The 1965 war between India and Pakistan remains one of the most debated and analyzed military conflicts in South Asian history. Fought between August and September 1965, the war was primarily centered around the disputed region of Jammu and Kashmir. While both nations claimed victory, the reality of who “won” the war is far more complex and nuanced.
The conflict began after Pakistan launched Operation Gibraltar, a covert mission aimed at infiltrating forces into Jammu and Kashmir to incite rebellion among the local population against Indian rule. The operation, however, failed to achieve its objectives, and India responded with full-scale military retaliation. What followed was a 17-day-long war involving intense battles on land and in the air, making it the second full-fledged war between the two countries after the 1947–48 conflict.
India managed to launch successful counter-offensives not only in Kashmir but also in sectors such as Lahore and Sialkot. The Indian Army crossed the international border in Punjab and advanced close to the Pakistani city of Lahore, a bold move that demonstrated India’s superior conventional military strength. However, Pakistan also held ground in several key areas and showcased impressive resistance in some sectors, particularly in the use of armored divisions.
Stalemate and the Tashkent Agreement
Despite heavy casualties and significant losses on both sides, the war ended without a decisive military victory for either country. According to most military historians, the war resulted in a strategic stalemate. India had the upper hand tactically and held more territory at the ceasefire, but both sides returned to pre-war positions under the Tashkent Agreement, brokered by the Soviet Union and signed in January 1966.
The Tashkent Agreement, while restoring peace, left many in India and Pakistan dissatisfied. Indian citizens were disappointed that captured territory was returned, while many in Pakistan felt the war had not achieved its primary objective liberation of Kashmir. Field Marshal Ayub Khan, then President of Pakistan, faced domestic criticism, and his position weakened in the years that followed. In India, Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri, who was praised for his leadership during the war, passed away in Tashkent shortly after signing the agreement.
From a military standpoint, India inflicted more damage, captured more territory, and was able to push deep into Pakistani soil. Its air force and ground troops were better coordinated, and it managed to hold strategic advantages by the time of the ceasefire. However, due to the return to pre-war borders and unresolved issues in Kashmir, the conflict is often seen as inconclusive in political terms.
In summary, while India had the tactical and territorial advantage, the war did not result in a clear strategic or political victory for either side. The 1965 war reinforced the volatility of India-Pakistan relations and laid the groundwork for future conflicts, most notably the 1971 war which would prove more decisive.
Ultimately, the 1965 war was less about conquest and more a symbol of the enduring struggle over Kashmir a struggle that continues to define the complex dynamics between India and Pakistan to this day.
