Why is west deaf to reasoning on Pakistan affairs?

Why does US support Pakistan inspite of its harbouring terrorism – even when it has concealed the dreaded 9/11 Osama Bin Laden with their state machinery? But for a brief lull of anguish, it is business as usual! Pakistan continues to get US aids and repeatedly bailed out by the western funding institutions while the vibrant democratic India with 1.4 billion population, gets only preached to restrain when terrorists strike? Isn’t it disgusting? One would have expected the democratic west to stand up on the stated moral principles and support India. But it is always gets lectured to maintain peace lest there will be a nuclear conflict! Why?

USA wants just a pliable partner – Pakistan holding a begging bowl with chaos and instability all around, suits well. Its strategic location advantage in Central Asia adds to its credit for keeping the military assets of the west.

In the past decade, India has started taking its own decision, be it buying oil from Russia defying sanctions, in spite of west dictates. Even for military supplies India is no longer arm twisted – also the lobbies that were in vogue in earlier regimes have got vaporised! India is becoming economically strong – makes most of the equipment indigenously, builds its own trade links – be it BRICS or Middle East trade corridor! Would US or for that matter any other strong country like such a nation? USA does not want any nation to question its stand – wants only those who tow their line. Yes – Pakistan fits the bill and not India! The country is so reliable that some nuclear arsenals of the west are safeguarded in Pakistan as per some reports!

These days, global partnerships are not structured on principles, it is built only on pliability. The more you are strong and independent, more an unreliable and undesired partner you become! West would even indulge in weakening!

So for heaven’s sake don’t expect US to appreciate your moral stand not only now but ever in the future – be it a democratic or republican president in chair – they don’t want an economically strong partner with an independent mindset! Western principles are more self centred than that of the morally oriented east! West is only good at diplomatic preaching of others!

As long as Modi and Jaishankars are around, India is unlikely to blindly tow the western world! Pakistan would continue to be in political and economic turmoil for ages to come and be a launching pad with lavish aids from the west, for all the trouble makers!

It is only a waste of time and effort sending multiple delegations to explain our position – west is deaf!

Continue reading →

Religion in conflict with Society?

The biggest challenge before the world is Religious Terrorism. It is a known fact that terrorism can’t be rooted out by violent reprisals. Can intelligence agencies provide protection against terror attacks?

It is stated that specific and timely alerts have been provided by the Indian intelligence to their Sri Lankan counterparts, including names and locations of the attackers. But, to the country’s shame, due to the government’s indifference, innocents paid the price with their lives. Chasing a clue is also not an easy task: Decades back, in the novel, ‘The Day of the Jackal’, Fredrick Forsyth, portrays the strenuous efforts of a detective to track the ‘shrewd’ terrorist who plans to kill the French President. The attempted assassin was a sniper, that may be utterly ‘primitive’ mode now, considering the fact that the terror tactics have evolved into more sophistication, culminating into human suicide bombing.This suicide bombing methodology was probably first conceived and executed successfully to eliminate the former Indian Prime Minster Rajiv Gandhi, during the times of Sri Lankan civil war. Since then, more than three decades have rolled by, with ever increasing risk from this deadly tactics of terror.

The recent Sri Lankan bombings were planned by members of one of the wealthiest families in the island. Foreign-educated scions of this politically influential family were among those who volunteered to blow themselves up in the suicide mission. Of late, this clan of terrorists is in the raise: Osama bin Laden came from a wealthy Saudi family; Al Qaeda’s present leader, Ayman Zawahiri, is a qualified paediatrician. If the highly educated and the rich take up to this ammunition, would it not be a Herculean task to protect the innocents?

Can ‘intelligence’ alone protect the humanity from terror in the coming years? Are we destined to live in constant fear of this ‘Frankenstein’ evolving from ‘conflicts of intolerance’ that motivates even the ‘rich and educated’, considered once as ‘cultured’ lots’?

