Former Indian Coast Guard DIG BK Loshali, who had been removed as Chief of Staff Northwest in February 2015, has been court-martialed. He had boasted blowing up a Pakistani boat on 31st December 2014 in a video released by the India Today: “I hope you remember the 31st December night. We blew off the Pakistani boat…we blew them off.” The comment had triggered a huge controversy because it contradicted with Indian government’s version. On January 1, Indian Coast Guard patrol vessels had claimed to have intercepted ‘a suspicious Pakistani boat’ in the Arabian Sea, thwarting what the Indian security establishment said could have been another attempt to unleash a Mumbai-style terror attack. At the time, Indian officials claimed that four men on board of the vessel set it ablaze after an hour-long ‘hot pursuit’ by the Coast Guard.
Immediately after the incident, the Coast Guard had said that it intercepted a suspicious fishing boat 365 km off the Porbandar coast on December 31 night. The story was concocted by the Coast Guard stating: “When the Coast Guard ship fired warning shots and asked the crew to stop and identify, the crew set the boat afire.” India’s defence ministry sources recounted the entire episode as narrated by the coast guard with the addition that “the National Technical Research Organisation (NTRO) had intercepted a conversation from Karachi on transferring vital equipment to the western coast of India. However, the ministry did not say what kind of cargo the boat was carrying, or if the boat was carrying explosives. All it said was “illicit transaction”; but did not even say whether the boat was of Pakistani origin or not.
Even in India, analysts had questioned the Indian government position. Commenting on the mystery of the boat, Ajai Shukla, a noted defence analyst and former army officer had said: “Who knows the story behind the story. We may never discover the truth. But as it stands, the coastguard’s story of the high seas encounter doesn’t stand scrutiny. This is strictly my military opinion.” Another retired senior intelligence official had said: “If it really was a boat carrying terrorists for a 26/11 kind of an attack, its crew would have attacked the Coast Guard ship first, and blown up the boat only after harming the Coast Guard.” The question was also raised as to why the Coast Guard chased the boat when it was on the fringe of India’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ). The EEZ extends up to 200 nautical miles or 370 km.
According to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), a nation can chase or intercept suspicious vessels if they prohibit the host nation’s passage or if they loiter above or under the surface of the sea. That was not the case here, the official said. Anyhow, Indian government failed to sell the so-called logic of saving 26/11-like situation. As per international protocol, the Indian Navy or the Coast Guard can exert limited control for preventing or punishing “infringement of its customs, fiscal and immigration laws and regulations, or can take punitive action against a loitering ship only in the contiguous zone which extends from the outer edge of the territorial sea to up to 24 nautical miles or 44.4 km. Nevertheless, many questions were raised by independent analysts. Anyhow Pakistan’s position has been vindicated.
The incident was strongly rejected by Pakistani Foreign Office terming it as mere propaganda aimed at tarnishing Pakistani’s image. The incident stirred a controversy within India. Indian National Congress initially congratulated the coastguard for putting up a brave act; but after knowing the facts it stated that it had doubts on government’s version of Porebandar incident. The BJP in response stated that Congress supported rather lent credence to Pakistani stance. After 48 hours of the said incident, Indians had come out with another version i.e. the boat that had left Keti Bandar, Karachi could belong to small time smugglers, which negated the earlier version. The media clips showed only fire damage to the boat, whereas in case of an explosion, the small boat could have been torn into pieces. Yet India continued to insist on its version.
Indian officials stated that wreckage and bodies could not be recovered due to bad weather, whereas open source meteorological data had forecasted fair weather. The aim of this stereotype Indian orchestrated event was to create an environment against Pakistan prior to US President Barrack Obama’s visit to India. The objective was to put pressure on Pakistan government on Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi’s bail issue and alleged LeT as an organization posing regional threats. Indian propaganda seems to be part of over-all plan to malign Pakistan of sponsoring terrorist activities in India, whereas no solid proof was provided by Indian authorities about the incident. Inquiry report was not shared with local and international media. The fact remains that India has been resorting to false flag operations in the past especially on the occasion of American president’s visit. In March 2000, few hours before President Clinton was to arrive in New Delhi, similar operation was planned by Indian government.
Thirty six sikhs were killed in Chittisingpora Kashmir by Indian military; and Lashkar-e-Toiba was accused to have carried out the slaughter at the behest of Pakistan military. In the hours immediately after the massacre in March 2000, the US condemned the killings but refused to accept the Indian government’s accusation that it was the work of Pakistani Islamist groups. Indian military had accused five men, what it said, infiltrators from Pakistan, and were killed in a fake encounter and their bodies were found mutilated and burnt. According to New York Times report dated 31st December 2000, the five men killed at Panchalthan were two farmers from Brari Angan, both named Jumma Khan and one of them a man of 60; two shepherds from the village of Halan, Bashir Ahmed Butt and Mohammad Yusuf Malik; and one young cloth merchant from the city of Anantnag, Zahoor Dalal – all belonged to Indian Held Kashmir.