http://kashmirtimes.com/newsdet.aspx?q=92436
KASHMIR TIMES Op-ed 6 July 2019
Kashmir: Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory[1]
While complimenting the governor
and the representative of the Union for sticking their necks out prior to the
visit of the home minister to the Valley, it must be recorded how irrelevant
their positioning on talks turned out to be. In the event, the home minister,
having the next national elections in his sights when he gets elevated to prime
ministership, has left behind a potentially worse mess. That neither the
governor nor the interlocutor resigned thereafter brings them back to square
one in esteem, especially since they are busy implementing anti-democratic
orders as privileging the Yatra over state assembly elections and concomitant
guidelines as traffic stoppages on arteries favouring yatris over citizens.
To be fair to the home minister,
he has cannot be credited with any clue on next steps, if indeed he is the one
calling the shots. In his earlier avatar in the home ministry in his province,
he is infamous for his calls to gunmen in khakhi out killing hitman Sohrabuddin,
even while they did despicable things to the brave wife of the hitman. It is
quite clear that the khakis were not out on an autonomous errand. Instead, it
is possible – whatever the cabinet system that India conferred on itself
seventy some years back might have it - that the Kashmir policy is in the hands
of Ajit Doval in his capacity as super defence- foreign-internal-security
minister as his step up to cabinet rank implies.
Strategic sense has been kept a
state secret all through Modi’s first term. It is no wonder then that by the
end of it India was facing the threat of nuclear war as it contemplated
retaliating to the Pakistani counter to Balakot launched in broad daylight at
Naushera-Rajauri. Not all of the gallant air chief’s sweeping-under-the-carpet
act in denying any such attacks took place on behalf of his political bosses can
rewrite history on this score. In the event, the Modi-Doval duo chickened out
of missile strikes – using the peacemaking intervention of the United States
timely released from its obsession with Kim Jong Un - as cover.
Politicians – notable for being
in election mode over the past five years - cannot be expected to look past the
next upcoming election, set for autumn in Kashmir. This accounts for a Hindu
pilgrimage taking front seat as against the priority to revert the state to
democratic rule. The disingenuous reason is that the nomads out in high
altitude pastures would be disadvantaged by elections any time sooner. It gives
the ruling party more time to attain Mission 44, that it missed out on last
time. The last time they put the international border sector on fire using
Khakis (once again) of the border guarding force to extend the Line of Control’s
active scenario on to that sector. This time round an outcome of the Shah visit
was to appease the communities inconvenienced by the brunt of the Pakistani
Rangers’ backlash with reservations through a parliamentary intervention on his
return to Delhi.
The statistic put out of 733
killed over the past four years was to condition the home minister that India
is in a position of strength from which it can launch a peace initiative.
Sources had it that recruitment had come down, as had stone throwing. The
governor, for his part, went out of his way to put the spot-light on peace
possibilities, highlighting the softening of separatists. Notably, this
followed a visit by Dineshwar Sharma to him, implying that the credit for
creating the possibility is a shared one. The intent was to depict this as the
‘ripe moment’, which was certainly a ‘hurting’ strait for the insurgent side,
even if not a ‘hurting stalemate’ for India since the problem is seen as
confined to three and half districts out of India’s 700 plus districts.
The onus needs to be borne by Delhi.
Doval has a military adviser, but his input can be anticipated in light of his
view (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loDM_ub6ELE)
that the demonetization dealt a body blow to terrorism, with terrorists reduced
to robbing teller machines to get by. Clearly, the establishment in Delhi and
Srinagar is not on the same page. While Srinagar having followed the script
over the past four years thought it was time for a politically predominant exit
strategy, Delhi did not think so.
Delhi is perhaps cognizant that
Shah, as an aspiring prime minister – now that the bench mark for toughness has
been set by the current prime minister – cannot be expected to on his very
first visit go namby-pamby. So even if there was strategic level sense for a
shift of gears in Kashmir, the political level has different verities informing
its consideration. Delhi’s national security establishment errs in putting on
political blinkers, borrowed from Nagpur (incidentally, the military advisor is
from close by Indore), to its supervisory and advisory role on Kashmir.
This author in an opinion piece
‘War in 2018?’ (18 Jan 2018, http://www.kashmirtimes.in/newsdet.aspx?q=75607)
in this publication had dwelt on the portents of war that year, keeping in mind
the national elections slated for the following year. The lesson is that
Kashmir has potential to take the two sides to war in short order. Considering
that the Pakistani side got the better of India over the last crisis – the
information war notwithstanding – there would be a push to get even at the next
opportunity. So, if this side the India’s backed off from shooting off their
missiles, the next time that may well be their start point. Both surgical
strikes and the aerial strike were brushed off by the Pakistanis. Indian
bravado requires more proof than what mere information war can furnish. All of
the air force’s bluster cannot show up an F-16 carcass. Pakistanis, warned off
by the air chief that Rafales would be in place by early next year, would also
prefer the missile exchange option. It would draw in the international
community fairly quickly.
Pakistanis could get uppity. Projecting
an indigenous face to the insurgency over the proxy war Indians prefer (the
proportion of Kashmiris dead went up from 40 per cent to two thirds), they have
been quiescent over the past four years. India’s diplomatic offensive is set to
peak in October with the financial action task force taking a review then. This
explains Pakistan’s arraigning of Hafeez Sayeed for canvassing money for the
jihad. There is enough of an overlap between the Islamic block – that took a
dim view of Indian (in)action in Kashmir only early this year - and the task
force to bail out Pakistan. No amount of deliberation by Indian diplomats in
the shadow of the Sardar Patel’s statue may help out, particularly since India
itself does not walk the talk on terrorism – having let off its ‘good
terrorists’ in cases such as the Samjhauta express and ensconced the Malegaon accused
into parliament.
Pakistanis are also well placed
in Afghanistan, having weathered Trump’s worst. Though it put them in an
economic bind, leading to the army settling for less in this budget, it has
delivered Taliban to the all-Afghan jirga this month. Therefore, it can afford
to reengage with mischief in Kashmir, perhaps as early as next year. The 300 or
so militants are enough to see off the summer campaign. India’s rebuff of its
outstretched hand over the past year could come at a price.
As the ruling party makes gains
in Rajya Sabha, it would draw closer to Shah’s promise of rescinding Articles
370 and 35A as part of New India by 2022. This is when Pakistan would likely
pitch in, if the 1965 War is any guide. Then, India had rid Kashmir of the titles
its governor and chief minister, seemingly drawing Kashmir in closer embrace. A
renewed push along such lines would unlikely see Pakistan stand idly by. Also,
as in 1965 when India was recovering from its drubbing in 1962, it would be
preempting Indian power getting too big to deflate later.
India has good reasons to believe
it can withstand anything Pakistan throws at it. However, it must reckon with
poor defence budgets over the past four years. It must factor in that its
self-image as a power far outstrips reality, if the recent crisis outcome is
any guide. It bears warning that a draw with Pakistan – a limited war can only
end in a draw - would leave Modi as much out of hot air as was Nehru after
1962.
If the political level is
unmindful, the strategic and operational level must push back. Shah has to be
reminded that in his new capacity he does not have the likes of DG Vanzara at
the other end, lest he carry over habits so formed into his upcoming prime
ministership at the cost of India and national security.