The problem has become notoriously complex if one studies the series of articles in The New Indian Express, written by Gurumurthy in the aftermath of the recent Sri Lanka carnage. This is what he says:

“Understanding the horrendous nature and scale of the Sri Lankan terror would be incomplete without taking cognisance of the inhuman ideology, which dehumanised the culprits, including a pregnant woman, into human bombs. Whenever and wherever Islamic extremism manifests, seculars and liberals tend to explain it away as the outcome of illiteracy, poverty and deprivation. The 9/11 strikes in the US knocked out this logic. It was a technology-driven terror mission. An article titled “Uncivil Engineers: The Surprising Link Between Education and Jihad” (Foreign Affairs magazine, 10.3.2016) said the majority of Islamic terrorists are educated. Terrorism is no more the domain of the illiterate to vent their anger.

But the Sri Lankan terror has scaled up further. Two brothers from the richest Islamic family in Sri Lanka (characterised by the media as Spice Tycoons) who are frequently seen with the top echelons, not only became human bombs and killed themselves to kill hundreds, the pregnant wife of one of them blew herself, her three young children and three policemen who came in search of the terrorists in her home.

What kind of ideology drives the softest creation of God, the mother, to turn so inhuman as to kill herself, with a foetus inside her, and her three children? What is that thought that makes even rich people leading comfortable lives blow themselves up to kill people whom they know to be innocents? Where does that maddening hostility come from? It is that poisonous ideology that has to be targeted and demolished. So long as that venomous ideology is not rooted out, the war on terror cannot be won. Laws, police and army are inadequate to shut the vicious ideology that generates terror. This the biggest challenge before the world.”

One may still hope that the religion may itself take appropriate actions before there is severe backlash from the society. For example, A Muslim Educational Society in Kozhikode has issued a circular prohibiting female students from wearing veils in its institutions across the country, The group runs 35 colleges and 72 schools, and has around one lakh students on its rolls. The circular quotes a Kerala High Court order from December 2018, which dismissed a plea filed by two female students of Christ Nagar Senior Secondary School in Thiruvananthapuram, seeking to wear headscarves and full-sleeve shirts. The High Court, upholding the school’s refusal to grant permission for such clothing, said in its order that collective interest must supersede individual interest.

Yes, it is true, in a civilised world the interest of the society shall over ride that of a section: even if it curtails freedom to practice one’s beliefs and it is true for any religion!

Credits:

1. http://www.newindianexpress.com/opinions/columns/s-gurumurthy/2019/may/03/the-thowheed–jamaths-are-isis–terror-merchants-1971935.html

2. https://scroll.in/latest/922085/keralas-muslim-educational-society-bans-women-from-wearing-veils-on-its-campuses-in-india

3. http://www.newindianexpress.com/opinions/columns/t-j-s-george/2019/may/05/why-do-the-rich-turn-terrorists-1972756.html

Slay the dragon by choking its access to Indian markets

Azar, the 50-year-old ISI’s angel of death, is the in the China’s wealth creator and facilitator of its strategic and business interests in Pakistan. China recognised Azhar’s influence over radicalised elements and used him to safeguard its own strategic and economic interests in the region. Azhar thrives as a the caretaker of China’s investments in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) that spans the terror-infested Af-Pak border terrain. Once completed, it will provide an alternative route for Chinese exports to the Middle East and Europe. It is estimated that 5,00,000 Chinese nationals will be living in the Gwadar port city by 2022. China is courting Azhar to secure the CPEC and the Chinese living in Pakistan. In simpler terms, Azhar is a blackmailer of China’s economic interests. It is foolish to believe that United Nations Security Council (UNSC) would designate Azhar as a “global terrorist” in the near future with China lifting its veto.

So is there any other way of stopping the international funding and access to the arms market for this organisation? How to nudge China out of its temerity of protection to this dreaded terrorist! It is no secret that China is funding these terror outfits directly or indirectly. Is there a way to hit them below their belt? Yes… TRADE….

In 2018, India-China trade was worth around $84.44 billion and there is no sign of shrinking of $50 billion trade deficit! Look at the trade between the two countries! The Indian taxation system has only allowed the indiscriminate dumping of cheap and inferior consumer goods in the country, causing myriad indigenous units to close. Indian consumers spent over 50,000 crore in 2018— twice the amount they spent in 2017—on smartphones manufactured by the top four Chinese brands. Chinese smartphone brands that account for more than 50 per cent of our market include Honor, Xiaomi, Vivo, Oppo, Infinix, Lenovo-Motorola and One-Plus. China has exploited the price sensitive-Indian mindset by dumping cheaper household goods ranging from assembly line homes to toys.

