Tuesday, September 20, 2016

Rhetoric over Uri attack

The sound and fury over the attack on the army camp in Uri is understandable. The loss of soldiers' lives has been heavy and tragic. But the rhetoric and the jingoism evident in the media make little sense. It's important to underline two key points.

First, as an editorial in today's Business Standard points out, there have been lapses on the part of the security forces. The infiltrators were able to cross the LOC and they were able to get into the camp quite easily. Among other things, it points to unsatisfactory vigil at the border. This is not just a matter of equipment or terrain, although these factors do count. BS makes the point that the border is porous because there's laxity on both sides. And the laxity is on account of the thriving drugs trade. Smugglers are able to move in and out because sections of the establishment make this  possible. And once you relax the vigil for smugglers, the jihadis get their opportunity. So it's no use simply pointing the accusing finger at the Pak army.

Secondly, all talk of retaliation is futile because the international community at large and especially the US will not take kindly to a military strike, as ambassador M K Bhadrakumar points out. The writ of the US runs across the world and the Indian establishment has cosied up to the US in recent years. The question of any major military action on India's part without US approval does not arise. And hostilities with nuclear Pakistan is the last thing the US wants today:
...despite the government's sustained public diplomacy to create an impression in domestic opinion that its foreign policies have burnished India's international standing and image and so on, in reality, India's actions -- especially any military moves -- will come under close scrutiny and be weighed in terms of international law and the United Nations Charter.
The bottom line is that the present ruling elites dare not think of crossing any 'red line' that Washington demarcates.
The US State Department, in a series of statements, has distanced Washington from the Indian positions with regard to the situation in the Kashmir valley, India-Pakistan tensions and Balochistan.
Conceivably, the Americans have cautioned our leadership already against making any precipitate military moves. The kind of brazen military adventures that many self-styled Indian defence analysts are espousing will not get Washington's approval.
As the Barack Obama administration tiptoes toward the lame-duck period, the last thing Washington wants as legacy is an India-Pakistan conflict.......
.....If the Americans do not want a war between India and Pakistan or any precipitate Indian military moves that violated international law, Modi cannot act otherwise.The umbilical cord that ties the Sangh Parivar and our ruling elites to the US establishment may be invisible, but remains robust.
So that's it- the rhetoric and sabre-rattling on our part will remain just that. The media pundits can rant as they much as they want. Perhaps the saner course for us is to simply put our house in order first.






5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Well, sometimes the world changes !! The US is actually goading India to Punish Pak for terrorism.Look at their open support for our surgical strikes. The mythical tactical nuclear red line is wiped away !!
Dont go by what Bhadrakumar, he is still stuck in Soviet era thinking.

Anonymous said...


Many thanks for the brilliant blog post, couldn't agree more with your views "rhetoric and the jingoism evident in the media make little sense."
I sincerely feel sorry for all the innocents and their families who lost their lives and loved ones while on duty & otherwise and wish that the Indian army/armed forces get their act together.
It seems Indian media outlets just like any other (e.g. Fox) are bought and sold twice every day.

Thanks & Regards

Anonymous said...

Some articles read different almost awkward when read backwards in time. This is a masterpiece in that sense. How India's surgical strikes enjoyed worldwide support and it was Pak rather than India which was cornered. Obviously we wanted strikes but couldn't believe we could do it because of perceived consequences of US snub and retaliation of a nuclear armed state, ultimately both turned out imaginary, whoever though thru this and ordered strikes is a champion visionary

Anonymous said...

Some articles read different almost awkward when read backwards in time. This is a masterpiece in that sense. How India's surgical strikes enjoyed worldwide support and it was Pak rather than India which was cornered. Obviously we wanted strikes but couldn't believe we could do it because of perceived consequences of US snub and retaliation of a nuclear armed state, ultimately both turned out imaginary, whoever though thru this and ordered strikes is a champion visionary

Anonymous said...

My comments are published for reasons unknown to me