Historical Book Excerpt; Governance of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan

[Joe Shearer]

View attachment 1524

I am looking at this map, and wonder if there can ever be found a solution. I don't think anyone is going to be able to wrestle the lands back from China.

What matters is probably the political will to find a peaceful solution to the area. Exchange of lands and such, but I do not think either of the two countries can do that.

There are two completely opposite motives not to want to find a solution: one, only the enforceable line of control needs to be identified, and accepted by both sides as a working arrangement; two, if there is no solution, who loses? As ever, throughout human history, the stronger power. So it is with Pakistan and India; India is the loser in the ongoing confrontation, and Pakistan the winner. Pakistan does not have to actively seek a solution; with her limited resources, merely by keeping a threat in existence at all times, in all years, she compels India to spend far more than she should, merely to equal what seems to be Pakistani capability. That capability is a myth, but India dare not put it to the test. That is precisely the same case as obtains between India and China. India does not need to find a solution; if China did not have an extremely tactically clever and extremely strategic leadership that cannot distinguish a game of 'go' and real life, she will have to keep on diverting some attention and some energy from her other major issues to keep the Indian pot boiling. It doesn't help matters that her leadership thinks that by doing so, she is impeding India. If they had for one moment thought the unthinkable, and done a mind experiment with peace on the Indian border, they might have jumped up in their chairs and rushed off to mend relations. But no mind experiment, no jump, just the same jejune falling back on seemingly clever, in reality bone-headed stupid calculations of what they are doing to India.....

Added to this is the unpalatable fact that the Chinese side has no solid facts to support their claims to the Aksai Chin area, that was a trade route open to all, controlled by none (except the Dzungarians, briefly); in all the dreary meetings between representatives of the two countries, China has failed to make a case, let alone a convincing case, for her claims on the region.

It is absolutely correct that the exchange of land would solve the problem, other than the uncomfortable fact that it will never happen.

The exchange of land is a bubble, of course; the Arunachal Pradesh tribes have the blood-curdling example of the native Tibetan and of the Uyghur in front of them. They are unlikely to voluntarily WANT to merge with China. So Arunachal will stay where it is, even the highly dubious tacked on portion that is the Tawang Monastery and its economic hinterland. In Aksai Chin, NOBODY lives in the disputed area; the first settlements are those that were part of the ancient Kingdom of Ladakh, and that is far to the west of the Line of Actual Control. In effect, an exchange of territories should be a no-brainer; exchanging a territory where the inhabitants do not want a change in the status quo for a rocky, icy wilderness really shouldn't make any administrator or politician think beyond the recommended 1.5 minutes. But Indian administrators and politicians are caught in a twilight zone, where an index of the deep-rooted decay is given by the government (centre and state governments, without exception) dogged compulsion to file appeals, and finally to resort to a very irritated Supreme Court. The operating rule here is that if an administrator accepts an adverse court judgement, he is judged by his peers and his political masters as a self-impeached traitor.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I understand where you are coming from.... I am just pained at how things have turned out and what forces seemingly have the greatest final involvement in the political setup we have inherited today in the region (I am in no way dismissing all the action preceding it that was indeed one of the greatest if not the greatest modern call to action from the ground up by Bapu and all the efforts that preceded that too)

....my focus is there I suppose,...that painful and most consequential final fumbling of the ball approaching the endzone...rather than all the quite extraordinary persistent action that brought the play there (that still make the overall recollection noteworthy as you indeed are correct to surmise)....

I should have stated that clearly. It leaves immense ripples today, covering the nature of the deeper ocean beyond it....and all too many prefer it this way or are accustomed or desensitized to this being the dominant perception and reality.

How many people truly study the independence movement in the depth it should be...compared to the time they spend living the effects and having thoughts consumed by this partition that has made seeming near-eternal happy putty and wonder clay for the politicians and the most intense immediately harnessed human nature?

Being a stickler for first principles, there is no other way for me to explain how doggedly so many people in our region refuse to think of another one as a human being as the default, give a fair benefit of the doubt to another with as little prejudice as possible....and build up impression from there bottom-up.....rather than the top-down consequence that has enforced top-down collectivist prejudices and judgement of the "others".

The region already had enough material to burden our societies with this already....but it has been saddled even more.

The costs are truly phenomenal when I have moments of clarity to think of what could have been....it is very saddening subject.

