Misconceptions when Generals speak The Excelsior 26 Mar 18
In a recent seminar on ‘Geo-strategic manifestations in Pakistan and implications for India’ at the Punjab University Chandigarh, army commanders of the Army Training Command (ARTRAC) and Western Command shared their perspectives. The army commander ARTRAC stated, ‘Peace on the border is difficult to achieve at the tactical level alone. Restoring ceasefire requires statesmanship not brinkmanship.’
On the other hand, General Surinder Singh from western command mentioned, ‘People keep talking about a two-front war. It is never a good idea, never a smart idea to fight a two-front war.’ To justify his comments, he added that ‘In Pakistan, the military writ runs. Sooner or later we have to talk to their military. I am convinced that on our side also, military diplomacy plays a major role.’ On China, he stated, ‘If we can improve our relations with China, we can develop the best possible leverage with Pakistan.’
The comments by the two generals have been referred to by some analysts as being against the army chief and governments views. An author even termed it as the ‘revolt of the generals’. It is anything but that and the two generals were expressing their views, which when viewed in totality are in sync.
A major drawback which remains in the context of Indo-Pak and Indo-China relations, is the deep distrust which first needs to be overcome prior to any forward movement. Pakistan has always considered Kashmir as a part of it and feels that the only option to obtain it is by creating internal turmoil in the region and drawing in the Indian army. In their army’s perception, talks would only be detrimental to their national interest.
Chinese claims on Indian territory have remained unchanged. Decades of border talks, increased economic interface and India’s acceptance of Tibet being Chinese territory has done little to break the logjam. Standoffs have only been increasing by the years. Relations have wavered up and down, but there has been no indication of peace. The proximity of China and Pak opens doors for collusion between the two against India.
Historically, it has always been the government of India which has reached out to Pakistan. It has always been at the level of government to government. This has been done with the hope that the polity would be able to reign in the deep state as peace takes hold. However, the same has never happened and talks have been impacted by terror strikes. It is with this experience that the present government has clearly laid down its policy of ‘terror and talks’ never going together. Further, with deteriorating relations any official announcement by India seeking talks would be an indicator of weakness.
India is aware that the writ of the military runs in Pakistan. Thus, statesmanship would only be plausible if the government decides to change tack and initiate talks with the Pak military, as suggested by General Surinder Singh. Alternatively, military diplomacy, involving talks between the two militaries could be the answer. The present Indian government policy of ignoring military diplomacy would never permit this option.
A small hint on political parties in a comment by the army chief in his address in a seminar in Delhi created a furore within the political class. Whether it would even accept military diplomacy, which is a norm the world over, remains a mute question. The Pak military has always been at the forefront of diplomacy and on numerous occasions, it is their army chief who takes the diplomatic initiative, as was his recent decision to move troops to Saudi Arabia. Ambassadors of every country have visited Rawalpindi and met the Pak army chief, except the Indian High Commissioner.
Indo-China relations have recently taken a downward turn. Doklam, growing Indian proximity to the West, mainly the US, flexing of Indian military muscle, its growing economy and proximity to nations with whom Chinese disputes linger have added to the distrust. Indian naval exercises with other nations including the latest 16 nation exercise, MILAN, have been viewed to have an anti-China bias.
With a slow distancing of Indo-Russian relations and their growing proximity to China has been to our disadvantage. With the CPEC moving through disputed territory, Indian options of joining One Belt One Road Initiative (OBOR) have faded, adding to the distance. China has always considered keeping the threat of a two-front war open in Indian strategic circles, thus continues to arm and support Pakistan as a counter to India.
No nation desires a two-front war, least of all, India. It implies pressures from all directions, division of scarce military resources and a severe impact on its economy. Though, India would remain defensive on one front, offensive on the other, escalation of the same would be detrimental to the nation. While China has never supported Pak in any earlier conflict by opening a new front, the possibility of the same has ensured Indian resources deployed on the Chinese front have remained in place, always more alert. While possession of nuclear weapons may deter an all-out conflict spread across all regions on both fronts, however localized coordinated actions on both borders remain possible.
India has never projected an anti-China stance in the international arena. Its groupings including the ‘Quad’ with the US, Australia and Japan are only aimed at enhancing its own security needs, rather than at countering China. Conversely, it has been China which has played an anti-India stance globally, denying India entry into the NSG and supporting Pak in preventing the UN from designating Masood Azhar as a global terrorist.
If India is to seek an improved relationship with China, it would have to bend and accept partial Chinese pressures. In the present context it may be joining OBOR, accepting Chinese domination and backing down from challenging Chinese hegemony in the Asian region. Even with this action, it may turn the relationship away from confrontation, but be unable to bring China to even partially reign in Pakistan. For China, Pak would always remain closer than India.
While India desires peace with both its neighbours, it appears to be the other way around with them. Indian overtures are rejected and there appears to be a collusion to pressurize India. What the two army commanders spoke at the Punjab University could ultimately be the right approach, it would be some time, before the nations in the region could even contemplate to head in that direction.
About the Author
Maj Gen Harsha Kakkar
Retired Major General Indian Army