Operation Sindoor and the new dynamic
This article is authored by Yogendra Kumar, former ambassador to Philippines, New Delhi.
The recent India-Pakistan conflict triggered by the ghastly Pahalgam massacre (April 22) demonstrated a recharged Indian national will to break the cycles of military confrontation steered by Pakistan to the accompaniment of its nuclear sabre rattling. Overconfident that this grand strategy of bleeding India by a thousand cuts was working, it was publicly proclaimed to be notched up several levels by the current Pakistani army chief’s speech (April 16) in a language befitting a Jihadi; encounters involving highly trained terrorists had intensified several weeks earlier.
The Indian response was determined and fierce; the government decisions were well-planned to exert maximum pressure by paring down the relationship to barebones and to not let Pakistani leadership get away with cynical abuse of international laws and bilateral agreements aimed at fostering stable international order and good neighbourliness; a critical part of these decisions was to put the 1960 Indus Water Treaty in abeyance, including and especially the sharing of the water flow data, until Pakistan takes credible and irrevocable steps to turn off the spigot of cross-border terror.
As Prime Minister (PM) Narendra Modi’s warning of military action was ringing in the Pakistani ears, a proactive diplomatic outreach was simultaneously launched to bust the hackneyed Pakistani script of the root cause and all the rest; diplomatic messaging about all countries having the right to defend themselves against terrorism fell on nearly universally receptive ears due to its global dimensions and Pakistan’s sordid image as a haven for international terrorism. Before Indian military strikes, the UN Security Council President issued a statement (April 25), negotiated amongst all members including Pakistan, about accountability of its perpetrators, organisers, financiers and sponsors where the Pakistani attempts to inject the dispute failed; nor, did it succeed at the informal, off-the-record, closed-door meeting of the Council (May 5) in doing so.
True to the public warnings by the leaders, the Indian military strike (May 7) delivered by drones and missiles by the IAF from the Indian territory on Pakistani terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) and its Punjab heartland was effective belying the latter’s expectations of it being restricted in scope and geography like the previous operations. Notifying it about the targeting of terrorist infrastructure, the Indian side warned that any attacks on its military and civilian sites would invite a strong riposte. As the military exchanges went up the escalation ladder, the Indian response demonstrated effective coverage of Pakistan’s entire territory whilst simultaneously briefing extensively the diplomatic interlocutors at high government levels. The international response was in urging both sides to de-escalate for which the greater onus was on Pakistan since Indian position all along was that Op Sindoor was for destruction of terrorist infrastructure but was prepared for retaliation. According to a CNN report (May 13), US, Saudi Arabia and China were engaged in bringing about cessation of military strikes. Irrespective of US claims, the phone call on the direct hotline was initiated by the Pakistani side to work out the modalities of cessation; the public display of gratitude to the US President in Pakistan was, manifestly, to improve its equation with the current US administration.
Despite the claims and counter-claims in the fog of war, the Indian military’s effectiveness in covering vital Pakistani military establishments throughout its territory has been quite clearly established; the PM’s visit to the Adampur airbase demonstrates that the Indian capabilities are virtually unscathed. The first sign that nuclear sabre rattling would have no effect on India was the cancellation of the Pakistani Nuclear Command Authority after being called; these moves also resulted in serious diplomatic pressure on Pakistan to desist from such tactics.
Announcing that Op Sindoor is being suspended, PM in his speech to the nation declared a new normal in the government’s policy in which the ambiguity of its response to another act of terrorism in timing, location and scale is an essential part as he rebuffed any attempt at nuclear blackmail; bilateralism in addressing issues between India and Pakistan remains unshakeable and all the other recent measures remain in effect.
As an uneasy, uncertain calm settles in, certain pointers are notable. Massive Pakistani drone and artillery firing across the Line of Control (LoC) and elsewhere within a few hours of the agreement indicates command-and-control issues in the Pakistan army where simmering differences exist between the radical and moderate thinking. The public association of the army chief, chief minister of Punjab (daughter of Nawaz Sharif), and other civil and military officers with the funeral of the killed jihadis is suggestive that serious action against terrorism is not a foregone conclusion at least as an immediate prospect. A still larger Pakistani agenda is evident in the recent expulsion of a Pakistani high commission staffer being linked, according to government sources, with recent arrests in Punjab.
The busting of the Pakistani script about these periodic conflicts cycles is being followed through diplomatically by India where international pressure needs to be relentless. Whilst being a victim of jihadi terrorism, there is a wider recognition of India’s significant position in the power equilibrium in South Asia and the world at large whereas Pakistan is now much diminished in this reckoning. Apart from bilateral measures, there is scope for international sanctions against senior public and military figures, including entities like the ISI, as the terror trail is identified.
Yet, the phenomenon of terrorism is more complex given that it pervades multiple power centres in Pakistan. As a fragile political system with a faltering economy, the leverage of international funding, including the IMF, can be exercised to foster thoroughgoing governance reforms including, inter-alia, a robust internal democratisation of its political parties which also rely on such elements. A day older than India in its post-Independence journey, Pakistan has had a troubled history in considerable measure on this account. A comprehensive international effort to rid its political system of this scourge will be hugely beneficial to its own people, to South Asia, and the world at large.
This article is authored by Yogendra Kumar, former ambassador to Philippines, New Delhi.
One Subscription.
Get 360° coverage—from daily headlines
to 100 year archives.
HT App & Website