No doubt about it, the costs are truly phenomenal.

 

[Saithan]

There are two completely opposite motives not to want to find a solution: one, only the enforceable line of control needs to be identified, and accepted by both sides as a working arrangement; two, if there is no solution, who loses? As ever, throughout human history, the stronger power. So it is with Pakistan and India; India is the loser in the ongoing confrontation, and Pakistan the winner. Pakistan does not have to actively seek a solution; with her limited resources, merely by keeping a threat in existence at all times, in all years, she compels India to spend far more than she should, merely to equal what seems to be Pakistani capability. That capability is a myth, but India dare not put it to the test. That is precisely the same case as obtains between India and China. India does not need to find a solution; if China did not have an extremely tactically clever and extremely strategic leadership that cannot distinguish a game of 'go' and real life, she will have to keep on diverting some attention and some energy from her other major issues to keep the Indian pot boiling. It doesn't help matters that her leadership thinks that by doing so, she is impeding India. If they had for one moment thought the unthinkable, and done a mind experiment with peace on the Indian border, they might have jumped up in their chairs and rushed off to mend relations. But no mind experiment, no jump, just the same jejune falling back on seemingly clever, in reality bone-headed stupid calculations of what they are doing to India.....

Added to this is the unpalatable fact that the Chinese side has no solid facts to support their claims to the Aksai Chin area, that was a trade route open to all, controlled by none (except the Dzungarians, briefly); in all the dreary meetings between representatives of the two countries, China has failed to make a case, let alone a convincing case, for her claims on the region.

It is absolutely correct that the exchange of land would solve the problem, other than the uncomfortable fact that it will never happen.

The exchange of land is a bubble, of course; the Arunachal Pradesh tribes have the blood-curdling example of the native Tibetan and of the Uyghur in front of them. They are unlikely to voluntarily WANT to merge with China. So Arunachal will stay where it is, even the highly dubious tacked on portion that is the Tawang Monastery and its economic hinterland. In Aksai Chin, NOBODY lives in the disputed area; the first settlements are those that were part of the ancient Kingdom of Ladakh, and that is far to the west of the Line of Actual Control. In effect, an exchange of territories should be a no-brainer; exchanging a territory where the inhabitants do not want a change in the status quo for a rocky, icy wilderness really shouldn't make any administrator or politician think beyond the recommended 1.5 minutes. But Indian administrators and politicians are caught in a twilight zone, where an index of the deep-rooted decay is given by the government (centre and state governments, without exception) dogged compulsion to file appeals, and finally to resort to a very irritated Supreme Court. The operating rule here is that if an administrator accepts an adverse court judgement, he is judged by his peers and his political masters as a self-impeached traitor.

I’m just thinking loud here.

I think a solution could be reached if the region was recognized and had it’s own supreme court. Seeing as it is a region with the fore mentioned problems. If the constitutional court gives leeway for this disputed area/region to solve the issue amicably.

This would og course require that referandums can be held.

Though I doubt it’s going to work considering kashmirs status was revoked.

 

[Saiyan0321]

View attachment 1524

I am looking at this map, and wonder if there can ever be found a solution. I don't think anyone is going to be able to wrestle the lands back from China.

What matters is probably the political will to find a peaceful solution to the area. Exchange of lands and such, but I do not think either of the two countries can do that.

Any lands that nation have, is not going anywhere. The area is well guarded and so much blood has been spilled that there exists no question of exchange of land and for what. Lets say that India offers to give the vale of Kashmir, then what can we give in return. gilgit Baltistan, the vale offers water, GB offers water and China and Central Asia.

Frankly the only feasible solution is LOC becomes International line. There will be no plebiscite as India will not concede and anything short of absolute breakdown of a state authority will allow for the annexation by the other.

This dispute is complicated and the egos and historical baggage of two nations tower over this. Victory as @Joe Shearer mentions is the game and you cant have two victors.

 

[Saiyan0321]

I think a solution could be reached if the region was recognized and had it’s own supreme court

Azad Kashmir Supreme Court is already there but it cant do anything in Indian Kashmir because that area is under Indian control. There cant be a merged and united administration because that would be conceding the ground that Kashmir is merged.

