FB   
 
Powered bysps
        Society for Policy Studies
 
 

 
Look who’s talking: If the Pathankot attack had been neutralised fast, wouldn’t the Indo-Pak talks have been safe?
Posted:Jan 10, 2016
 
Print
Share
  
increase Font size decrease Font size
 
By Ashok Malik
 
About the easiest thing to do in New Delhi is to whip up anger against Pakistan. Not that the neighbouring country helps of course, having allowed itself to become a sanctuary for a whole gamut of terrorist organisations that occasionally make incursions into India, as they did into the Pathankot airbase earlier this month. Nevertheless there is a familiarity to the response in the Indian system: loud primetime debates; overdone political posturing (with those in opposition contradicting positions they may have taken in government and vice versa); a call to suspend talks and take “action”.
 
In all this, there is an inevitable desire to cater to the lowest common denominator. Television anchors and politicians alike tend to do this, seeking the applause of those in the proverbial front row. In the short run, this is tempting. In the longer term it reflects poorly on the maturity of the practitioner.
 
It also points to the depressing fact that, despite the passage of years and the election of one government after the other, only cosmetic changes have occurred to the manner in which the Indian polity reacts to a terror attack.
 
Much of what has been described above has happened in the aftermath of Pathankot. The immediate question is will the foreign secretary level talks, scheduled for mid-January, go ahead? India has linked the talks to a Pakistani crackdown on the Jaish-e-Muhammed, a Deoband-inspired Islamist militia that targets India but has also made some common cause with the Tehreek-eTaliban. As such, unlike the Lashkar-eTaiba, Jaish is not completely loyal to the Pakistani state. Nevertheless it is unlikely that the Pakistani army and Jaish will go to war over India.
 
A reasonable expectation would be that Pakistan will take some steps against Jaish operatives and take in custody a few second-rung leaders, doing enough to allow the talks to go through. This would appear a logical course, as neither side really wants to call off talks, and for different reasons. For Islamabad, the fact that the BJP-led government has actually reopened the composite dialogue (now called the “comprehensive dialogue”) is an achievement. As for New Delhi, another false start is avoidable.
 
Frankly, India would have had the luxury of calling off talks – that is, to impose a cost by refusing to speak – if it had already been in a process of sustained engagement in the first place. This has not been the case for the past 18 months, with a course correction being effected only when the national security advisers met in Bangkok on December 6 and then external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj travelled to Islamabad.
If India were to call off talks again, it would go down, in the larger discourse, as one more example of Indian whimsicality. It would leave the international diplomatic community – whose opinion does matter, make no mistake – perplexed.
 
The current dialogue framework has been arrived at by effort and by fate. It differs from previous models in that it offers a direct channel to the Pakistan army through General Naseer Janjua, the new NSA who has a separate conversation with his Indian counterpart, Ajit Doval, on security and terrorism. This track may achieve nothing, but to not give it a chance and reject it so early would be pointless on India’s part.
Of course, such a decision could be spun as one more tactical advance. Even so, a strategy is usually something more than a collection of tactics. On the Pakistan front, the BJP government has shown a consistency of method – and the makings of a strategic approach – only since Bangkok. Neither country can afford to jettison this.
 
There is a second point. If the Pathankot attack had been neutralised within a few hours and not become a prolonged, televised drama, would India still be wrestling with the issue of calling off or not calling off talks? Probably not. As such, if a repeat of this dilemma is to be prevented, aren’t corrective steps incumbent upon India?
 
The reference here is not just to the specifics of the Pathankot counterterrorist operation – that is another discussion and others are having it – it is also about the up-and-down and inconsistent messaging, and the fact that the government was not on top of the narrative as the episode unfolded.
 
A compulsion as it may have appeared at the time, even the decision to postpone border talks with China because of an unrelated attack on a single military installation ended up conveying a much graver situation than warranted. In the period that followed, this only increased – rather than mitigated – the expectations from and pressures on the government.
 
