A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Friday, March 15, 2019
India: Don’t Misuse Our Forces
Crass
politicisation of the Army is this government’s way of perpetuating
cardinal sin. The EC must go beyond banning militarised banners, outlaw
mention of operations
A plethora of sweeping phraseology — “game-changer,” “paradigm shift”
and even “calling Pakistan’s nuclear bluff” — has entered the strategic
discourse post-Balakot, signalling a turning point in India-Pakistan
military balance. Like the surface surgical strikes, the aerial
pulverisation of Balakot deep inside Pakistan may turn out to be a
one-off also. However, neither the solitary surgical strikes nor the
Balakot bombing will end cross-border terrorism. It will curb the menace
and lead to diplomatic dividends to prevent India from repeating a
military action that the international community fears could trigger the
nuclear threshold.
Continuing its 30-year-long counter insurgency campaign, India must
frame a sustained strategy based on the political aim of
destroying/degrading Pakistan’s terrorist infrastructure while fully
sanitising its own side against terrorist strikes. Israelis call this
mowing the grass. The strategy must introduce covert capacities for
clandestine operations to hurt Pakistan’s military though India will
find it easier to disincentivise Pakistan from its fatal attraction to
terrorism as an instrument of state policy diplomatically than
militarily. Not one country criticised India for the defensive
cross-border counter terrorism operations while Pakistan was censured by
several countries with even its all-weather ally China merely
mentioning “respect for sovereignty.”
Two things are clear: Pakistan cannot be completely isolated
diplomatically; terrorist organisations are Pakistan’s strategic assets
and military equaliser and while they may lie low for some time, they
cannot be wished away.
Pakistan’s decision to release Abhinandan as a peace gesture was the
button for de-escalation. A Pakistani delegation will arrive tomorrow
for Kartarpur Corridor conversations. It will soon be business as usual
as India begins to fight bitter electoral battles for the next eight
weeks to determine whether Balakot will give Prime Minister Narendra
Modi the decisive majority for another term. Public mood at present is
overwhelmingly for his return to power. The imponderable is what will
Modi do if there is another mass casualty terrorist attack in the run up
to elections whose footprint cannot be traced to Pakistan. Or there is a
dramatic Rafale exposure pointing at him.
In the first case, air strikes might appear to be the most appropriate
instrument of response once the signature on the envelope is deciphered.
The IAF has consistently complained that the inherent flexibility and
non-escalatory character of air power has not been recognised (this has
to be taken with a grain of salt). It recalls the historic folly of
Nehru not employing the IAF in 1962. Former Air Chief Marshal Fali Major
this month at the India Today conclave advocated the use of helicopter
gunships in support of Army in eliminating terrorists in Kashmir — many
of whom are Pakistanis. I have been saying this for over a decade: use
armed helicopters to give quick closure to hostile engagements in
Kashmir. Air strikes in PoK/Pakistan may not work again as Pakistan Air
Force will not be caught napping. Further, Pakistan’s strategic assets
will be re-located close to population centres, some even embedded close
to cantonments. IAF may have opened a strategic window but another air
strike will be fraught with risks of attrition and escalation.
What stood out during Balakot is that India, while winning the air
battle lost the battle of narratives. Pakistan’s DG ISPR, Maj Gen Asif
Ghafoor, started his campaign of fake news within minutes of the air
strikes against our own disorganised presentations 14 hours later.
Foreign Secretary Vijay Gokhale’s terse statement with no questions
taken left multiple doubts after Ghafoor had belittled the damage caused
by our air strikes. Similarly MEA spokesperson accompanied by an IAF
officer, who did not utter a word, also appeared without anything new or
useful to add. Later, at a chaotic tri-service briefing, some picture
emerged about the air battles, prospects for escalation (India will
respond only if Pakistan escalates) and likely damage assessment —
targets that were designated had been destroyed. This was reiterated by
the Air Chief who added that IAF does not make any estimate of
casualties and it is for the government to give out details of damage
and casualties.
In Pakistan, not just Ghafoor but both Prime Minister Khan and Foreign
Minister Qureshi were addressing domestic as well as the international
audience. No Indian minister said a word at any formal interaction with
the media. The military completely lost the media plot, having done
impressive daily media briefings during Kargil. Not for nothing is the
international media challenging India’s claims of damage and
casualties.The government says it has the data but will not put it out
as the enemy will find out IAF’s technology advantage. In the perception
battle, Pakistan has won hands down.
The rush and race to brand the landmark air strikes as the new normal
will be premature. Twenty-four-year-old Ashutosh — a proficient
professional car driver — was highly wound up during Balakot. He told
me, “Why can’t we send armed Hindu fighters (RSS) into PoK to take the
battle to the other side.” He said he was ready to go to the border to
fight Pakistan. I thought he would do a great job. He also said for the
next five years, the government should spend all-out on the military
instead of development and welfare schemes to make the armed forces big
and strong. If only governments had invested 2.5 to 3 per cent on
defence for the last 10 years Pakistan would dare not have continued its
proxy war. India has spent peanuts on defence and modernisation in the
five years of this government. BJP president Amit Shah is militarily so
illiterate when he claims that crossing the Rs 3 lakh crore mark in
defence is a big achievement when it is only 1.5 per cent of GDP and
funds for modernisation are next to nothing after inflation and
committed liabilities. Prime Minister Modi constantly raises the OROP
flag, which is a welfare measure and not a force multiplier.
Yet both were the first to politicise the Army, milking first the
surgical strikes and now going to town over Balakot air-strikes; this
time Modi even claiming “Modi ne mara hai.” The IAF, which carried out
the air strikes, is forgotten. Crass politicisation of the military is
this government’s way of perpetuating cardinal sin. The Election
Commission must go beyond banning militarised banners to outlawing
mention of military operations. But who cares for the sanctity of an
apolitical, professional and secular armed forces as long as elections
are won piggy-backing them.
(The writer is a retired Major General of the Indian Army and founder
member of the Defence Planning Staff, currently the revamped Integrated
Defence Staff)