From Legal prospective and @Joe Shearer will again say lawyers arguing legally on Azad Kashmir but here is the thing. India asserts the MahaRaja as the rightful government in power whereas Pakistan uses Revolutionary Constitutionalism as brought first by K.H Khurshid, the personal secretary of Quaid E Azam and a major figure in Kashmiri and Pakistan history and it goes that the brutal action of the Maharaja is evidence that the dogra had lost its mandate by the people and that mandate belongs to the revolutionaries of the Muslim conference headed by Ghulam Abbas as their role political party representative and Sadar Ibrahim as the head of Azad Government, the revolutionary government declared and mandated by the people of Kashmir and argued that it is this government that has the fundamental over all of the Princely State of Kashmir and ofcourse this was witnessed with the Karachi agreement 1949 as well and the importance of its signing since Pakistan had legally recognized Azad government as the government in Kashmir, not itself so it needed the sole government and political party aka Muslim Conference Ghulam Abbas the powers that they did and Gilgit Baltistan.

So India says Maharaja based on the recognition of a Princely state and Pakistan says Revolutionary Constitutionalism as the legitimacy for Azad Kashmir. There are two and If India steps back then it is accepting that Maharaja was not the sole authority and its every step it legitimizes in Kashmir will be made illegal and if Pakistan steps back from Azad government then it will accept that the revolutionary government did not have the mandate of the people and thus was illegitimate and Pakistan would loose all legal ground. The thing is the resolutions of 1950s really helped this two government aspect since they recognized Azad government and Azad forces as equivalent to the state government and state forces and ofcourse recognition would mean that both draw their legitimacy as the local authority and this complicated the issue even more.


So here we have the complication. The writ of srinagar cannot be accepted by Pakistan and the writ of Muzaffarabad cannot be accepted by srinagar and this will be another argument if there ever is a solution. K.H Khurshid played a major part in Pakistan Kashmir policy. too bad Ayub three him aside after he didnt make for a good puppet but then again none of them did.

Anyhow the issue is very complicated and as i said, i havent even touched Gilgit Baltistan.

 

[Saithan]

But how did it come to that the region ended up under indian and pakistani occupation. I assume the amount of soldiers just kept increasing over time, but surely at some point, maybe at the beginning there weren’t any soldiers in the area ?

I imagine the independence of kashmir is particular explosive, but all we see in foreign media is the hard indian crackdown on a city/state that keeps calling themselves independent or pakistani.

It is really messed up that UN doesn’t exert an effort for kashmiris.

 

[Saiyan0321]

But how did it come to that the region ended up under indian and pakistani occupation. I assume the amount of soldiers just kept increasing over time, but surely at some point, maybe at the beginning there weren’t any soldiers in the area ?

Pakistani and Indian soldiers? There were none and long before both formed themselves on the map there were the state forces as the state was a princely state so it had some military however it was nothing special since they were vessels to the british and the british didnt allow them a large scale military and secured them from foreign invasions with their own. This is why we hear all the british surveyors when we talk about the northern borders.

by the time Pakistan and India were on the map, it has been months since the beginning of internal dissent which assumed larger scale by august 1947. Most point to the poonch rebellion in august 1947 as the starting point but i have read a few times that the revolts had begun a decade ago on shorter scale and by spring 1947, the villages and various groups especially the Sudhans ( the tribe from which Sardar Ibrahim was) was fiercely rising up . You see the princely state of Kashmir is a construct formed from expansions of the Sikh, Dogra and British Colonialism. The areas that would constitute as Kashmir were often those that would fight amongst them selves or with the tribal inhabitants of xinjiang. If you ever visit Azad Kashmir, you would see many monuments which would highlight the bravery of the locals against dogra and sikh and their brutal occupations and signs of rebellions. For many, the battle had begun in the late 1800s and the British played a major part of it being in glue. Infact if you visit modern Day Gilgit Baltistan, many areas boast that the Dogra didnt have any writ here and the british were the lone factor. So moving on, we have rebellions and revolts which assumed a massive scale in August 1947.

Now when Pakistan and India were formed, there were over 500 princely states in the British subcontinent and Pakistan and India could only be formed of areas that were directly under the British Empire. The Princely states had two options. Join any one of the dominion or be independent. So by the 1930s we had mass political movements as well where we had the Kashmir national Conference and the Muslim Conference, where the former supported integration with India and was sympathetic to India led by sheikh abdullah and the latter supported a muslim union with Pakistan led by Ghulam Abbas and Sardar Ibrahim. All three of them were the founders of the first political party of the kashmir region named the All Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference which was later broken as such and the demand in the 1930s by this party was that the state of Kashmir should merge with India. This was the 1930s.

So you should have a bit of an idea on Kashmir now. The area was very complicated, the dogra rule was not in anyway loved and areas of gilgit baltistan were under british mandate leased by the dogra and lets add more complication. We had three states here which were the State Of Chitral, The state of Hunza and The state of Nagar as Princely state which the dogra and India argues were vessels of Kashmir state and all three heavily reject this notion. So the map itself is a huge simplification of the situation as it was in 1947...


so here we go its august 1947 and the rebellion has begun. world war 2 veterans and Sardar Ibrahim have started a poonch revolt and started expanding to Jammu. Not Kashmir. Jammu. Now during this period Pakistan wanted Kashmir to become part of Pakistan and India wanted Kashmir to become part of India. We had sheikh Abdullah and we had Ghulam abbas and Sardar Ibrahim. The Dogra themselves wanted independence and were crushed down on political dissent and the revolt itself but they struggled against the jammu revolt. During this period, the partition violence itself was at its peak. The Pashtuns of FATA and NWFP aka KPK were getting restless. For them cross the Indus was nothing new especially with no british around and that is an argument for another time. So Akbar khan and a few select politicians met to discuss what to do. It is largely seen that Jinnah was not involved although he did tell his military general douglas gracy or was it frank, anyway it think it was gracey to look into the situation. Gracey states later on that he told jinnah that it cant be done and jinnah did not get involved anymore. Partition was a huge enough mess so we had Akbar khan, sher khan along with other political leaders gauge as to how the situation can be seen militarily. Akbar declares himself largely an architect although Humuyun amin thinks that as presumptious but hey all claim credit for land won. So that was to funnel tribals and arm them into kashmir. Jammu was revolting and Pakistan had the best connectivity straight to srinagar. If it was a military offensive, srinagar would have fallen easily but we sent lashkar of 2000-3000 although some have stated it as far as 20,000 but not it was not that high. maximum would be 5000 and the launching pad was abottabad and they all came on lorries and while Sher khan states that they armed them to the teeth, humyum amin and akbar khan have stated that not all were fully armed since Pakistan had a professional army. You couldnt funnel ammunitions and equipment to equip a large army and not get noticed. They funneled as much as they could and by 18th october they crossed into modern azad Kashmir and by 22 october muzaffarabad had fallen to the tribals and by 24th October, the Azad forces had beaten the state forces in jammu and proclaimed Azad government.

Well as they went forward and stood on the outskirts of Srinagar, the Dogra Maharaja asked for Assistance which Mountbatten only declared to give if Kashmir Accedes, He agreed and Kashmir Acceded to India. India immediately sent its troops to the last airport that was under siege using the lone road path through pathankot i believe ( the partition had granted them a road access to Kashmir from Tehsils which were muslim majority). I think it was here that jinnah asked Douglas to intervene but he refused citing impossible military tactics.

Later on by 1948 september, Pakistan army entered the frey when the tribals had nearly lost all the gains they had made and thus the two armies began their long watch,.

 

[Nilgiri]

Well as they went forward and stood on the outskirts of Srinagar, the Dogra Maharaja asked for Assistance which Mountbatten only declared to give if Kashmir Accedes, He agreed and Kashmir Acceded to Pakistan. India immediately sent its troops to the last airport that was under siege using the lone road path through pathankot i believe ( the partition had granted them a road access to Kashmir from Tehsils which were muslim majority). I think it was here that jinnah asked Douglas to intervene but he refused citing impossible military tactics.

Typo here.

Joe will likely give some input later I feel. This conversation at PDF when done by the well-meaning and well-read pros was quite a sight to see.

 

[Saiyan0321]

Typo here.

Joe will likely give some input later I feel. This conversation at PDF when done by the well-meaning and well-read pros was quite a sight to see.

Yes a typo. I had to go so was writing fast

 

[Kaptaan]

I am looking at this map

I am looking at the map and thinking in the name of Allah did Pakistan lose Kashmir to India?

 

[Saiyan0321]

Typo here.