Indian corporate world have been infiltrated by pro-China elements, which ignore the national interest and allow Sino-centric trade to flourish here. This policy generosity allows the Chinese to earn dollars in India while funding its pet terror lords in Pakistan. Isn’t it stupid?

Our governments have all along been soft to China since the days of independence for reasons best known to them. Today, when Rahul criticises Modi for not being aggressive against China, BJP promptly rummages the closet of skeletons and pulls out Nehru’s self-sacrificial naïveté allowing China a permanent seat in the UN Security Council. This has empowered China with its VETO power! The party tweeted, “China wouldn’t be in UNSC had your great grandfather not ‘gifted’ it to them at India’s cost. India is undoing all mistakes of your family. Be assured that India will win the fight against terror. Leave it to PM Modi while you keep cosying up with the Chinese envoys secretly.”

Neither the government is tough against imports of cheap and substandard Chinese goods, nor our citizens patriotic enough to shun them in the interests of nation. The solution to combat this shadow boxing using terror outfits for massacre and going scot free, lies in slaying the dragon by choking its access to the Indian markets apart from instilling a fear in those minds that nurture terrorists, of ‘Do you want a Repeat of Balakot?’

It is heartening to note that there is a surge of protest against the import of Chinese goods and passionate request by some section of the patriotic Indian public to boycott them, in the social media.

A paper, which is affiliated to China’s ruling Communist Party, said that its the “forces inside India” is hampering the country’s reform process. It quotes Rahul Gandhi, to emphasise the point that Indian politicians should not use China to solicit voters! Kudos to Rahul, for the pat from our ‘friend’ China!

The papers goes on to add, “And it would be dangerous if candidates in the general election use the “China threat theory” to hype nationalism and gain popularity. Sensationalizing China affairs may help Indian politicians’ political careers, but it will not help improve India’s economy, manufacturing or people’s livelihoods,” it warned.

So, if you boycott Chinese goods, only indian economy would be in trouble! The paper further advised Indian politicians to improve real strength rather than shouting slogans on Twitter.

Yes there seems to be another side for the coin! There might be some credence to this also: With country going on installing large scale solar power plants we need the help of china. China hold about 70% of world share in solar cell production or its raw materials. Banning would hit our economy harder than theirs.

The country has to take call while the civilised world take their own sweet time…….

Credits:

1. http://www.newindianexpress.com/opinions/columns/2019/mar/17/slay-dragon-terror-by-choking-access-to-indian-markets-1952166.html

2.ET:Like it or not, you can’t avoid our products: Chinese media to India http://www.ecoti.in/LW84oa

Pakistan’s Nuclear Bluff busted at last….

Husain Haqqani, who was Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States from 2008 to 2011, in his latest book is “Reimagining Pakistan“, reiterates the need for reigning in on Pak terror groups operating in their soil. In a hard hitting dictum, he opines, “Pakistan can no longer link its tolerance or support for terrorist groups with the grievances of the people of Kashmir in hope of securing international attention to Kashmiri human rights concerns”.

Since 1999, crises between India and Pakistan have tended to evolve in four stages. First, eager to get international attention for the dispute over Kashmir, a Pakistan-based militant group launches an attack in India. Then India threatens retaliation, which in the past involved mobilisation of troops along the Pakistan border. Faced with Indian threats, Pakistan raises the specter of nuclear confrontation and asks the United States and other major powers to help defuse the situation. Finally, American diplomacy provides Pakistan a face-saver, and the threat of war subsides. The same story repeats in every episode of terror bleeding the nation with the undercurrent theme “Nuclear threat“.

Pakistan’s intelligence establishment counts on India’s fear of conflict escalating to the nuclear level while planning terrorist attacks. Instead of nuclear weapons being a deterrent to war, this approach allows for low-cost, low-intensity war, which can be carried on endlessly under a nuclear umbrella. But now India feels it has found a soft spot where it can strike — whether on ground using special forces, as in 2016, or using air strikes as they have in the current crisis — without crossing the threshold for all-out war between the nuclear powers.

