Invigorating ‘longstanding’ Indo-Russian Ties

Prime Minister Narendra Modi during the joint conference at 17^th Indo-Russian summit said in Russian “an old friend is better than two new ones” in an apparent reference to the current geopolitical scenario. The remark was aimed at Russia’s drift towards Pakistan to reposition itself in the South Asia region. Seemingly, miffed by India’s closeness with US, Russia started flirting Pakistan. Moscow indeed sold four Mi-35 attack helicopters to Pakistan when its ties deteriorated with US and built a $2billion gas line. The long-standing Indo-Russian ties ruffled, owing to Russia’s decision to conduct first joint military exercise with Pakistan at a time when India was contemplating strikes against the regional neighbor. Despite India’s objections Russia went ahead with the bilateral exercises with Pakistan when Indian troops are in Vladivostok to participate in the eighth joint military exercises Indra-2016. The main theme of the exercises was “counter-terrorism operations in semi mountainous and jungle terrain under UN mandate”. The agenda of Russo-Pakistan joint exercises, Druzbha-2016 on high altitude warfare, were held at Army High Altitude School in northern Pakistan, Cherat.  Allaying Indian fears, Moscow assured that exercises will not be held in disputed regions. Amidst this bilateral turbulence, India reached out to Russia to infuse new life into traditional relations with Russia and to strengthen Druzhbha-Dosti at the 17^th India-Russia Annual Summit held along the sidelines of the 8^th BRICS Summit, Goa. Both countries besides, reviewing bilateral Special and Privileged Strategic Partnership rooted in mutual trust and friendship, signed 17 cooperative agreements taking economic ties to unprecedented heights. Consolidation of Indo-Russian ties and significant tangible outcomes of the bilateral friendship have instilled hope and faith.

Seven Decades of Diplomatic Ties

The year 2017, would mark 70 years of diplomatic relations between the countries. A rather dispassionate analysis of the journey so far can help India to reinvent old links. India always considered Soviet Union as a reliable friend. After its collapse, Russia inherited the close diplomatic ties with India. Russia donned the role of India’s “best friend forever” for lending fervent support to India’s position on Kashmir. In 1950’s when the Anglo-American lobby made a desperate attempt to seal-off Kashmir in favor of Pakistan, Russia supported India by exercising veto power at the UNSC. Later in 1955 Khruschev on his state visit to India travelled to Kashmir. Enamored by the public reception, he proclaimed to help India whenever it is in trouble. But in fact, Russia’s relations with India are guided by its own strategic consideration. Growing rift between Soviet Union and China propelled Moscow to draw closer to India. When India’s tensions with China peaked in 1959, Russia declined to support China in border dispute and offered MiG-21 to India. (While Pakistan was provided arms by Eisenhower in 1954, Indian requests were turned down). But when war erupted in 1962, Khruschev withheld delivery of the MiG’s and shared its intelligence on India with China. Russia’s sudden reversal was in response to India’s turn towards US. After war MiG’s were supplied to India.

In 1965 Russia played a crucial role in bringing about ceasefire between India and Pakistan. India turned to Russia for mediation after war, Leonid Brezhnev successor of Khruschev not only failed to condemn Pakistan for incursion into Rann of Kutch but coerced India to return the captured territories. Russia in fact secretly harbored a desire to forge relations with Pakistan in the cold war era. Russian uncertainty towards India can be attributed to Delhi’s foreign policy with foundations in Non-Alignment. After 1965 Russia began to feel that mutual hostilities of India and Pakistan would play to China’s advantage. So, it announced supply of military equipment to Pakistan. India was infuriated and raised severe objections. Russia backed off and anticipated treaty of friendship with India. In the meanwhile, Sino-Soviet relations deteriorated and were marred by Zhenbao incident along the Ussuri River in 1969.

By 1970 India was reeling under the constant influx of refugees from East Bengal, troubled India sought international support. India’s hopes of support were dashed when US, China, Pakistan reached a consensus on East Bengal. Then, in contravention to Non-Aligned principles, Indira Gandhi signed Indo-Soviet Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Cooperation in August 1971. Soviet Union advised India not to escalate tensions and avert war. But as refugee influx reached threatening proportions, Indira Gandhi travelled to Soviet Union again in October 1971 to seek Soviet support. During the war, Soviet Union extended invaluable support to India. But, again in 1972 after the war, Soviet insisted that India should return 93,000 prisoners of war. Throughout 1970s and 1980s India and Russia enjoyed great comaraderie and friendship.

