistani War, India was in a favorable position before the enforcement of a UN-mandated ceasefire and that is labeled as an Indian victory, but the same is not applied here? Utilizing the claim that scholars do not agree with the assessment of Pakistani successes is simply not true.
 * Footnotes:
 * 'Just another border incident': The Rann of Kutch and the 1965 India–Pakistan War. "The Indian forces' retreat validated the view held by many in Pakistan that India no longer had the stomach for a fight.[62] Stories of India's hasty retreat made headlines in major Pakistani papers.[63] British officials in Karachi were equally taken-aback by India's poor military performance in the Rann.[64]"
 * "The Pakistani attacks from 17 April unnerved both military and civilian leaders in New Delhi. Indian Chief of Army Staff, J. N. Chaudhuri, told Chester Bowles, the U.S. ambassador to India, that he was 'faced with a crisis'. The reality of Pakistani Chaffee tanks descending on the feebly defended Indian positions in the northern part of the Rann had got the better of India's senior-most army officer. India had no armour in the area. Chaudhuri asked for U.S. political intervention, especially, as he forcibly argued, since Pakistan was using American military equipment that was to be reserved for self-defence, or to fight the Soviet Union.[69] Further, Chaudhuri made it clear that India had found itself in an unenviable position in the Rann."
 * "the success in the Rann 'encouraged the Pakistan government to revive international interest in the Kashmir dispute'."
 * Rann of Kutch Conflict
 * "6-7 March 1965: 51 Brigade moves to Rann of Kutch area
 * 14 March 1965: Indians construct Sardar Post
 * 9 April 1965: 51 Brigade's attack on Sardar Post
 * 19 April 1965: 50 Indian Para Brigade moved from Agra to Biar Bet area
 * 23 April 1965: 6 Brigade's raid on Saira Bet and Gullu Talai
 * 26 April 1965: Biar Bet captured by Pak troops
 * April - May 1965: Indian and Pakistani forces deployed on borders
 * 30 June 1965: Rann of Kutch Agreement; forces withdrawn from borders"
 * https://eds.s.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=20&sid=96876550-753c-414a-9b6c-f36498fe1596%40redis&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#AN=109885913&db=f6h (One could associate this with a biased point of view however it does give a detailed summary of the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 overall)
 * In April 1965, a military encounter took place between the Indian and Pakistani troops in Rann of Kutch where India suffered casualties and withdrew few miles from their forward positions established in territories under claim of Pakistan. Victory in the Rann of Kutch made Pakistani nation jubilant. Indian Prime Minister threatened Pakistan of a war at a time and place of Indian choice.
 * https://www-jstor-org.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/stable/26098410?seq=2
 * "On 6-7 April 1965, Pakistani troops forcibly took the fort, which began the first phase of the war. India reacted with limited force, which was unable to dislodge the Pakistanis. The British helped broker a ceasefire agreement that gave Pakistan modest territorial gains. hed Operation Gibraltar, the best known of the war's three main campaigns. Success in the Kutch moved the war to its main theatre in Kashmir, where Pakistan's army launched Operation Gibraltar, the best known of the war's three main campaigns. Gibraltar involved infiltrating thousands of Pakistani troops in civilian clothes into Kashmir to hit Indian targets and organize Kashmiri rebels against New Delhi."
 * In conclusion, there seems to be a recurring theme of success by the Pakistani army in the Rann of Kutch in 1965. The meaning of success is, "the accomplishment of an aim or purpose", as per the Oxford Languages. As per Oxford Languages, success is a synonym of victory. Pakistan achieved its objectives in the Rann of Kutch in 1965, thus concluding a Pakistani victory in Operation Desert Hawk. Thank you. MrGreen1163 (talk) 03:10, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The poorly organized walls of text you're writing here is not helping your case here, @MrGreen1163. It dissuades people if anything from engaging in the discussion. Chakravorty did not conclude of his own that Pakistan emerged "victorious" in the Rann of Kutch theatre. Brig (R) Usman Saeed's account may be drawn on for writing about Pakistani perspectives on the war and various aspects of its involvement, but not for undergirding the claim of a Pakistani victory, which would require validation by third party academic sources, which you have not provided to us thus far to contest the extant result which is cited to such sources. Regards, MBlaze Lightning (talk) 11:43, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * And to touch on your last point about the Pakistani success being a recurring trope in sources, although you furnish a solitary book review to attest to it, Pakistan may have had successfully conducted itself in the theatre, but to what avail is the question that needs answering. It conceded all its ephemeral tactical gains by acquiescing to the ceasefire brokered by Britain and the UN and ultimately withdrew from the frontiers with India, so did India as part of the mutually agreed upon consensus. MBlaze Lightning (talk) 12:13, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your points as a resolution has been made, and so I'll offer a proposition. Maintaining of the ceasefire agreement, mention of the deterioration of relations that led to the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965, and the important for last, keep the map. (I dont know who added it but it was a cool addition :P) MrGreen1163 (talk) 12:22, 27 November 2023 (UTC)