By Col R Hariharan
[Here is a summary of my comments made to print
media and on TV on the India-Pakistan standoff, after two Indian soldiers were
killed by Pakistani troops on 8 January 2012.]
On the
killing and mutilation of soldiers
This
is not the first time Pakistan army has indulged in barbaric acts like
beheading captured Indian soldiers, particularly in Jammu and Kashmir.
Unfortunately, it has become a part of the Pak military culture while handling
Indian soldiers taken prisoner. They had carried in such inhuman acts before.
Captured soldiers were blinded and pushed back alive to the Indian lines during
the 1971 War. The torture and mutilation of Lt Saurav Kalia before killing him
in the Kargil War in 1999 is well documented. In 2009 they did this again; and
now this is one more such gruesome incident.
Why
does the Pakistan army do such things?
We
should not see this as a standalone action of some misguided soldiers. Pakistan
army for long has nursed a grudge to avenge its decisive defeat in 1971 War at
the hands of Indian army. Even the Kargil War has its roots in this
mentality. And in the eyes of average Pakistani the unresolved Kashmir issue
provides sufficient grounds to ignore such aberrations of Pakistan army.
Pakistan army has exploited this attitude and the latent fear of India to
perpetuate its existence as a powerful extra constitutional authority to
control the way ‘democracy’ operates in the country.
In
this respect Pakistan army is totally different from Indian army which
functions under the elected government. So we cannot expect Pakistan army to
behave like its Indian counterpart.
Pakistan
had been facing a terrorist attacks mainly from two groups: the Tehrik
–e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), popularly known as Pakistan Taliban and the Lashkar
e Jhangvi (LJ), an anti-Shia Jihadi terrorist group. The TTP, a predominantly
Pashtun group, aims to destabilize Pakistan state and establish an Islamic
government based on Sharia and operates from bases in Federally Administered
Tribal Area (FATA) along Afghan border. It has been attacking government and
military installations with considerable success. The LJ, a predominantly
Punjabi outfit with Taliban connections, has mainly targeted the Shia
population. It has claimed responsibility for the 10 January 2013 bombings in
Quetta and in northern Swat Valley, killing in all 125 people and injuring 270.
Pakistan army is currently carrying out operations against these two
organizations. In addition to this, since December 2012, the army has been
intensified its operations against Baloch nationalists fighting for an
independent Baluchistan.
Perhaps
this has generated recent reports of Pakistan army considering terrorism as the
number one threat to the country. While this sounds plausible as terrorism is
becoming an existential threat to Pakistan, qualitatively counter-terrorist
operations and conventional military operations are different as chalk and
cheese. So the question of Pakistan army relegating India, which has nuclear
capability, to the second place in its strategic threat perception does not
arise.
Whatever
that be, the Pakistan army’s reported change of its stance against India has
come under severe criticism from fundamentalist right-wing political groups as
well as terrorist brain trusts masquerading as humanitarian and social
organizations in Pakistan.
As J
and K is a perennial and popular hate symbol, Pakistan army could be indulging
in some violent acts in J and K to divert the flak it has been facing from
fundamentalists. This gains credibility when we see in December 2011 as
many as four terrorist infiltration attempts were neutralized in J and K and 11
terrorists were killed.
On
Pakistan government’s response to the incident
There
are two aspects in the response. First, Pakistan Foreign minister has flatly
denied the involvement of Pakistan army in the incident across the LoC. Second,
she has offered to get it investigated by the UN Military Observers Group
(UNMOGIP) in Kashmir.
The
reaction is not surprising. It is typical of Pakistan. Pakistan has denied its
involvement in every attack where terrorists based in Pakistan, supported by
the Inter Servies Intelligence (ISI) and trained by the army have been
involved. Despite strong evidence Pakistan had been dragging its feet over
prosecuting the Pakistani culprits who masterminded the 26/11 Lashkar attacks
in Mumbai.
The
Foreign Minister’s offer to get the incident investigated by UNMOGIP is at best
specious and at worst mischievous. She knows fully that India’s firm stand
against outside intervention in bilateral issues between the two countries. She
may also be hoping to revive the UN interest on the Kashmir issue, which had
faded from UN agenda quite some time ago.
An
Indian media commentator has indirectly suggested that the building of a border
check post by Indian army on the line of control (LoC) in J and K was objected
to by Pak army as it violated the 2003 Ceasefire Agreement. And they opened
fire when Indian troops went ahead with the construction. The whole chain of
events followed from that, hea has added. This is simplistic.
India’s
defence ministry has denied this conjecture. Bases of jihadi terrorists
continue to exist in Pakistan occupied Kashmir across the Indian border. Troops
deployed there remember the lessons of Kargil War and are duty bound to prevent
infiltration by these terrorists.
Unless
Pakistan removes the terrorist camps and disband the outfits, Indian army’s
priority will be to ensure all actions are talem to prevent infiltration across
the border.
India
must tell Pakistan that it should also conform to the letter and spirit of the
ceasefire agreement when it talks about it. And India has to take adequate
measures to safeguard the sanctity of its borders.
Shout India
break off peace initiatives?
India
and Pakistan share not only geographic borders but common historical, cultural,
religious, and social experience as well. They have to exist in peace and amity
lest they fritter away their common assets. This is the reality. Unfortunately
the wounds of Partition have left deep scars in the psyche of both countries.
In
Pakistan, the lingering suspicion about India not reconciling with the
existence of Pakistan has conditioned its politics and thinking of large
sections of the people. In India, a strong antipathy to Pakistan permeates
thinking both in political and public sphere.
However,
after both countries acquired nuclear capability, both countries seem to be
aware of the dangers of escalating military confrontation to full scale
conventional war. So there is greater realization among the people and
mainstream political parties that building better relations is the only option
for the good of both the nations as well as the region.And both countries have
embarked on building peaceful relations between them.