Joe will likely give some input later I feel. This conversation at PDF when done by the well-meaning and well-read pros was quite a sight to see.

that was a great thread. Too bad it isnt being continued on anymore.

The Kashmir conflict, if we look at the military has many avenues. For example its not just Tribal invasion supported by Pakistan but we have various sections with their own struggles, the most important being the working of the Azad forces and Azad government. One of the most interesting questions that i like to focus on is why didnt Pakistan have Azad government accede to Pakistan?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Pakistani and Indian soldiers? There were none and long before both formed themselves on the map there were the state forces as the state was a princely state so it had some military however it was nothing special since they were vessels to the british and the british didnt allow them a large scale military and secured them from foreign invasions with their own. This is why we hear all the british surveyors when we talk about the northern borders.

by the time Pakistan and India were on the map, it has been months since the beginning of internal dissent which assumed larger scale by august 1947. Most point to the poonch rebellion in august 1947 as the starting point but i have read a few times that the revolts had begun a decade ago on shorter scale and by spring 1947, the villages and various groups especially the Sudhans ( the tribe from which Sardar Ibrahim was) was fiercely rising up . You see the princely state of Kashmir is a construct formed from expansions of the Sikh, Dogra and British Colonialism. The areas that would constitute as Kashmir were often those that would fight amongst them selves or with the tribal inhabitants of xinjiang. If you ever visit Azad Kashmir, you would see many monuments which would highlight the bravery of the locals against dogra and sikh and their brutal occupations and signs of rebellions. For many, the battle had begun in the late 1800s and the British played a major part of it being in glue. Infact if you visit modern Day Gilgit Baltistan, many areas boast that the Dogra didnt have any writ here and the british were the lone factor. So moving on, we have rebellions and revolts which assumed a massive scale in August 1947.

Now when Pakistan and India were formed, there were over 500 princely states in the British subcontinent and Pakistan and India could only be formed of areas that were directly under the British Empire. The Princely states had two options. Join any one of the dominion or be independent. So by the 1930s we had mass political movements as well where we had the Kashmir national Conference and the Muslim Conference, where the former supported integration with India and was sympathetic to India led by sheikh abdullah and the latter supported a muslim union with Pakistan led by Ghulam Abbas and Sardar Ibrahim. All three of them were the founders of the first political party of the kashmir region named the All Jammu and Kashmir Muslim Conference which was later broken as such and the demand in the 1930s by this party was that the state of Kashmir should merge with India. This was the 1930s.

So you should have a bit of an idea on Kashmir now. The area was very complicated, the dogra rule was not in anyway loved and areas of gilgit baltistan were under british mandate leased by the dogra and lets add more complication. We had three states here which were the State Of Chitral, The state of Hunza and The state of Nagar as Princely state which the dogra and India argues were vessels of Kashmir state and all three heavily reject this notion. So the map itself is a huge simplification of the situation as it was in 1947...


so here we go its august 1947 and the rebellion has begun. world war 2 veterans and Sardar Ibrahim have started a poonch revolt and started expanding to Jammu. Not Kashmir. Jammu. Now during this period Pakistan wanted Kashmir to become part of Pakistan and India wanted Kashmir to become part of India. We had sheikh Abdullah and we had Ghulam abbas and Sardar Ibrahim. The Dogra themselves wanted independence and were crushed down on political dissent and the revolt itself but they struggled against the jammu revolt. During this period, the partition violence itself was at its peak. The Pashtuns of FATA and NWFP aka KPK were getting restless. For them cross the Indus was nothing new especially with no british around and that is an argument for another time. So Akbar khan and a few select politicians met to discuss what to do. It is largely seen that Jinnah was not involved although he did tell his military general douglas gracy or was it frank, anyway it think it was gracey to look into the situation. Gracey states later on that he told jinnah that it cant be done and jinnah did not get involved anymore. Partition was a huge enough mess so we had Akbar khan, sher khan along with other political leaders gauge as to how the situation can be seen militarily. Akbar declares himself largely an architect although Humuyun amin thinks that as presumptious but hey all claim credit for land won. So that was to funnel tribals and arm them into kashmir. Jammu was revolting and Pakistan had the best connectivity straight to srinagar. If it was a military offensive, srinagar would have fallen easily but we sent lashkar of 2000-3000 although some have stated it as far as 20,000 but not it was not that high. maximum would be 5000 and the launching pad was abottabad and they all came on lorries and while Sher khan states that they armed them to the teeth, humyum amin and akbar khan have stated that not all were fully armed since Pakistan had a professional army. You couldnt funnel ammunitions and equipment to equip a large army and not get noticed. They funneled as much as they could and by 18th october they crossed into modern azad Kashmir and by 22 october muzaffarabad had fallen to the tribals and by 24th October, the Azad forces had beaten the state forces in jammu and proclaimed Azad government.

