Pakistan Army Chiefs have compulsively resorted to Kashmir-centric
military adventurism against India based on flawed and misconceived
assessments on Kashmir Valley being ripe for secession from India and a
misreading of firmness of resolve of Indian political leaders in
responding to their military adventurism.
The Pakistan Army supported and facilitated terrorist attacks against
the Indian Army have increased for over a year now during the
incumbency of the General Raheel Sharif, the present Pakistan Army Chief
due to retire in November 2016. In case of General Raheel Sharif what
requires to be noted is that his adventurism is not confined only to
military adventurism against India but also extended to political
adventurism in Pakistan’s domestic politics. For all practical purposes,
he had carried out a ‘soft coup’ against Pakistan’s duly elected PM
Nawaz---reflected in one of my papers of that time. Having carved a
larger than life domestic political image with his disputable
counter-terrorism offensive in frontier regions, General Raheel Sharif
seems to be having second thoughts on living upto his January 2016
public announcement that he will not seek extension. What better way to
get out of his commitment than to escalate tensions with India and
thereby facilitating an extension to be thrust on him. Be as it may,
what is of concern to India as to what impelled the Pakistan Army Chief
to indulge in conflict-escalation with Kashmir Valley-centric contours?
Once again like in 1965 and thereafter, yet another Pakistan Army
Chief has grossly misread that the Kashmir Valley is ripe for secession
from India based on the intensity of the Pakistan Army incited unrest.
Blame for this misreading has to be shared by the Indian policy
establishment in its permissive toleration of Kashmir Valley separatists
like the Hurriyat leaders openly declaring their loyalties to Pakistan.
Greater share of such blame needs to be apportioned to India’s
‘intellectual terrorists’ of Indian opposition parties, media elites and
academics propagating ‘dialogue’ with seditionists. Such Indian
manifestations seem to have fed Pakistani Army Chief’s perceptions that
India was adopting appeasement policies to Kashmir Valley seditionists
out of fear of loss of the Kashmir Valley because the people of Jammu
and Ladakh hate Pakistan.
Against such a contextual background, three questions emerge which
need to be answered initially and these two questions are (1) Has India
lost control of the Kashmir Valley? (2) Is the Kashmir Valley ripe for
secession from India and (3) Are the Indian Armed Forces incapable of
stemming and defeating Pakistan Army’s Kashmir Valley-centric military
adventurism?
The answers to all of the above three questions is in the negative.
India has not lost control of the Kashmir Valley because what is in play
is the Indian democracy’s tolerance of dissent within certain
reasonable limits. The Indian State is strong enough to exercise strong
and effective control over the Kashmir Valley seditionists paid by
Pakistan.
Media reports tend to sensationalise that the Kashmir Valley is ripe
for secession from India and that the Valley populace is alienated from
India, The truth is that the vast silent majority in Kashmir Valley is a
hostage to the terrorising and violence inflicted on them by Pakistani
and some Kashmiri terrorists. If the Kashmir Valley had been ripe for
secession then why did the Valley register nearly seventy percent voting
in the last Assembly elections despite the threats of the terrorists
and seditionists?
The answer to the last question is that the Indian Armed Forces ever
since 1947 have not only stemmed and defeated Pakistan Army’s military
adventurism against India more notably the 1971 War which besides
leading to the creation of Bangladesh (erstwhile East Pakistan) but also
led to 96,000 Pakistani Army Prisoners of War being in Indian Army
custody.
The Uri terrorists attacks by Pakistan Army affiliated Jaish-e
Mohammad brings to a head the crucial question as to how long India can
bear Pakistan Army’s strategy of a ‘Thousand Cuts’ without strong
reprisals against Pakistan and Pakistan Army in particular? This too in
an environment when India today is counted as a an emergent major power
and when Pakistan Army’s repeated military adventurism has incensed
Indian public opinion to a feverish pitch demanding strong retribution.
What are India’s options now?
The Indian electronic media has been alive for the last three days
with panel debates and TV anchors giving out military solutions to
reflect India’s strong reprisals. But then war is so serious a matter to
be left to arm-chair strategists, former diplomats and Army Generals
and so -called academic strategic experts.
When it comes to planning and executing strong Indian military
reprisals, this domain is strictly and exclusively for the Indian Armed
Forces professionals who have spent their lifetime dealing with Pakistan
Army’s military adventurisms credibly and with success. Indian military
responses and their operationalisation to put an end finally to
Pakistan Army Chiefs propensity for Kashmir Valley-centric military
adventurism should be left to the trustworthy hands of the Indian Armed
Forces hierarchy without interference by civilian bureaucrats and
intelligence officials.