The
need for such win-win relationship has become urgent as changes in the
strategic scene in Af-Pak region looks imminent when American and NATO forces
pull out from Afghanistan 2013-14. In all likelihood Taliban-led jihadi
groups could stage a comeback and become more aggressive. In view of this, both
India and Pakistan have strategic imperatives in ensuring that this does not
affect their national interests.
There
had been a number of roadblocks coming up now and then in the peace building
process mostly due to the strong military influence in Pakistan’s body politics
and terrorist forays on India emanating from Pakistan. So there are always
periodic up and down swings in peace moves.
Despite
these setbacks, both countries have invariably bounced back. Now also this
process is on and some progress has been made in lifting trade restrictions for
Indian goods, and in adopting more liberal visa policies. Pakistan cricket team
has visited India after a long time; and an Indian team is scheduled to tour to
Pakistan. However, these initiatives have not been allowed to bloom in full due
to persistent parochial and security considerations.
India-Pakistan
relations have security, political and international dimensions. It is
essential that any incident affecting in one of these dimensions is assessed in
its own context before any precipitate action is taken that would stall the
peace building process.
However,
this does not mean India adopting a soft approach when its soldiers have been
meted out barbaric and inhuman treatment. We should strongly react and send a
clear message that India would not tolerate such conduct from Pakistan.
Is
India’s response soft?
India
has always avoided a knee jerk reaction to border confrontations. But this is
not a run of the mill incident; it is an inhuman act by Pak troops. As has
become the common practice, the prime minister has maintained his silence. Defence Minister Antony has come out with a strong
statement. The Army Headquarters has also reacted promptly to set the record
straight. Air Chief Marshal NAK Browne, chairman of the Chiefs of Staff
Committee and Air Chief, has warned that the country might have to look at
“some other options for compliance” if Pakistan breached the 2003 Ceasefire
Agreement.
But if
past experience is any guide, this does not mean Indian army would be allowed
to respond fittingly to discourage such Pak adventurism. After all, in the case
of Saurav Kalia’s, the Indian government responded so weakly that even 13 years
after the incident his father, a veteran soldier, has to come on public media
and appeal to the prime minister for action. Still Ministry of Defence and
Ministry of External Affairs is playing round robin on the Kalia issue.
One
can see the continuing lack of coordination even in the response to the current
incident. Even as the Defence Minister made a strong statement, Foreign
Minister Salman Khurshid made it clear India would not be “pressured by wild
calls for revenge” over the killing and mutilation of two Indian soldiers. Of
course, he tried to mellow it down by making a statement sympathetic to the
dead soldiers. This proves that the priorities of foreign policy are not
inclusive of defence sensitivity and at best comes in a lower order.
Thus even the ‘strong statement’
would appear to be a tepid response at best. But that is business as usual as
far as defence matters are concerned in this country, where we have a unique
system where civilians take decisions on strategic security issues with the
service chiefs only on listening watch. As the government ethos appears to be
guided by Rudyard Kipling who wrote the duty of the soldier was “not to reason
how and why but to do and die” soldiers are just doing that. And that is the
tragedy.
Future course
The
LoC continues to be restive in J and K. Firing across the border continues; in
military terms that would indicate probably cross border infiltration attempts
are continuing. The terrorist activity has started again in Kashmir. This time
they appear to be choosing soft targets like village sarpanchs. They have been
threatened with death if they do not resign. Already two sarpanchs have been
killed by terrorists.
The
ruling Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) is completing its full five year term.
Cashing on the public anger at civilian casualties due to American drone
attacks on Pakistani terrorist targets, Imran Khan, leader of the Pakistan
Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI), has gathered huge popular support. He could threaten
the successful return of PPP as winners in the coming elections. So the PPP
government will probably be cautious in dealing with India as the election
nears.
The
army is an important external factor that conditions Pakistani response to
India. The army would also like to avoid being branded as going soft on Indians,
particularly when it continues its counter terrorist against some of the jihadi
terrorist groups outside its orbit of control.
Given
this complex scene across the border, we can expect more local skirmishes along
the J and K border. However, we need to handle such incidents dispassionately
and with greater alacrity; there is no need to bend over backwards to appease
Pakistan. Instances of intrusions by Pakistan army or terrorists should be
dealt with firmly keeping in mind national security considerations.
Indian
government will have to work out its Pakistan policy afresh taking into
consideration the dynamics of impending changes in Af-Pak region. It has to
take into confidence all major political parties in evolving this.
The
credibility of the government and political class is increasingly being
questioned by the public who are impatient with the sloth and indifference in
governance. So while responding to any India-Pakistan security standoff, the
government has to show greater sensitivity and spruce up its act in
communicating to the public.
Written on January 12, 2013
Courtesy: South Asia Analysis Group Paper No 5361 dated January 14, 2012
Courtesy: South Asia Analysis Group Paper No 5361 dated January 14, 2012
2 comments:
Dear Colonel,
Very good write up on the prevailing situation in our border with Pakistan. You are correct in your assessment of inability of the Government of Pakistan in controlling their Army. But don't we have some remedy under the provisions of Geneva convention for the human right violations during peacetime or under the prisoner war or under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 passed by the UNO ? I for one believe war is not a solution for all conflicts.
Right or wrong we are destined to live with Pakistan for ever.
Well, I do not know whether there is any military or civil protocol established between the two neighboring nations to defuse tensions concurring due to skirmishes of minor nature like crossing borders by mistake. If there is one we can take up the matter under the same to defuse the tension, before it is politicised by the "shout brigade"..
Regards,
Balasubramanian A,
Bangalore.
Post a Comment