Despite the intensity of partnership, Soviet refused to concede Indian requests of pulling out of Afghanistan. Soviet Union relied on the false assurances of Zia-ul-Haq and continued to prevail over Afghanistan. Unfortunately, Soviet failed to recognize the deep entrenched revenge harbored by Pakistan towards Moscow for its unconditional support to India during Bangladesh war. Pakistani Jihad dislodged Russian regime in Afghanistan. The ambitious Afghanistan war eventually resulted in the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Areas of Cooperation

While there have been differences between both countries, India and Russia remained best of the friends. Unlike the US, Soviet Union didn’t provide any military equipment to Pakistan. Over the years, both sides strengthened relationship through cooperation in defence, space, transfer of technology and civil nuclear energy. India is now the second biggest market for Russian military equipment and over 70% of India’s military equipment is of Russian origin. Till 1999, Indian military purchases were made from Russia. India subsequently diversified arms purchase and US too notched up several arms deals becoming one of the largest vendors for India.  Bilateral trade and investments picked up greater momentum. Owing to surge in bilateral trade in recent years, both countries have set a target of $30billion by 2025. Besides, working together with China in the trilateral RIC (Russia, India, China) both countries are collaborating towards issues of global interest through various multilateral forums like the UN, BRICS and G20. Russia strongly supported India’s escalation from Observer Status to full membership in SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization). Russia reaffirmed support to India’s candidature for expanded UNSC, welcomed India’s membership for NSG and supported India’s application to APEC.

Outcomes of the India-Russia Summit

A bilateral investment fund was created by the National Infrastructure Investment Fund (NIIF) of India with Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) to facilitate high- technology investments in both countries.

Investments in areas sectors like pharmaceuticals, chemicals, mining, machine building, implementation of infrastructure projects, cooperation in Railway sector, fertilizer production, automobiles and aircraft building in each other’s country and increased focus on the construction of the International North-South Corridor was welcomed.

 Expanding cooperation under the “Strategic Vision to Strengthen Cooperation in the Peace Uses of Atomic Energy between Russian Federation and Republic of India” signed in Dec 2014, Kudankulam Unit 1 after attaining full power capacity was dedicated to nation by both leaders in August 2016. During the current summit, Unit 2 of Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant was jointly dedicated and “pouring of concrete” for Unit-3 and Unit-4 was witnessed. General Frame Work Agreement and the Credit Protocol for Unit-5 and Unit-6 was discussed.

Russia welcomed Indian acquisition of two oil companies in Russia and invited Indian companies in joint exploration in the off-shore Arctic circle. Several key agreements are signed to deepen-defence cooperation, space cooperation, cyber cooperation, security and disaster management and in enhancing links in cultural exchange, education, science and technology.

India and Russia have decided to develop next generation of the cruise missiles, Brahmos with over 600km range, can cover any area in Pakistan. Unlike the ballistic missiles whose initial half of journey is powered and the later uses gravity to complete the trajectory, cruise missiles flight is completely powered and can hit any protected target with extreme precision.

India signed a $10.5 billion pact for acquiring air defence missile system, four Krevak or Talwar class stealth frigates (two built in Russia other two to be constructed in India with Russian assistance) and joint production of 200 Kamov-226T light utility vehicles. Kamov helicopters can operate at 20,000 ft high making them suitable for flying to Siachen Glacier. The five new-generation $5 billion S-400 Truimf long range air defense missile systems include three types of missiles which can fly at hypersonic and supersonic range to intercept targets in the range of 120-400km. India is second customer after China.

Energy deal of $13 billion acquisition of the Essar Oil’s Vadinar oil refinery, by Russian-State Owned oil gaint Rosenft drew international attention. This mutually beneficial deal will help India to diversify its oil imports and reduce reliance on Middle East which is now currently exploring European markets. While Russia can reassert its role in global oil market at a time when low oil prices began to hits its economy. This deal is real shot in arm for Russia since India’s oil demands are projected to increase till 2040.

MoU for joint study between Engineers India Limited and Gazprom for constructing a $25 billion natural gas pipeline.

Agreement for lease of second nuclear attack submarine of Akula class, worth $2 billion as the lease of first submarine INS Chakra expires by 2021. Few days back, indigenously developed nuclear submarine INS Arihant was commissioned into service.

Issues Discussed

Expressed concerns about deteriorating situation in Afghanistan, both sides condemned terrorism in all forms and manifestations, pitched for “zero tolerance for direct or indirect support of terrorism” and pitched for earliest conclusion of CCIT and called for comprehensive international collaboration to combat terror. Russia strongly condemned Uri attacks and expressed concern about the fact that attacks originated from Pakistan. It endorsed surgical strikes against terror launch pads across the LoC and called for “isolation of Pakistan beyond South Asia”. Russian solidarity assuaged Indian concerns about its Pakistani tilt.

Both sides, raised concerns over prevailing instability in South-Eastern Ukraine and supported complete implementation of Minsk Agreements of Feb, 2015. Stressed the urgent need for cessation of hostilities in Syria and deliverance of humanitarian aid.

India thus invested great energies in reviving friendship with Russia. Till now irrespective of ideological leanings, Indian leaderships of various hues favored strong bilateral ties with Russia. Strategic geopolitical alignments of cold war era- China with the West and the Soviet Union’s animosity with China are now replaced with dynamic alignments. Russia having suffered tumultuous jolt with the collapse of Soviet Union is now partnering with China.  As the intimidating hegemony of China turned it into an adversary of the West.  Russia’s dalliance with Pakistan and contacts with Japan, Turkey and Saudi Arabia are part of its desperate attempts to recover lost ground in global arena. In the process, by cozying up to Pakistan, undermining the sensitivities of India, Russia conveyed its message loud and clear. Alternatively, Russia can ill afford to side India for Pakistan and begin arms sales with the later since markets of Islamabad are not robust. Just like Russia, India is also trying to position itself internationally and is enthusiastic to play a vital role in global order. Hence, Delhi is trying to maximize its engagements with various partners in this multi-polar World. But India can’t take Russia for granted. New Delhi should expand the horizons of its foreign policy and endeavor to sustain the momentum in the Indo-Russian relations.

@ Copyrights reserved.

India's massive BRICS-BIMSTEC diplomatic outreach

The massive diplomatic blitzkrieg at Goa should indeed find a special place in annals of Indian foreign policy for the audaciously bringing out a collaborative commitment on fighting terrorism. Donning the chairmanship of BRICS, India hosted the leaders at Goa on Oct 15^th-16^th and deftly utilized the platform to expand cooperation with regional partners by extending invitation to BIMSTEC (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectorial Technical and Economic Cooperation) members. Having firmed up relations with the West through the Link West Policy, Prime Minister Modi during the current strategic diplomatic engagement strengthened the neighborhood first to its east and act east policy by reaching out to BIMSTEC partners. One of the corner stones of Modi’s foreign policy program has been his keen interest in engaging with Bay of Bengal littoral states. With the eventual collapse of SAARC regional engagement owing to Pakistan’s intransigence, India began to explore new vistas for regional cooperation. The lacunae created by absence of cooperation among SAARC nations, propelled leaders in the South Asian region to promote alternative forum to strengthen regionalism. The viable alternative format, BIMSTEC was the immediate choice. BIMSTEC created two decades ago with a mission of integrating two Regions-South Asia (Bhutan, Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Sri Lanka) and South East Asia (Thailand and Myanmar) remained incapacitated due to lack of steering leadership initiative. With China making inroads into various South Asian countries for gaining access to Bay of Bengal and Indian Ocean, the idea of sub regional cooperation began to gain more momentum. Regional cooperation with Bay of Bengal as a vehicle has been on the top of mind for NDA regime for quite some time. With Sri Lanka and Bangladesh evincing similar interest, Modi infused a fresh breath of air into the moribund regional economic cooperation forum-BIMSTEC. In an effort to revive and revitalize the concept of regionalism for improved economic cooperation, Modi expanded the summit meet of BRICS to give a push to regional aspirations. India’s renewed push for regional connectivity is in part driven by the burgeoning Chinese aggressiveness of roping in four South Asian countries (India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Myanmar) for its One Belt One Road (OBOR).

