Help from regional friends notwithstanding, India must defeat Pakistan on its own. New Delhi can also not wait for the West, especially the US, to intervene actively
After the Brics (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) and Bimstec (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation) summits in Goa, India needs to reflect deeply on its strategy to defeat Pakistan's unconventional war through cross-border terrorism against it. The most striking feature of the Brics Summit Declaration 2016, was its naming of the Islamic State and Jabhat al-Nusra in the context of its call for action against all UN-designated terrorist organisations, while not saying anything against two of Pakistan's terror spawns, the lashkar-e-Tayyeba and Jaish-e-Mohammed, targeting India. Particularly noteworthy was Moscow's failure to back India sufficiently strongly to neutralise China's resolute support to Pakistan, a development which India must view against Russia's recent staging of an anti-terror exercise with Pakistan.
On the other hand, the Retreat 2016 Outcome Document, emanating from the Bimstec summit, states, without naming, but obviously referring to, Pakistan, “We strongly believe that our fight against terrorism should not only seek to disrupt and eliminate terrorists, terror organisations and networks but should also identify, hold accountable, and take strong action against states who [sic] encourage, support and finance terrorism, provide sanctuary to terrorists and terror groups and falsely extol their virtues. There should be no glorification of terrorists as martyrs.”
The last sentence was clearly meant to be a rebuke, again without mentioning any name, to Pakistan's Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif for describing the Hizbul Mujaheedin terrorist Burhan Wani as a “martyr”. The difference between the two statements has to be seen in the context of the membership of the groups issuing these and their particular circumstances and interests. China's long-standing role as Pakistan's patron and protector is widely known. Besides, Beijing would need Pakistan's help to keep at bay any Islamist militancy in the Xinjiang area where Uyghur separatists — mainly Islamist fundamentalists —have been restive for a long time. Russia, on the other hand, has had to cope with insurgency and terror strikes by violent Islamist Chechens. The situation can become worse if — as is likely — the growing prospect of defeat in Syria and Iraq prompts the Islamic State to increasingly divert its human and material assets to Afghanistan and North Waziristan in Pakistan, from where they can easily strike Russia and China, besides India.
Bimstec's member countries — Bangladesh, India, Myanmar, Sri lanka, Thailand, Bhutan and Nepal — do not need Pakistan's help to fight terrorism. Two of them — India and Bangladesh — have to contend with Pakistan-sponsored terrorism and, Bangladesh, particularly, with direct involvement of the Pakistani High Commission in fomenting subversion and terrorism. Myanmar has to contend with Pakistan's efforts to fish in the troubled waters of Rakhine Province inhabited by Rohingyas, while Sri lanka and Nepal face the increasing spread of Pakistan-linked Islamist terrorist organisations within their borders. Besides, they, as well as Thailand, must have found it easier to sign the document because it did not mention Pakistan by name.
While understanding the reasons for the difference in the thrust of the two Declarations is important, it is more so to divine in their light, India's strategic course to defeat Pakistan-sponsored terrorism. The first thing to recognise here is that neither Russia nor China will help, nor will, beyond a point, the United States which has poured billions of dollars into Pakistan and not done anything beyond verbal criticism of Islamabad. Of the Bimstek countries, Bangladesh and Bhutan will help actively in sharing intelligence, others will extend diplomatic support, with Myanmar cooperating on a number of fronts, including intelligence sharing.
While such cooperation will be useful, India will have to deal with Pakistan on its own, employing every possible weapon it has, including the application of an economic choke-hold, activation of social, ethnic and political fault lines, and the waging of a major unconventional warfare through proxies, to compel Pakistan to abandon its strategic goal of balkanising India. We have to fight a war if this leads to it. Pakistan's frequent brandishing of the nuclear threat must be ignored. Its generals are aware of the consequences to follow. As their response to the highly successful surgical strikes across the loC shows, they know when not to press matters too far.
(The writer is Consultant Editor, The Pioneer, and an author)