At last, Pakistan’s nuclear bluff has been busted, there will be pressure on every future Prime Minister to respond in a kinetic rather than a cosmetic manner to mass terror attacks sponsored from Pakistan. Very little was done after Pathankot (besides giving ISI operatives a guided tour of the facility). There was a stronger response after Uri, although the surgical strike was conducted through “keyhole surgery” and therefore did not leave much of a mark. Pulwama has resulted—for the first time since 1998—in a relatively robust armed response, followed up by the shooting down of an F-16 when the PAF sought to do what the IAF had done a day after the latter crossed over the International Border to attack terror sites.

In fact, world leaders seem to have changed their tack and ignored the well-worn four stages of previous India-Pakistan crises. For example, US Secretary of State Pompeo, emphasised “the urgency of Pakistan taking meaningful action against terrorist groups operating on its soil” along with leaders of France and Germany, instead of focusing on finding a face-saver for Pakistan.

Pakistan’s nuclear bluff busted at last. Is it the dividend for Modi’s ‘globe trotting’ and ‘hugging’ diplomacy?

Would Modi keep us his pressure?

Modi made it clear that the costs of terror attacks for Pakistan would no longer be minimal as in the past. ‘The pay back will be with interest’, he roars from a public platform!! Not surprisingly, the finance minister Arun Jaitley seems to be piquantly saying that, India having the ability to carry out an Osama-type operation deep in the heart of Pakistan like the US did… A threat presently may not be far from realistic, so obviously scary to the Pakistan! But why not? Does Only US have the sole rights for retaliation? Are we very different from the whites?

The hectic diplomatic manoeuvres at the aftermath of Pulwama, yielded bountiful dividends: President Trump said that India was planning “something very strong”. Would he have been sounded on the things to come? The operation itself was executed so well, the diplomatic offensive prior to the strike, and after it, has been equally impressive. While China, which has traditionally backed Pakistan on JeM chief Masood Azhar, was forced to sign off on a UN Security Council (UNSC) statement condemning the attack, and the US/UK/France have made yet another attempt to get the UNSC to label Azhar a ‘global terrorist’; while China may, once again, scuttle the move, it says a lot that the pressure is being maintained by the global community; After the Balkot strike and the skirmishes at the LOC thereafter, instead of condemning India, Trump enthusiastically said “We have reasonably attractive news from Pakistan and India” and hoped the hostilities would end soon; The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), though condemned India’s strike, did not withdraw its invitation to foreign minister Sushma Swaraj, inspite of Pakistan—a founding member of the OIC— objecting strongly. Shushma attended and aired the need for fighting the terrorism and seeking support from the civilised world, while Pak had to boycott! The total isolation of Pakistan on the diplomatic front led Pakistan to recalibrate its responses.

One need not be so naive not to believe that, it is highly unlikely that Abhinandan would have been released so soon, unhurt, without global pressure. By no stretch of imagination, Imran Khan can be credited with the peace gesture, leave alone his being a candidate for ‘Nobel Peace Prize’ as some of his staunch lunatic admirers taunt for! But, unfortunately, as Gurumurthy has put it appropriately, There are five governments in Pakistan: The main one run by Army, second by ISI, the third by parliament, the fourth by Americans and the fifth by the terrorists. Which one will do what & when is unknown. So long as US was dominant in Pak there was some order. With the US influence weakening, its just anarchy. Can there be an undue wait for long, while the neighbours bleed?

But alas! An Opposition so blinded by hatred for Modi, took no pride in what the country had achieved. While the Opposition’s sniping, and, indeed, its attempt to scuttle the Rafale purchase despite the huge delays in procurement—even as the Air Force’s fleet kept dwindling—suggest that it, and not Modi, is guilty of playing politics. It is, of course, unfortunate that the Opposition is not with him in this endeavour, though that may change once the elections are over—right now, no one wants to concede anything since, at least till the Pakistani misadventure, most predicted the elections would be a lot closer than imagined in May 2014. The fear of loosing looms large so as to blind them from seeing the larger picture.

Would Modi keep up the pressure to dent the terror dens and maim them now or would he wait for the General elections to be over? It may not be far from reality to prophecise that the country is on course for further subdivision, if it does not restrain the non-state actors from indulging in ‘bloody heroics’!

Credits

https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/modis-tactics-work-now-to-get-masood-azhar/1501907/

Is Conflict escalation, a preferred option?

