No 21st century war holds out hope of a permanent solution, especially one based on such historic problems like India-Pakistan. However, India could damage Pakistan’s overseas interests and use the carrot and stick policy to bring it back to the peace process
The problem that India faces with Pakistan on reconciling diplomacy with aggression exists since 1947 and has its roots in the course of the partition itself. Even today the generation which had suffered during the process of partition is alive on the both the sides of the border and the wounds have not healed. Till date India and Pakistan have fought three wars (and a half taking into account Kargil). Pakistan, perhaps out of a delusion that it was India which was responsible for the birth of Bangladesh, has developed an extremely vindictive approach against India. In Kashmir, it is seen working indefatigably to annex the region since 1948 without any success. Also, Pakistan’s efforts to internationalise the problem have failed in direct relation to India’s success with keeping it as a bilateral issue.
The use of asymmetric warfare against India is a well recognised phenomenon. To carry forward this agenda Pakistan’s Army/ISI uses the tactic of deniability on terrorism. Between the Kargil war and the August 7 incursion in the Poonch sector, Islamabad has invariably claimed that it was non-State actors who were behind it and not its regular Army. In reality, there is little difference between a Pakistani solder and a Pakistani terrorist in the context of its activities against India. Its fight against India is of emotions, vengeance, religious fundamentalism, one-upmanship and, of course, desperation.
Engage problem child
There is a considerable — and influential — body of opinion in India favouring engagement with “problem child” Pakistan. International academia and even government circles also expect India (recognised as the “sensible” power of the region) to ignore Pakistan’s belligerence as the last gasps of a parallel, but dying, fundamentalist establishment.
But there are those who argue that this amounts to mollification. How long should India engage Pakistan and keep on demonstrating its moral credentialsIJ The Indian Parliament has condemned the recent killings on the line of Control and has univocally blamed the Pakistan military for this mishap. On the other hand Pakistani PM has spoken about the need for a dialogue. Now the issue is, ‘should India allow this incident to wither away in the same way that it allowed the January beheading of a jawanIJ Is only issuing strong statements helping or there is need to do something moreIJ
Various theories could be advanced to explain Pakistan’s apparently duplicitous ways. It could well be that Pakistan is concerned about the likely increase in India’s influence in Afghanistan after US forces withdraw in 2014. Also, it is likely that the ISI is keen to keep the Kashmir/India issue on the boil order to dominate the newly elected Nawaz government. There could also be a long-term policy that once the US withdraws from Afghanistan the Taliban/Al Qaeda/leT could be turned on Kashmir and hence the process of preparing for grand insurgency.
There also exists a possibility that Pakistan wants to infiltrate as many terrorists into India as possible before the setting of winter (an old practice). The reasons for this could be countless, but the end result would be that the lOC would always remain troubled. So, is only dialogue going to bring about normalcy or should India opt for some other course of actionIJ
India’s problems with Pakistan have remained unresolved over the years despite India’s best efforts to find diplomatic solutions. Ending the process of dialogue and applying coercive diplomacy are two of the major options used by India in the past, but with limited success. Also, post 26/11 India has been up to very strong diplomatic manoeuvres, In spite of all this no permanent solution has been found. Under the present circumstances it could be easy to take an extremely hawkish position and propound war as an option. However, no war in the 21st century can hold out the promise of a permanent solution.
Diplomacy and war
Are any options available between diplomacy and warIJ Perhaps the time has come to opt for the ‘diplomacy plus’ and ‘war minus’ option. This essentially means that a multi-pronged strategy needs to be opted where continuing dialogue would not be the only facet of this strategy. Within the dialogue there is a need to shift the focus from the so called less lethal subjects like Sir Creak towards the main issues in contention.
During the process of dialogue it could be required to clearly spell out India’s position on those subjects and make it amply clear that India is not keen to keep these issues hanging for the coming generations to resolve. Simultaneously, it could essential to make it evident that India could box Pakistan in by making a significant military presence in Afghanistan after 2014 and also by increasing its presence in the Arabian Sea.
India could internalise Pakistan’s shocking transgressions in China’s Uighur province. There are reports that a significant number of Uighur Muslims from China are being trained in Pakistan’s terror camps and then sent to Syria to fight against the Bashar al-Assad regime. Also, Pakistan needs to be told that India is in a position to harm their interests internationally and indirectly inflect some form of an economic blockade. Essentially, the time is ripe to look for ‘diplomacy plus’ and ‘war minus’ options.
(Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses)