Author: Bharat Wariavwalla
Publication: The Tribune
Date: June 25, 2002
URL: http://www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20020625/edit.htm#4
Perhaps, at Kaluchak we defeated
the Pakistan-based terror machine. The killing of some 30 civilians and
soldiers at Kaluchak in Jammu on May 14 filled the Prime Minister with
the resolve to act which he had lacked till then. In a public speech in
Manali where he had a tension-filled holiday two weeks ago, he admitted
that he should have acted after the December 13th terrorist attack on the
Parliament complex but failed to do so because of international pressure.
So, he did after Kaluchak what he
had failed to do after the December 13 event. It appears that our massive
deployment of force along the border and the message it carried to Pakistan
that we would risk a war with the belligerent neighbour if the latter did
not stop its support for terrorist activities had a desired impact on the
Musharraf regime.
The strategy has worked. Pakistan
has conveyed to us through US Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage
and Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld that it would stop for good terrorists
activities on the LoC. We believe his assurances, for the present at least,
and have, therefore, reached a limited rapprochement with General Musharraf's
Pakistan.
The December 13 event gave us the
cause to deploy force aimed at fighting a full- fledged conventional war
with Pakistan. The Kaluchak event gave us an occasion to convey to Pakistan
that we would use it to prevent the recurrence of such events. Capability
and intention have to go together. The scope of the war was deliberately
left undefined.
The Vajpayee government did what
the USA and Israel have done since the 9/11 event: fight wars against terror
with the means they think fit and at the time of their choosing. We have
unmistakably conveyed to the adversary our intention to fight a war against
terror.
This strategy differs from all other
strategies we have deployed in the past: it is offensive in both capability
and intention. In 1965 Pakistan started the war and we contained it, by
luck and the courage of General Harbux Singh at the battle of Khem Karan.
In 1971 we were engaged in a defensive action on the western border to
carry out the offensive on the eastern front to break up Pakistan.
In the late eighties and the nineties
we and Pakistan have had several military encounters, all over Kashmir.
Operation Brasstack in 1987 was an encounter that came about because of
a misunderstanding on both sides. The May, 1990, confrontation came about
in the wake of the outbreak of wide unrest among the Kashmiris in 1989.
Our sarkari defence analysts are silent about it. Only the Americans have
talked about it, only to tell us how reckless. We and Pakistan were and
how Mr Robert Gates, the CIA Director, saved us from a nuclear collision.
The Kargil war of 1999 was launched by Pakistan to shift the LoC in its
favour. We beat them by a purely defensive action.
More than at anytime since the 9/11
event there is now a greater recognition on the part of the USA and Britain
that they and us have the same enemy: Al-Qaida and other Pakistan-Afghanistan
based terrorist organisations. US Defence Secretary Rumsfeld said in Delhi
that Al-Qaida was operating along the LoC though later he went back on
these words in Islamabad.
Till now the USA and Britain had
kept their fight against terror separate from India's despite our pleadings
to make war on terror a common cause. After the 9/11 event Foreign Minister
Jaswant Singh even offered bases to the Americans to fight terror but they
politely spurned it.
No doubt they needed Pakistan much
more than India because that country is the home of some of the most vicious
terrorist organisations. Now Pakistan is asked to witness the destruction
of the predator it had reared for so long: the terrorist. The move is brilliant,
but the person against whom it is directed is also wickedly clever to see
through it. General Musharraf is cooperating with the Americans but only
to the extent needed to get American money and American support for his
regime. Much like his predecessor, Zia-ul-Haq, he cooperates with America
but without giving up his policy objective in Kashmir.
Perhaps, General Musharraf would
have been able to pursue his objectives in Kashmir had we not shown a glint
of steel at the LoC and told him that the cost of supporting terror could
be war. It's our offensive that has made him publicly acknowledge in his
recent speech that Pakistan had spawned terrorism in Kashmir. This must
greatly disturb the core Pakistani leadership which has been carrying a
covert war against India for so long.
We can beat the terrorists in Kashmir
by clearly distinguishing them and the political opponents of the present
government in Srinagar. For the past 15 years since the first manifestation
of political unrest in Kashmir in 1988, Delhi has regarded all dissent
in Kashmir as the work of Pakistan and its collaborators in Srinagar. Kashmir
is seen as a security problem which can be solved only militarily. The
repression of political opposition and rigging of elections, as it is alleged,
are our response to the problems we face in Kashmir.
Ridding J&K of terrorists will
be possible only when the people of Kashmir enthusiastically support or
fight against the terrorists; and that will happen only when the Kashmiris
have the government they have freely chosen.
A recent MORI poll, an independent
market research company, conducted among the people of Jammu and Kashmir
and Ladakh, clearly shows how they long for peace and democracy and how
they resent foreign militants for all they have done in the state for the
past 15 years or so.
True, 72 per cent of the people
interviewed are for "azadi", but they may perhaps settle for autonomy.
Mr Shabir Shah is a popular leader in the valley, and he is indeed moderate
and certainly has no love for Pakistan. According to the MORI poll, 86
per cent of the people are for free and fair elections, 76 per cent for
preserving their cultural identity, Kashmiriyat and 65 per cent think that
foreign militants have harmed Kashmir.
The coming election in J&K is
of critical importance for India. Pakistan can be more effectively defeated
by a fair election than by military means. And we will enrich our democracy
by giving Kashmiriyat a well-deserved place in it.
(The writer is a Delhi-based thinker
and political analyst.)
