Countering cross-border terror across the border
The successful strike by the Indian Army's Special Forces against militants holed up on the other side of the India-Myanmar border marks an important and welcome change in the country's policy towards terrorism. As a Union Minister remarked, it was “unprecedented and bold”. The strike shows that the Narendra Modi Government is willing to adopt ‘hot pursuit', if need be. The cross-border offensive came days after militants massacred 18 Armymen in Manipur in an ambush. It was known that the militants had fled to the Myanmar side after the attack. While there is still some confusion on the extent of communication the Indian officials had maintained with their counterparts in Myanmar on this particular development, the two sides have coordinated closely in the recent past on tackling militancy directed against India from across the border.
Myanmar was also reportedly informed about the development soon after it happened. There is no reason to believe that the episode will adversely impact the close cooperation that exists between the two countries in fighting terror. On the contrary, it can strengthen the resolve, given that Myanmar has irrefutable evidence that its soil is being used to launch attacks against India. Although reports have it that some important militant leaders have been eliminated by the Special Forces' offensive, the long-term impact remains to be seen.
All the same, it is clear that the fear of the Indian Army must have percolated into the minds of the militants, who, until now, had thought they were safe as long as they were on the Myanmar side of the border. India's strong response cannot be termed as knee-jerk, because New Delhi had tried its best to get the militant groups to the discussion table. Several rounds of talks had taken place, but it was clear that the terror outfits were not in a mood to be reasonable. After the Indian Army's surgical strike, perhaps some of them may now be more receptive. Else, they will learn the hard way.
This apprehension must have spread, or ought to spread, among militant groups operating elsewhere too — along the India-Pakistan line, for instance. Of course, the dynamics are different. The Government in Naypyidaw has been working closely with New Delhi over the last many months on combating terror, whereas Islamabad has not only been uncooperative but has also tacitly backed anti-India militants. While this complicates matters, it should not come in the way of India's resolve to do all it can — diplomatically and otherwise — to neutralise terrorists who either have Islamabad's/Rawalpindi's direct support or are propped up by non-state elements Pakistan patronises.
Given that diplomacy has got us nowhere despite years of effort, perhaps ‘hot pursuit' into Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, where militant camps are flourishing, will be seriously contemplated by the Modi regime. In doing so, while the Government should naturally take into consideration the fallouts, it must not be overly sensitive to external opinion. The security and sovereignty of one’s country remains supreme. The US showed this with its elimination of Osama bin laden on Pakistani territory, and Israel repeatedly demonstrates a similar commitment by hitting its enemies on foreign soil, despite being slammed by even its friends in the West.