The drums of war are rising in crescendo, as India launched attacks against terrorist camps in not only Pakistan occupied Kashmir, but for the first time since 1971 against Pakistan itself, and that too in the heart of Punjab. There is a huge potential for escalation, especially since it seems that Pakistan army chief General Asim Munir, has put his reputation on the line by climbing onto a tank at an army exercise and declaring that any Indian “military misadventure” would be met by a “swift notch up response”.
But are attacks by India in fact a military misadventure? By any analysis point, it is not. It is a calculated, extremely precise counterterrorism attack: Foreign secretary Vikram Misri said they were “non-escalatory... measured... and did not hit any military target”. The message was clear. It was up to Pakistan to decide whether it wanted to hit civilians and the Indian army. After all, there are no terrorist camps here.
There was another type of signalling a day earlier. The ministry of home affairs ordered civil defence drills in 244 districts, indicating that India was readying itself for a complete war. Again, however, this was a defensive measure mobilising only voluntary organisations like the National Cadet Corps, or the National Service Scheme.
Against all these carefully modulated efforts, the question is what Pakistan can gainfully do. Of General Munir’s aggression, there can be little doubt. His fiery speech on April 18, on the two-nation theory, that preceded a terrorist attack of a cruelly deliberate communal colour by four days seemed to indicate a determination to goad India to action. That Munir is under severe stress is evident. Terrorist activity in Pakistan has gone up by some 66%, to a nine-year high. The establishment has jailed former Prime Minister (PM) Imran Khan, who has a huge following. It has also jailed a former ISI chief, Lt Gen Faiz Hameed, and at least another clutch of senior officers including a general who refused to fire upon his own people. It’s not just that Munir may have made himself hugely unpopular. What is apparent is the humiliation of having been pushed out unceremoniously as DG ISI by an irate Imran Khan obviously went deep, and he wielded the whip, waiting a long time for the right opportunity. In the present crisis, therefore, don’t expect the earlier carefully calibrated Pakistan air response to Balakot, when the Air Force saved national pride but hit nothing very much, is going to be repeated. That was under General Bajwa, a man of an entirely different calibre and someone who wanted to create trade links with India. General Munir wants to make a statement to beef up his image. Unless he is prevailed upon to exercise better sense by outside actors. But that is a problem.
{{/usCountry}}Against all these carefully modulated efforts, the question is what Pakistan can gainfully do. Of General Munir’s aggression, there can be little doubt. His fiery speech on April 18, on the two-nation theory, that preceded a terrorist attack of a cruelly deliberate communal colour by four days seemed to indicate a determination to goad India to action. That Munir is under severe stress is evident. Terrorist activity in Pakistan has gone up by some 66%, to a nine-year high. The establishment has jailed former Prime Minister (PM) Imran Khan, who has a huge following. It has also jailed a former ISI chief, Lt Gen Faiz Hameed, and at least another clutch of senior officers including a general who refused to fire upon his own people. It’s not just that Munir may have made himself hugely unpopular. What is apparent is the humiliation of having been pushed out unceremoniously as DG ISI by an irate Imran Khan obviously went deep, and he wielded the whip, waiting a long time for the right opportunity. In the present crisis, therefore, don’t expect the earlier carefully calibrated Pakistan air response to Balakot, when the Air Force saved national pride but hit nothing very much, is going to be repeated. That was under General Bajwa, a man of an entirely different calibre and someone who wanted to create trade links with India. General Munir wants to make a statement to beef up his image. Unless he is prevailed upon to exercise better sense by outside actors. But that is a problem.
{{/usCountry}}The problem is that the so-called international community is badly bogged down. Once a Pakistani or even Indian PM could talk to Washington and be assured of action. For instance, President Donald Trump, in his first term, claimed to have got the captured fighter pilot Wing Commander Abhinandan released, leading to a quick drawn down of tensions. Then there was the dressing down given to Nawaz Sharif after Kargil by President Bill Clinton. This time round, the White House itself is in rotation mode with NSA Mike Waltz shifted out, controversy around defence secretary Peter Hegseth, six staffers removed from the National Security Council, and a spate of resignations. President Trump’s statement of a ‘thousand year’ conflict on Kashmir shows serious lack of knowledge. Vice President JD Vance’s advice to India to not provoke a “broader regional conflict’, may mean a warning that China may step in, or it may mean nothing at all. The chaos at the top is unprecedented.
To the east, Moscow is in even worse straits. After President Vladimir Putin offered unqualified support, that stance was revised to offer mediation, a position that the Kremlin knows is anathema to Delhi. The sending of a plane load of missiles was heartening, but a Russian military shoulder is now probably unavailable. Then there’s the European Union’s statement on restraint, at a time when it is struggling with an economic meltdown, and severe infighting. Israel, while actively and strongly sympathising with India, has little space given the mess in Gaza. In sum, the world simply doesn’t care. Too many are dying in messy wars for an India- Pakistan jostling to make much difference. This is the most dangerous part of this series of events. The ultimate irony would be if the de-escalator turns out to be Beijing. It’s clout with Pakistan is unquestionable. Besides, it would probably find itself funding the Pakistani war, given that financial institutions will draw back. But nations seldom act rationally. There is an equal chance it could go the other way, a danger that Delhi is fully aware of.
There is hope, however. An unacknowledged truth is India and Pakistan have been far more mature in their actions than many Western nations. Neither of the three wars saw large scale bombing of civilian targets; when an India missile went off course to hit Pakistan, the army response was comparatively mild. As of now, the directors general of military operations on both sides are talking. That’s one hopeful sign. So is the fact that Lieutenant General Muhammad Asim Malik, director general of the Inter-Service Intelligence has been appointed Pakistan’s national security advisor. If the two intelligence chiefs decide to talk, it matters. A civilian NSA would never have been taken seriously.
Both countries could announce a joint initiative towards a verifiable elimination of terrorism from the subcontinent, a not so impossible event given the repetition ad nauseam of how Pakistan faces the worst terrorism in the world. The over the horizon prospect is the opening of trade and industry. In the extremely likely option that this doesn’t sell, the only option is hit everything linked to terror including the hidden actors. It is risky. But the bottom lesson is this. You have to fight your own battles. Operation Sindoor just demonstrated that.
Tara Kartha is director (research), Centre for Land Warfare Studies. The views expressed are personal