archive: Threat to Global Peace
Threat to Global Peace
K Subrahmanyam
The Times of India
June 21, 1999
Title: Threat to Global Peace
Author: K Subrahmanyam
Publication: The Times of India
Date: June 21, 1999
Introduction: Core Issue Pakistan, not Kashmir
THERE is a lot of justified speculation and concern in this country
about the pressure on the Indian Army to cross the Line of Control,
how long this border conflict will last and whether it will escalate.
As is characteristic of the Indian political class and its mindset,
the focus is on ourselves and what we will be doing. But this conflict
was imposed on India by the deliberate aggression of Pakistan. If
India were to behave like other countries which have been sovereign
for much longer periods than we have, our attention should be on what
Pakistan's next move will be.
Plan that Failed
Will it accept the international community's exhortations and wind
down its aggression or will it escalate the conflict? What India
should do and whether the conflict will be prolonged depend not on
this country but on Pakistan. This inability and unwillingness of our
political class to study, analyse and assess the other country's
motivation, moves and aims are at the root of all our national
security failures in the last 50 years.
Pakistan's aim in initiating this aggression is obvious. It was
intended to internationalise the Kashmir issue as per the Pakistani
framework. It was carried out at a time when Pakistan thought the
Indian leadership, preoccupied with the forthcoming elections, would
be weak and indecisive. Presumably it thought that its massive
intrusion would cut the Srinagar-Leh road and simultaneously the
mercenaries it had already placed in different locations would strike,
paralysing the Indian security forces and the Kashmir administration.
Now Pakistan knows this plan has failed. The Indian response was both
firm and restrained. The air strikes were launched, but both ground
and air operations were confined to Indian territory except for
retaliatory artillery fire. The most disappointing development for
Pakistan was the recognition of leading nations that there was a
definite aggression by Pakistan across the LoC and their consequent
unwillingness to internationalise the Kashmir issue as per Pakistan's
prescription.
Therefore, our efforts should focus on assessing the alternative
options open to Pakistan in the light of this situation. Pakistan may
escalate the situation by sending in more intruders and supplies
across the LoC. Pakistan may broaden and open new fronts. It can
trigger a major sabotage and terrorist campaign in Kashmir and
elsewhere in India. It can even initiate a limited conflict across the
international border and use it to resort to nuclear blackmail. Last,
if good sense prevails, Pakistan can quietly wind down its aggression
and call it a day. The Indian response should be tailored to ensure
that in any of these cases its action should contain Pakistan's
aggression and prevent a possible escalation.
Even if the Pakistan army and Mr Nawaz Sharif had been together in
planning and unleashing the aggression in Kargil, their interests in
respect of further escalation and their reactions to international
pressures may not necessarily be the same. Pakistan has kept itself an
exit route. Since it has not acknowledged that its own army is
involved in the aggression, winding it up may not pose any problem in
terms of loss of face. However, the launch of this aggression and its
becoming counterproductive will have serious after-effects in the
army-government relationship.
While India may have legitimate reservations over internationalising
the Kashmir issue in traditional terms, it cannot have any over
internationalising the problem of a state like Pakistan posing a
threat to international peace and security. According to Pakistan's
own admission, its security forces cannot control the thousands of
armed mercenaries who are causing domestic problems in that country
besides indulging in international terrorism. Many of these terrorist
groups are financed by the proceeds of narcotics traffic. Their
extremism and fundamentalism are not only evident in the atrocities of
the Taliban against Afghan women but also in the torture and
mutilation of captured Indian Army personnel.
Nuclear Status
Therefore, this is the appropriate time for the Indian government to
focus on the problems posed to international peace and stability by
the state of Pakistan which is moving economically towards becoming a
``failed state''. It should be pointed out that Pakistan is
poliitically unstable, involved i narcotics traffic, international
terrorism and generates and harbours a large number of religious
extremists. There is a strong assumption in India that the US-Pakistan
bonds are unbreakable and, therefore, India raising the issue will
lead to the US and its allies siding with Pakistan. That assumption
gives too much credit to the sense of loyalty of both countries and
their commitment to each other. In international politics, such
commitments are rare. The anti-American feeling in Pakistan runs deep
and the US has never been known to be loyal to any ally at the cost of
its own interests.
In India, there are still fixed ideas that the US-Pak, US-China and
Pak-China relationships -- which were developed during the Cold War --
are immutable. In international politics, few relationships remain
unaltered over a period of time -- especially those which were
developed out of highly opportunistic considerations. Pakistan no
longer serves a useful purpose for the United States as it did during
the Cold War era and during the period of intense US hostility towards
Iran. Though elements in the Pentagon are still nostalgic about past
links with the Pakistani military, there are increasing worries
elsewhere in the US administration about the growing Islamisation of
the Pakistani armed forces. The US was used to a docile Pakistan and
yet Pakistan belied that assumption by becoming overtly nuclear. The
aggression in Kargil is a symptom of further Pakistani defiance of the
US and an assertion of its autonomous nuclear status. A defiant
nuclear Pakistan involved in international terrorism, narcotics
traffic, money laundering and Islamic terrorism has very little use
for the US.
Mutuality of Interests
Similarly, Pakistan was a convenient tool for China to keep India
countervailed within the subcontinent. The overt nuclearisation of the
subcontinent and Pakistan's roguish behaviour which can pose similar
threats to China in Xinjiang must make China reconsider seriously the
utility of its relationship with Pakistan. What happens in Kargil
today can be re-enacted across Mintaka and Kunjerab passes.
It is high time India seriously re-evaluated its long-held assumptions
on Pakistan's utility to the US and China. We must explore the
possibilities of developing a better understanding on a mutuality of
interests with the US and China, however limited their scope may be.
Back
Top
|
