China blocks proposal to list Azhar as designated terrorist
China on Friday finally blocked India's proposal to list JeM chief and Pathankot mastermind Masood Azhar as a designated terrorist…
Limitless will be the speculative analyses on the “trigger”, motivation and implications of the terrorist strike at the Headquarters of the XVI Corps at Nagrota; yet nothing can camouflage the unflattering reality that key installations of the Armed services remain vulnerable. That reality actually long preceded the deadly attacks at Pathankot and Uri, but that no foolproof remedies have been found reflects poorly on the functioning of the forces. For after the temperatures were raised at Pathankot and then Uri, surely there ought to have been more efficiency and alertness at as critical a centre as HQ XVI Corps. It is no comfort that the military leadership maintains that a series of similar bids have been foiled. The blatant shortcoming, as exposed at Nagrota, must be addressed and due action both punitive and remedial, initiated without delay. Seven precious lives were lost, a hostage-situation averted, and considerable courage displayed by Army wives — but the fallout is more worrisome. The credibility of India’s defences have been shaken, people living in border areas have grave apprehensions for the safety, and the “psychological victory” must belong to the terrorists.
Sad, but an inescapable truth. A pain that will not be relieved by “surgical strikes” that have limited impact on the ground, belligerent promises of “massive retribution” and the loudmouth defence minister’s childish threat to “gouge” eyes out. Yes, a major Indian counter-punch is to be expected, the gung-ho talk leaves little other option. But will that prove definitive, and will the international community sit back and allow a full-fledged war between two nuclear-weaponised nations? Has the time not come to jettison the bombast and re-cast Pakistan policy in a more “doable” mould? That would be a display of mature statecraft, not the surrender petty politicians would imagine that to be. Neither India nor Pakistan is “going away”, the Line of Control cannot be re-drawn (only modified, as after 1965 and 1971), and the human factor cannot be ignored by either New Delhi or Islamabad/ GHQ Rawalpindi. The negotiating table holds out more promise than the battlefield. However, it requires greater courage to “work” the latter than force subordinates into endless fire-fights.
Quite a few myths were shattered at Nagrota: short-lived has been the hope that the top-level change in the Pakistan army would mark a new dawn. Maybe rhetoric on both sides of the border narrowed the options available to General Qamar Javed Bajwa, but it is naïve to believe that the civilian leadership in Islamabad does not support military confrontation. So also it is silly to think that the Pak DGMO “sued for peace” when he sought an unscheduled interaction with his Indian counterpart. Sustained bellicosity may secure votes — not the nation.
Advertisement
