| Atlantique Incident | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Part of Indo-Pakistani wars and conflicts | |||||||
| . An Atlantique plane belonging to the Italian Navy. The downed Pakistan Navy plane was of the same type. |
|||||||
|
|||||||
| Belligerents | |||||||
Pakistan
Pakistan Navy |
India
|
||||||
| Commanders and leaders | |||||||
| LCDR Mehboob Alam †[2] LT Farasat Ali †[3] |
Sqn. Ldr.P.K. Bundela Fl. Lt. S. Narayanan |
||||||
| Units involved | |||||||
| Squadron No. 29 Atlantic, PNA | No.45 Squadron, IAF | ||||||
| Strength | |||||||
| 1 Atlantic-91PN | 2 MiG-21FL | ||||||
| Casualties and losses | |||||||
| Killed in Action 5 Naval officers 11 sailors |
None | ||||||
|
|
|||||
The Atlantique Incident was an event in which a Pakistan Navy's Naval Air Arm Breguet Atlantique patrol plane, carrying 16 people on board, was shot down by the Indian Air Force for alleged violation of airspace. The episode took place in the Rann of Kutch on August 10, 1999, just a month after the Kargil War, creating a tense atmosphere between India and Pakistan.
Foreign diplomats noted that the plane fell inside Pakistani territory, although it may have crossed the border. However, they also believe that India's reaction was unjustified.[4] Pakistan later lodged a compensation claim at the International Court of Justice, accusing India for the incident, but the court dismissed the case in India's favour.[5][6][7]
Contents |
The French-built naval plane Breguet Atlantique (Breguet Br.1150 Atlantique) plane, flight Atlantic-91, c/n 33, of 29 Squadron [8] was one of Pakistan Navy's frontline aircraft, used primarily for patrol and reconnaissance. Atlantic-91 left Mehran (Sindh province) Naval Base in Pakistan at 9:15 a.m. (PST). An Indian Air Force ground radar picked up the flight path of the plane approaching the International Border.[9] Two IAF Mig-21 interceptor aircraft of No.45 Squadron, from the Indian airbase at Naliya in the Kutch region, were soon scrambled by the Indian Air Force.[10] After a series of maneuvers—and a conflicting version of events from both sides—the two jets were given clearance to shoot down the Pakistani plane.[9] At 11:17 a.m. IST (10:47 a.m. PST), nearly two hours after takeoff from Pakistan, the Atlantique was intercepted and an infrared homing R-60 air-to-air missile was fired at it by Squadron Leader P.K. Bundela, hitting the engine on the port side of the plane.[11] This resulted in the aircraft losing control and spiraling towards a crash at approximately 1100 hours PST and approximate location , killing all 16 on board the Atlantic-91, including five officers of the Pakistan Navy.
The incident was the Pakistan Navy's only loss of an aircraft to hostile fire in its history, and the biggest combat-related casualty for the navy since the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971.
The event immediately sparked claims and counter-claims by both nations. Pakistan claimed that the plane was unarmed and the debris was found on Pakistan's side of the border,[12] and there was no violation of Indian airspace. According to the official Pakistan version of events, the plane was on routine training mission inside Pakistan air space.[13] The Pakistani Prime Minister stated during the funeral service of the airmen that the shooting was a barbaric act.[14]
The Indian Air force, however, claimed that the airplane did not respond to international protocol and that the plane acted in a "hostile" manner[15][16], adding that the debris of a downed aircraft could fall over a wide radius.[17] Indian sources also state that the Pakistani Information Minister, Mushahid Hussein, was initially quoted saying that the aircraft was on a surveillance mission.[17] India also accused that the plane violated a bilateral agreement signed between India and Pakistan in 1991. The treaty states that no military aircraft is supposed to come anywhere near 10 km from the border[18] (although Pakistan claimed the Atlantique wasn't a combat aircraft).[4] Indian experts also questioned why a training mission was being done so close to international borders, since all air forces clearly demarcate training areas for flight, which are located well away from the borders.[19] According to them, the Pakistani claim was untenable since the primary role of the Atlantique is for operations over the sea and that to carry out a training flight over land deep inside foreign territory was an indication of its use in a surveillance role.[19] India displayed part of the wreckage of the Pakistani naval aircraft at New Delhi airport the next day. Pakistan however, stated that the wreckage was removed from its side of the border by Indian helicopters.[12]
While Pakistan said that the plane was unarmed and the debris was within Pakistani territory, India maintained that warnings had been given to the Atlantique and that its flight trajectory meant it could have fallen on either side of the border. According to the Indian version of events, the MiGs tried to escort it to a nearby Indian base, when the Pakistani aircraft turned abruptly and tried to make a dash for the border; it was only then that it was fired upon. India claimed that the debris was found in a radius of 2 km on either side of the border and that the intrusion took place 10 km inside the Kori Creek, which is Indian territory. Pakistan requested that the matter be taken up in the UN. Indian officials blamed that there had been previous violations in the area and pointed out that in the previous year a Pakistani unmanned surveillance aircraft had intruded 150 km inside the Indian border, coming close to the Bhuj air base before the IAF spotted it and brought it down with several missiles.[17]