In the past few months, the Modi government has run an energetic Afghanistan policy, and has had a dialogue with old friends of Pakistan, such as the UAE and Saudi Arabia, on the dangers of Pakistan-based terrorist groups. These concerns are finding (limited) resonance in China and the US as well, though much needs to be done before theoretical concerns translate into coordinated action. Yet, for all of this to be taken forward, India needs to be seen as open enough to engaging with Pakistan. That is a critical diplomatic ingredient.
 
Times of India, January 11, 2016
 
 
 
 
Print
Share
  
increase Font size decrease Font size
 
Comments (Total Comments 0) Post Comments Post Comment
Review
 
 
 
 
The first India-China strategic dialogue is to be held on February 22, 2017. This dialogue was proposed during the visit of Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in August last year and it was propagated as a new mechanism for a more comprehensive dialogue between the two countries. 
 
read-more
The Islamic State (IS)  and its ideological affiliates  in Pakistan have claimed responsibility for this attack and threatened that this is only the beginning of such an anti-Sufi /Shia  campaign to exterminate the apostate – or ‘non-believer’ writes C Uday Bhaskar for South Asia Monitor.
 
read-more
spotlight image India has vital interests in the Middle East and going by the spurt in political engagements since May 2014, the region is a top priority for Prime Minister Narendra Modi writes Md. Muddassir Quamar for South Asia Monitor
 
read-more
The recent violence that took place in Nagaland against the 33 per cent reservation given to women is not only sad, but it would certainly hurt the holistic development of the entire State. The recent violence that took place in Nagaland against the 33 per cent reservation given to women is not only sad, but it would certainly
 
read-more
Society for Policy Studies in association with India Habitat Centre invites you to a lecture in the Changing Asia Series by Dr.Pratap Bhanu Mehta, President and Chief Executive, Centre for Policy Research on Asia: Hope for the Future or Prisoner of the Past?    ...
 
read-more
spotlight image Earlier this week, just after United States President Donald Trump’s top adviser on national security resigned in controversy, a European intelligence official asked a reporter the question on everyone’s mind: “I was hoping you could tell me what’s going on over there [in the US].”
 
read-more
It is high time that Taiwan differentiated its position from Beijing’s claim on South China Sea, writes Namrata Hasija for South Asia Monitor.
 
read-more
At the moment, Nigerian President Muhammad Buhari is able to stop the violence by pushing the Islamists to the vast Sambisa forests of the Borno State At the moment, Nigerian President Muhammad Buhari is able to stop the violence by pushing the Islamists to the vast Sambisa forests of the Borno State
 
read-more
Every year during the budget, many defence and strategic experts start clamouring for a higher budgetary allocation for the defence sector and this year was no different. The allocation of Rs 2.74 lakh crore (excluding defence pensions) is being perceived as “too less”. Every year during the budget, many defence and
 
read-more
Column-image

India remians the inflexible bête-noir for Pakistan, yet there are few books by Indian authors that have sought to interpret the prodigal neighbour in a holistic, informed and empathetic manner.

 
Column-image

The line that Mortimer Durand drew across a small map in 1893 has bled the Pashtun heart ever since. More than a century later both sides of that line remain restless. But the mystery behind what actually happened on 12 November 1893 has never ...

 
Column-image

What went wrong for the West in Afghanistan? Why couldn't a global coalition led by the world's preeminent military and economic power defeat "a bunch of farmers in plastic sandals on dirt bikes" in a conflict that outlasted b...

 
Column-image

What will be Pakistan's fate? Acts of commission or omission by itself, in/by neighbours, and superpowers far and near have led the nuclear-armed country at a strategic Asian crossroads to emerge as a serious regional and global concern whi...

 
Column-image

Some South African generals, allied with the British forces, sought segregation from the enlisted men, all blacks, after being taken prisoners of war. The surprised German commander told them firmly that they would have to share the same quarte...

 
Subscribe to our newsletter
Archive