While casualties taken by the army are reported to be less than 100, no one is really talking about civilian casualties. The numbers could be alarmingly large because of the indiscriminate bombing and the inevitable deaths and injuries due to crossfire. The repercussions of civilian deaths and injuries would be obvious to those of us who understand the complexities of counter-insurgency operations. Each such dead and wounded causes more insurgents to spring up. The conclusion is obvious: with the passage of time, the problems will get worse.

In the joint press conference with Holbrooke on June 3, President Zardari talked of the imperative for “strong and decisive” action by the Pakistan Army. It can be assumed that he was echoing America’s viewpoint and maybe even phraseology. The army’s approach too has echoes: destroy rather than defeat; as the US operated in Iraq and Afghanistan. The universally accepted principle of the “use of minimum force” was apparently totally ignored. The Pakistan military threw in everything it had: tanks, artillery, gunships, fighter aircraft, in their ground-attack role. A quote from a local 50-year-old mason sums it up: “If the government wants to control and crush the Taliban why don’t they send in ground troops? Why are they only shelling, which hurts the public most of all and creates anti-government feelings?”

In India, we have fought insurgents and militants for over 50 years; in Kashmir alone for 20 years now. Barring one exception, never have we contemplated using artillery or tanks, nor for that matter the air arm for combat. Operations have been entirely by infantry and paramilitary forces. The air force or army aviation, if used, was only for surveillance, communications and casualty evacuation. All soldiers are expected to abide by the “ten commandments” issued by HQ that stress “minimum force” and a humane approach.

... contd.