Indian analysts state "flare-ups" in the Rann of Kutch region were routine, and despite bilateral agreements, both Indian and Pakistan had conducted air intrusions in the past. Thus, the fact that the Atlantique was shot down, despite coming close to the Indian border, came as a surprise.[17] Some Indian analysts stated that the Atlantique was nearly destroyed in 1983 on a similar encounter and noted other close encounters and violations from Pakistani naval planes.[20][21][22]
Some experts stated that the Atlantique was probably conducting a "probe" on India's air defence system, mainly the radar equipment in the border area; however, they advised that it was not part of any planned aggressive military action by Pakistan.[23] Foreign diplomats who visited the crash site noted that the plane "may have strayed into restricted space", and that Islamabad was unable to explain why it was flying so close to the border; they however added that India's reaction to the incident was not justified.[4]
On the day following the attack, an IAF helicopter carrying journalists to the site of the attack was attacked by the Pakistan Army with a surface-to-air missile. Pakistani officials asserted that two Indian jets had intruded into Pakistani airspace near the Atlantique wreckage site, along the border between the Indian state of Gujarat and Pakistan's Sindh Province, and were then fired upon by Pakistan. International and Indian television journalists traveling in the chopper said the aircraft shook severely and a flash appeared in the air, suggesting a missile had been fired at it.[24] The IAF thus aborted their mission to display Atlantique wreckage on Indian soil.[23]
Following this, and the rising tensions in the area coupled by the fact that the Sir Creek was a disputed territory, both the countries' militaries near the Rann of Kutch and nearby were put on high alert.[14] Pakistan sent a company of soldiers, equipped with both laser guided and infrared homing shoulder-fired surface-to-air missiles, to the site near the border.[25] Coming barely weeks after the Kargil Conflict where both nuclear armed countries fought high altitude warfare, this incident was seen with growing concern around the world. The U.S. State Department termed the subcontinent as being in a state of "continued high-stakes tension."[14]
On September 21, 1999, Pakistan lodged a compensation claim at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, accusing India of shooting down an unarmed aircraft. Pakistan sought about $60 million in reparations from India and compensation for the victims' families. India's attorney general, Soli Sorabjee, argued that the court did not have jurisdiction,[26] citing an exemption it filed in 1974 to exclude disputes between India and other Commonwealth States, and disputes covered by multi-lateral treaties.[27] In the buildup to the case, India also contended that Pakistan had violated the 1991 bilateral agreement between Pakistan and India on air violations, which states: "Combat aircraft (including, Bombers, Reconnaissance aircrafts, Jet military trainers and Armed helicopters) will not fly within 10 km of each other’s airspace including Air Defense Identification Zone."[18]
On June 21, 2000, the 16-judge Bench headed by Gilbert Guillaume of France ruled—with a 14–2 verdict—upholding India's submission that the court had no jurisdiction in this matter.[5][28] Pakistan's claims were dropped, without recourse to appeal, and the outcome was seen as a decision highly favourable to India.[7][6][29] The Pakistan government had spent close to 25 million Pakistani rupees (approx. $400,000) on the case.[30]
The next day, Pakistan fired missiles on one of the three helicopters carrying journalists into the region. Pakistan said that it fired on Indian fighter jets that were escorting the helicopters and had come inside Pakistani territory.[4]
In India, the incident made the two pilots of the MiG-21s into instant heroes.[17][31] On October 8, 2000, the prestigious Vayusena medal was awarded to Squadron Leader P.K. Bundela. The medal was also awarded to Wing Commander V.S. Sharma (the fighter controller who tracked the Atlantique, guided the pilot and ordered him to attack the plane) and Squadron Leader Pankaj Vishnoi, the helicopter pilot who recovered a part of the Atlantique's debris from the marshy border regions of the Rann.[32]
The downing of the Pakistani aircraft came at a particularly bad juncture for the Pakistani Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif, who was already under attack from politicians for ordering a withdrawal of its troops from Kargil. Two months later he was deposed in a bloodless coup d'état by Gen. Pervez Musharraf.
|
|||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
