Kashmir: Time for tough decisions ORF 20 Jun 18
Despite all actions being taken by the army, soldiers lose their lives daily. It is either by Pak breaking the ceasefire at will or by their sponsored terrorists targeting security forces. The Hurriyat, creating of which has been claimed to have been the best decision of the Pak army as claimed by Assad Durrani, their ex—ISI chief, sponsors terrorists and stone throwers who target security forces at will. Tying security forces hands, claiming stone throwers are our own but misguided, only adds to their problems. Protecting and financing the Hurriyat only gives them the strength to continue challenging the writ of the state.
The government which proudly professes the surgical strike as a means of garnering votes, appears to be lost in curbing Pak actions, both internally and externally. The army accepted Pak’s request for a ceasefire, but has it worked? Reports appear daily of Pak terrorist camps, located close to the border, holding trained terrorists, awaiting infiltration. Infiltration attempts continue unabated and Indian soldiers are killed preventing them.
If there is temporary peace along the LoC in the upper reaches of the valley, the Jammu sector bears the brunt and the BSF the casualties. Targeting soldiers on patrol, 700 m within Indian territory by snipers, is clearly sending the message that ceasefire would be violated at will. We may be responding equally, but nothing appears to deter Pak. It only seems to be getting bolder by the day.
Thus, while India seeks peace and tranquillity along the border, it is Pak which chooses the time and place for violations. Hence casualties on Indian side are on the rise. With support from the Hurriyat, fuelling unrest within, the Indian security forces face multiple challenges.
No nation, least of all India, should be willing to accept casualties of its security forces daily, either within or from forces from outside. It therefore needs to counter Pak actions with force and determination externally, while changing its policy to a hard approach internally.
Within Pak, with elections around the corner, there is no government worth the name. The interim government is unable to take any decisions on peace nor is it capable of roping in the deep state. The Pak army chief, General Bajwa has repeatedly made calls for peace, but the same has not been backed by action. In fact, his actions have belied his words. Hence logically the same has been ignored by the Indian government.
Further, the government has refused to engage in dialogue with the Pak army, as other nations have done. The importance of the Pak army chief can be judged by the fact that the killing of the head of the anti-Pak terror group, Tehrik-e-Taliban (Pakistan), in Afghanistan, by a drone strike, was conveyed to the Pak army chief by the Afghan President on phone.
The surgical strike, claims of which were rejected by the Pak army, has therefore failed to be a deterrent for the long term and it is business as usual along the LoC. Indian reactions to all Pak actions have been equally strong, however have remained at the tactical level, hitting their posts, causing casualties. With a suppressed Pak media, their nation is unaware of Indian actions. To further save its reputation, Pak resorts to calling in Indian diplomats to complain of ceasefire violations, placing the onus on India.
India therefore would need to change its approach in countering Pak actions. It should therefore seek to create an intense environment for Pak to make its ceasefire violations costly in terms of casualties. With Pak shortly expected to go forward with elections and the announcement of army deployment in sensitive and highly sensitive booths, its role would increase. Further the elections would need to be rigged as their army chief would have decided its next PM. Hence, the select party must win. The army would therefore have a significant role to play.
Across the border, India must send forth a firm message that it’s threshold of tolerance has been crossed. Hence, as a first step it needs to pull its border residents back to safety. Secondly, it needs to move forward heavy artillery along the border. Escalations should be strong and powerful, seeking to strike deep, ignoring world or Pak condemnations, increasing the tempo each day.
Simultaneously, it needs to enhance the level of deployment of the army for presumably training purposes, close to the international border, forcing Pak to resort to the same. The more Pak deploys to counter Indian actions, the lesser are forces available for deployment and influencing elections. Further, such actions severely impede Pak finances. For a nation on the verge of seeking bailouts to avoid bankruptcy this would only add to their exchequer. China would be forced to direct Pak to reduce the temperature as it cannot be a permanent fund provider.
Internally, the Hurriyat needs to be pushed to the wall by blocking their funding. The NIA and ED, which have gone soft in their investigation should be kickstarted. Stone throwing needs to be dealt with force. It may give rise to more youth joining militancy, but that would have to be accepted for the present.
The government’s decision of NICO was not responded back in a comparable manner by either the Hurriyat or militants. The Hurriyat had rebuked it, calling it a ‘cosmetic measure’. It even refused the call for talks, claiming that it would be worthless unless India agreed to term Kashmir as ‘disputed territory’. ‘Disputed Territory’ are the words which the Pak foreign office uses for Kashmir. The sudden rise in violence post Eid indicates that the Hurriyat does not desire peace.
There are signs of local anger against the Hurriyat. In a first, a relative of Kaiser Bhat, who was run over by a CRPF Gypsy challenged the Hurriyat, but possibly under pressure, withdrew his allegations. It is thus evident, that the Hurriyat is feared across the region and possesses funds to enforce violence. Hence, once pushed to the wall or moved away from the region, their influence would wane. Their non-announcement of a bandh and a mild condemnation on the assassination of Shujaat Bhukari, clearly points fingers in their direction.
India must now become firm, if we need to stop losing soldiers daily. It is time the government takes tough decisions. Mollycoddling the Hurriyat or stone throwers must stop. If they break the law, they should be dealt with, consequences may come later. With Pak, the time to act is now, when the nation has no government worth the name. The firmness displayed by the government when it assumed office must return or the situation may slowly slide away.
About the Author
Maj Gen Harsha Kakkar
Retired Major General Indian Army