A tale of two crises

As the focus shifts from Operation Black Tornado to the predictable bickering at home, Manmohan Singh faces an even bigger challenge on the diplomatic front. He has already pointed a finger at the militant groups operating in Pakistan and warned Islamabad that it will have to pay if it can’t stop the extremists operating on its soil.

Yet another crisis in Indo-Pak relations is at hand. The prospects for its rapid regionalisation, to include Afghanistan, and inevitable internationalisation, involving the US and NATO, are now real.

India’s friends will wonder — its enemies have already bet on the UPA government’s weakness — whether Dr Singh has the strategic resolve for a new confrontation with Pakistan’s armed forces and direct it towards a credible set of political objectives.The decision to replace Shivraj Patil with P. Chidambaram at the home ministry suggests that the UPA Government may finally be ready to take major political decisions in confronting the national security crisis at hand.

Dr Singh knows one of the first principles of statecraft is not to issue threats that cannot be carried out. If he fails to act on his promise to raise the costs to Pakistan, the credibility of his government will sink even lower. The question is not whether India should act, but how.

In developing a response to the Mumbai aggression, Dr. Singh will have to review the military/nuclear crises with Islamabad over the last decade.

In 1999, when the NDA government led by Atal Bihari Vajpayee discovered the occupation of Kargil heights in Jammu and Kashmir by the Pakistan army, it had no option but to embark on a limited war to reclaim Indian territory. Vajpayee faced a more complicated situation during 2001. In its audacity and intended political consequences, the attack on the Indian Parliament on December 13, 2001 is the closest parallel to the Mumbai attacks last week.

After considering and ruling out immediate air strikes on terrorist camps across the border, and announcing a series of rather ineffective sanctions against Pakistan, Vajpayee turned to what was then called “coercive diplomacy”. He ordered the full mobilisation of the Indian armed forces on the border and gathered the navy in the Arabian Sea.

India threatened to go to war with Pakistan, with all its consequences including nuclear, if Islamabad did not end cross-border terrorism. Analysts in India and abroad are divided over the effectiveness of India’s coercive diplomacy during 2001-02. It nevertheless saw the US along with Britain exert pressure on Pakistan’s president, General Pervez Musharraf, who agreed to end cross-border terrorism on a permanent basis.

... contd.

Ads By Google

Message*	Maximum characters allowed

Name*		Email ID*
Subject*		Country*

TERMS OF USE:
The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).

I agree to the terms of use.

A challenge and opportunity to India by Giri on 2008-12-01 23:33:28.644784+05:30
A good analysis. This crisis is a challenge to the India as a whole and going to determine our future Indo-Pak relationship. The Pak army and ISI are not under the complete control of the Pak Prez, PM and the parliament and that is the biggest problem. I see the outrage felt by the Indian public and the Indian political leadership. The all party meet is a good start. I don't think a military response from India against Pak is the right one. If that happens then the terrorists have achieved their objective. We have to work with the Pak gov to shut down the terrorist cells and it is not an easy task. We will have to work with America to appropriately pressurize the Pak gov and in turn the Pak army and ISI. Let us interrogate and find as much as possible from the arrested terrorist abt the way the terrorist cell, ISI and army operates. And use that information with whichever Pak official is going to visit India. It is a challenge for all - India, Pak, US. India has to lead the effort

Reply Forward

Stratergy by Thammu on 2008-12-01 18:56:49.14625+05:30
I can only think of three strategy, which can increase the cost to Pakistan military establishment.1. Control water in the Balighar and keep denying it2. Send troops to Afghanistan to support NATO.3. Blocade Karachi port

Reply Forward

FOCUS on ISI by Sunil on 2008-12-01 13:27:46.664441+05:30
A good analysis.India should focus its attention on dismantling ISI - which is the actual governing body in Pakistan. This can and should be done while maintaining superficial diplomatic relations with the elected pseudo-government in Pakistan, based on art of war. It is very important to realise that tackling ISI is the only way to reduce threat perception for India. Indian government should provide ample funds for this and use international relations with countries like Israel and US while simultaneously use covert operation inside the enemy territory to cause maximum damage to ISI.

Reply Forward