Well as they went forward and stood on the outskirts of Srinagar, the Dogra Maharaja asked for Assistance which Mountbatten only declared to give if Kashmir Accedes, He agreed and Kashmir Acceded to India. India immediately sent its troops to the last airport that was under siege using the lone road path through pathankot i believe ( the partition had granted them a road access to Kashmir from Tehsils which were muslim majority). I think it was here that jinnah asked Douglas to intervene but he refused citing impossible military tactics.

Later on by 1948 september, Pakistan army entered the frey when the tribals had nearly lost all the gains they had made and thus the two armies began their long watch,.

Excellent but flawed.

 

[Joe Shearer]

that was a great thread. Too bad it isnt being continued on anymore.

The Kashmir conflict, if we look at the military has many avenues. For example its not just Tribal invasion supported by Pakistan but we have various sections with their own struggles, the most important being the working of the Azad forces and Azad government. One of the most interesting questions that i like to focus on is why didnt Pakistan have Azad government accede to Pakistan?

I could continue, on the basis of the skeletal outline I presented a few posts earlier, but only with the active support of @Saiyan0321 and @Kaptaan; if we get emotional about it, that is a discussion to be kept at arms' length.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Excellent but flawed.

What is it, @Saiyan0321 ? Your post was excellent; the flaw in it is a matter of individual perception, of opinion. My comment was in no way personal; as far as that is concerned, it is already widely accepted that your analysis of situations is of an outstanding quality. If these comments sadden you, I will not comment again.

 

[Nilgiri]

that was a great thread. Too bad it isnt being continued on anymore.

Do not lament because its gone. Smile because it happened.

 

[Saiyan0321]

What is it, @Saiyan0321 ? Your post was excellent; the flaw in it is a matter of individual perception, of opinion. My comment was in no way personal; as far as that is concerned, it is already widely accepted that your analysis of situations is of an outstanding quality. If these comments sadden you, I will not comment again.

Lolzzz relax. The sad emoji for me is expression of pensive situation of events that are described. It was a commentary to all that had happened and in no way directed to your post individually.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Lolzzz relax. The sad emoji for me is expression of pensive situation of events that are described. It was a commentary to all that had happened and in no way directed to your post individually.

 

[Nilgiri]

if there is no solution, who loses? As ever, throughout human history, the stronger power.

Off topic, but I couldn't resist to give a little more wind to these wings:

After the resolving of the Cuban missile crisis, JFK called a meeting of the 5 chiefs of staff...where McNamara asserts this exchange happened:

Kennedy: Gentlemen, we won...I don't want you to ever say it, but you know we won, I know we won...

LeMay: Won? HELL! We should go in and wipe them out TODAY!

(McNamara chuckles at this recollection)

You ever seen that documentary Joe?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Off topic, but I couldn't resist to give a little more wind to these wings:

After the resolving of the Cuban missile crisis, JFK called a meeting of the 5 chiefs of staff...where McNamara asserts this exchange happened:

Kennedy: Gentlemen, we won...I don't want you to ever say it, but you know we won, I know we won...

LeMay: Won? HELL! We should go in and wipe them out TODAY!

(McNamara chuckles at this recollection)

You ever seen that documentary Joe?

No. First I've heard of this exchange. Curtis LeMay was the quintessential Cold Warrior.

 

[Nilgiri]

No. First I've heard of this exchange. Curtis LeMay was the quintessential Cold Warrior.

You likely will find this a good watch: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fog_of_War

It left a deep lasting impact on me...watching it for first time in 1st year college...honestly I have lost track of how many times I have come back to it to watch certain moments, certain footage, certain unnerving or beautiful music accompaniment.

Errol Morris (of "The Thin Blue Line" fame..another deeply consequential production that maybe @Saiyan0321 knows about) really hit this out of the park.

It cemented Philip Glass as one of my favourite composers of all time too.

@VCheng