Why did India chose to send the Mirages on a risky mission to strike the Jaish-e-Mohammed terrorist training facility, when it had the safer option of deploying surface to surface missiles? Whether there were any semblance of doubts of assured success? With a major national election looming on the horizon, guaranteed success was necessary and the mission could not be a damp squib. Any losses would have put back a potential electoral success, and less than desired optics would not have quenched the obvious thirst for retribution being demanded by the Indian public.

Under the circumstances, the most appropriate option no doubt was to go surgical against a Jaish facility and use the aerial route. The Balakot location was large, sufficiently notorious and targeting it carried the basic principle of surprise so essential for success. It met the need for the right optics without going too high in the escalation ladder. Not touching a military or civilian facility meant that the morals involved were intact and remained in India’s favour. That is an important aspect when dealing with the international community, where initial success had already been gained. The amount of importance attached to surprise did get the IAF to select its launch from airfields as far away in central India as Gwalior. It had all the heroics needed for a general public display when needed. The final decision appears to have most appropriately met all the needs of the situation. After all is Modi not a master strategist?

While there is euphoria in the Indian media regarding the huge success in the mission of ‘blood for blood’ battlecry, Pakistan rejects those tall claims. There is no confirmation on casualties yet from the official Indian side either. But there is a huge diplomatic victory for the Indian government with even close all whether allies like China not categorical in reprimanding the Indian offensive.Undoubtedly the diplomatic positives helped to take the right decision.

Yes, Pakistan is now at the crossroads. The decision it takes in the hours and days ahead is going to determine its future. It can either change course and accept that its policy of proxy war through jihadis will no longer work with respect to India, or else it can choose to continue on that slippery slope and raise the ante through a military strike against India.

But for India, a suitable conciliatory act could be to get the immediate and unconditional release of the Indian pilot now held in Pakistani custody.

Will India be willing to de-escalate at this point? The scope to do so appears difficult, but it also is in India’s interest not to escalate beyond a point. The diplomatic traction gained does place some encumbrances on India’s subsequent options. It would be unwilling to lose that advantage. In fact, in that direction lie some of the better options of reining in Pakistan and forcing it to retract from the dangerous path it had chosen to embark upon 30 years ago.

After having scored in the diplomatic and in the battle front, and also jolting the strategists in Pakistan with the paradigm shift in the Indian policy in countering cross border terrorism, Modi is well set in the buoyant electoral arena. Has Modi grabbed the golden opportunity which MMS badly missed in 2008?

All said and done, Modi’s astute shrewdness would be on display in the Conflict termination, and not conflict exacerbation, which must be the India’s preferred option.

Credits:

http://www.asianage.com/opinion/oped/280219/indias-response-measured-escalation-a-challenge.html

Doesn’t he deserve a word of praise?

Every opposition leader has praised the Indian Air Force – conspicuously missing was a word of praise for the political leadership. Some notorious neta went to the extent of even accusing Modi of stage managing the strike as dropping ‘bombs’ in barren areas of Pak territory to gain political mileage in the ensuing elections!

Addressing a party rally hours after the air strikes at Idukki in Kerala, state CPM secretary Kodiyeri Balakrishnan stunned all when he said, “The BJP government, which fears defeat in the Lok Sabha elections, is trying to polarise communities through war mongering.” Seeking to politicise the ‘Surgical Strikes 2.0’, Balakrishnan further said, “Instead of finding a solution to the insurgency in Kashmir, the BJP government is trying to make things worse by making the people of Kashmir enemies of the state.”

But look at what an army man does not mince words in complementing the establishment for the bravado. Air Marshal R K Sharma (retd), a Former Vice Chief of the Air Staff writes in the New Indian Express in a column thus…

The government’s decision to strike the terror camps shows its resolve to root out terrorism from its soil. This pre-emptive strike is also a show of strength and decisiveness on the part of the government. The success of the strike is a reflection of the government’s broader intent to address the issue of terrorism. The message is that India would not tolerate violence beyond a point and opening the envelope of strikes goes two ways. These matters are handled in militaristic and diplomatic terms. This is what happened on the ground on Tuesday—the execution of a non-military strike which was required to be accomplished. The terrorists’ command headquarters, including their terror camps have been attacked with significant casualties and material damages.