The Indian debates over the last few days have focussed on diplomatic
and economic options with the former being highlighted more and being
gloated upon as India’s diplomatic strikes in ‘Pakistan’s diplomatic
isolation’. True, Pakistan stands diplomatically isolated but then in
international relations such developments are transient by themselves
and they also denote an Indian dependency on external powers to execute
policy initiatives that India should put into effect on its own standing
as a regional power and emergent global power.
If India wants to bring about complete diplomatic isolation of
Pakistan and which should be highly visible in South Asia, then it
should give a lead in the boycott of the SAARC Summit scheduled in
November 2016 to be held at Islamabad. Afghanistan and Bangladesh have
advocated such a course. Sequentially, as advocated in my last SAAG
Paper a week back before the Uri attacks that SAARC should be disbanded
and India should strive for a new regional cooperation organisation
minus Pakistan and with no ‘observer status’ for powers external to the
Indian Subcontinent.
The next notable Indian reprisal against Pakistan is that India
should itself designate officially Pakistan as a ‘Terrorist State’ and
apply economic, cultural and social sanctions. India should not as a
supplicant been seen pleading major powers to control Pakistan’s
terrorism against India. Even if US pressures come in the wake of such a
step, they must be firmly resisted. Or, if the US is so concerned to
bail out the Pakistan Army then why has it not secured rendition of
Hafeez Saeed and Massod Azhar carrying sizeable US bounties on their
heads?
More telling and something that would force the Pakistani public at
large to curse the Pakistan Army is for its military adventurism against
India is to forthwith abrogate the Indus Waters Treaty which was thrust
on an unsuspecting Nehru as Prime Minister by United States and World
Bank pressures. India is not the India of five decades ago. India has a
salience today in the global power balance which major powers cannot
ignore just to side with Pakistan. Release of waters from rivers flowing
through India need to be regulated in direct proportion to Pakistan
Army Chiefs amenability to control terrorism against India emanating
from Pakistani territory and disbandment of its Islamic Jihadi
surrogates.
On the above count Pakistan’s strategic patron China would have no
standing or moral voice to protest Indian actions since China itself has
been regulating and diverting waters of the mighty Brahmaputra River
flowing into India from the Tibetan Plateau.
Countering Pakistan Army Chief’s propensity for Kashmir
Valley-centric military adventurism against India has never received due
attention of ‘Psychological Warfare Operations’ to highlight the damage
the Pakistan Army Hierarchies over decades has inflicted on Pakistan’s
nation-building. In the last decade I had written a couple of Papers on
the subject of “Pakistan’s Democracy is a Strategic Imperative of
India”. This should be a special focus beamed at Pakistan to highlight
as to where India has reached since 1947 economically and where Pakistan
too could have reached had it not been for the Pakistan Army constantly
subverting democracy in Pakistan.
The Uri terrorist attacks will not be the last of such Pakistan Army
inspired attacks against India in the Kashmir Valley or elsewhere in
India. The “Kashmir Mantra” is the magical potion that ensures Pakistan
Army’s survival as the dominating force in Pakistan’s domestic dynamics,
chiefly by stoking fears of ‘Hindu India’ domination and destruction of
Pakistan. To deny this mantra to the Pakistan Army, India needs to
fully integrate the State of Jammu, Kashmir Valley and Ladakh as an
integral and inviolable part of the Indian Union with no Special
Provisions. The people of Jammu and Ladakh demand full integration with
the Indian Union. Let here be no Indian ‘Doubting Thomases’ advocating
tinkering with the unanimous Special Resolution of the Parliament 1992.
Concluding, it needs to be observed that while India is rightly
incensed and Indian public opinion demands reprisals against the
Pakistan Army as the patron-saint of all terrorism against India, this
crucial response must be left exclusively to the Indian Armed Forces
professionals and not become an over-kill analysis by TV anchors. In the
same vein, to make this task of the Indian Army easier, the Indian
Government cannot be seen parleying with Kashmir Valley separatist
leaders who ruminate and preach anti-India hatred as Pakistan Army’s
fifth columnists.
By Dr Subhash Kapila
Courtesy: South Asia Analysis
No comments:
Post a Comment