India has made the choice of defending itself and has been considerate not to damage any innocent life.This strike is also a classic example of how smoothly the intelligence agencies functioned—hats off to the agencies which toiled to provide real-time actionable intelligence and inputs for this exercise. This incident is also exemplary of how strong teamwork can change the ballgame—where inputs from all have been incorporated to carry out a clean operation.

But now the time is up. If we find terror camps which Pakistan refuses to acknowledge and act on, we will have to take action and not allow chaos to reign in India.

Certainly, it is the government which will have to take the final call on when and how to take action. Isn’t that the political leadership that has to bear the brunt of criticism in case of a failed mission? Doesn’t it deserve a word of praise for a seemingly successful mission? But with elections round the corner, would the opposition camp take that risk?

Credits:

Operation Balakot: Terror and the significance of air power. https://goo.gl/x2uQtE

Modi’s new doctrine – prompt retribution: 350 for 40

When the Mirage 2000 jets returned after the successful bombing of the terrorists’ training camps, India’s security mindset and doctrine have changed forever. With this strike, the belief of the Pakistan security establishment that India would maintain its usual strategic restraint and of bleeding India with a thousand cuts using proxies like JeM without the fear of retaliation were also destroyed.

Till now, Pakistan harboured the sanguine belief that India would not broach an aggressive option bordering on conventional war. This is the first time after the 1971 war that India’s fighter jets entered Pakistani territory which they didn’t even at the height of Kargil conflict! Even after the Pulwama massacre, they were thinking of possible surgical strikes in only in the border areas of PoK!

India has stressed in the aftermath of the endeavour that the Air Force strike was a non-military and pre-emptive to take out terrorists who were planning new suicide attacks in India. The strikes were not meant to target Pakistan but only the terrorists, which the Pakistan government itself had committed in 2004 to act against terrorists on its soil. This way of paraphrasing the retaliatory mission, enables not only india putting up an acceptable show in the diplomatic front, but also is a huge diplomatic face-saver for Pakistan to ensure that the situation does not escalate in to a war, if it so desires..

Even Pakistan’s closest ally China showed tacit support to India by calling for “restraint” from both the countries. Significantly it did not mention the territorial violation of Pakistan. This must have upset Islamabad no end.

Imran has been held with pants down?

Credits:

https://www.ndtv.com/opinion/modi-administration-changes-india-handling-of-pak-decisively-1999612

Terror in civilised world

Would terror tactics succeed in a civilised world?

Can a small fly take a revenge to destroy a crafty antique chinaware store? Yes, if It can locate a bull loitering near the shop; just enter its ears! Terrorists are after all only flies, but they can irritate a nation to react violently! The casualties of terrorism (all types included) are in minuscule numbers compared to even traffic accidents. It does not decapitate the enemy of either its personnel or ammunitions as in a war encounter; the casualties are mostly white collar office goers and street venders! But then why bother?

While no government is penalised by its citizens for large scale casualties in natural calamities, those in power could be dethroned even if there is a single terror attack! Like the irritating thunderous noise a stone can make in an empty jar, people aver ineffective protection of their peace. USA was compelled to take several military actions in Middle East as a retaliation against terror attack on Sep 11, 2001. After a number of casualties in several ‘theatres’ spreading over a decade, the ‘fly’ was killed in Pakistan on 2nd May 2011.

The acts of Terrorism is a wish to provoke the otherwise calm and peace loving nations to use their force indiscriminately and get sympathy from ’civilised’ world for occasional mistakes in the campaign. Have the terrorists succeeded? Terrorists do get sympathy from a large section of ‘unaffected’ in the society!

It is a dilemma for the peace loving nations, to act to not to act. It is impossible to ensure complete protection to its vast population in an era of globalisation against terrorism, even with advanced gadgets and tactical espionage! Also, terrorism can’t be stopped by indiscriminate use of power against a faceless foe either, though ‘surgical strikes’ might help even though there would be some whispers against.

While turning a blind eye to the vandalism is an alternative, facing the wrath of its citizens would be a heavy storm to weather for those in power. Can the next generation resist getting panicky? Avoiding knee jerk reaction seems to be the only way out for a society that can successfully put up against the onslaught of terrorism. Of course technology would come handy for surveillance and prevention. Only then the ‘sinister flies’ can be defeated!