India hosted BRICS at a time when the South Asian geopolitics are in flux. After the Uri attacks, New Delhi pulled out all strings to isolate Pakistan in the region. With neighbors Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka and Bhutan firmly supporting India’s position on cross-border terrorism perpetrated by Pakistan the process of regional isolation was complete. Simultaneously, India’s relations with China too nose-dived. Downward spiraling of Indo-Chinese relations in the recent past has been a consequence of several interrelated events. With India affirmatively pushing for Pakistan’s isolation and firming up battle against terrorism, China vetoed India’s efforts at UN of imposing sanctions against LeT chief, Masood Azhar on technical grounds, stalled India’s NSG membership. In a more recent development, China blocked a tributary of Brahmaputra Xinbuqu, originating in Tibet and flowing into India citing construction of the most expensive Lalho hydro-electric power. Further India’s objection to CPEC project passing through POK and Gilgit Baltistan region and complete sealing on 3,323-km long western border with Pakistan irked China. Simultaneously, Russia’s decision of going ahead with joint military exercises with Pakistan for the first time despite India’s opposition post Uri attacks raised serious concerns about the long standing Indo-Russian relations. India can ill afford to ignore any fractures in relations with China (immediate neighbor with historical antipathy) and Russia (partner in India’s technological pursuits). Modi efficaciously utilized BRICS summit to energize and resurrect relations with these countries.

The origin of BRICS is interesting. Jim O Neill, an investment analyst at Goldman Sachs in 2001 in his econometric analyses projected that counties India, Brazil, Russia and China with their potential for growth would collectively occupy a greater economic space. He suitably coined the acronym BRIC and his prospective analyses paved the way for the formation of the unique geopolitical group for economic cooperation. Subsequently, foreign ministers of these four countries met along the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in 2006 officiating the formation of the group. The first BRIC summit was held in Yekaterinburg, Russia in 2009. Key focus of the group was on ameliorating global economic situation and reforming of financial institutions. By 2010 South Africa expressed willingness to be part the group and with its formal admission, BRICS in its present form has emerged. Since its inception, BRICS with its limited significance accumulated decent amounts of accolades and criticisms. Clearly, one of the defining features of BRICS has been an effort to establish institutes that are more friendly and accommodative to emerging countries in the post American order. Group basically relied on “non-interference, equality and mutual benefit” in conducting bilateral relations. India strengthened the vision of BRICS which was scoffed by the West as a scrambled alphabetical geopolitical grouping with no common agenda binding the forum. In the last summit held at New Delhi in 2012, India sowed the seeds for New Development Bank and Contingency Reserve Arrangement. Subsequently, China and Russia who were keen on fostering multilateral institutions to counteract the dominant western influence spearheaded the formation of New Development Bank (NDB). The bank head quartered in Shanghai has started lending with India receiving the $300 million loan for green-fields project. Soon the first regional office will be opened in Johannesburg, South Africa. As of now BRICS comprises of 43% of World Population, accounts for 30% of global GDP and 17% of global trade. But over a period of time, the economic clout of the group began to erode with Russia and Brazil slipping off the economic growth trajectory and China bracing lingering slowdown and South African economy contracting. Among these countries, India emerged as the lone bright spot posting over 7% annual growth.

The theme of the BRICS-BIMSTEC summit at Goa with a theme of Building Responsive, Inclusive and Collective Solutions ended on a high note. The 109 para Goa Declaration envisaged to create new institutions and agencies bringing about greater cohesion and strategic traction to the group. Aside various initiatives, the 8^th BRICS summit shall be reckoned for India’s sure footedness, incontrovertible diplomatic acumen in convincing all partners to talk tough on terrorism. While the focus of the BRICS summit and its outcomes were along the expected lines. But the way India single-handedly cornered Pakistan for harboring terror havens is commendable. Throughout the summit, Modi unequivocally condemned actions of Pakistan and spared no efforts to accomplish the agenda of isolation of the regional adversary. Modi in his address at Goa said “tragically its (terrorism) mothership is a country in India’s neighborhood. We agreed that those who support, nurture, shelter and sponsor forces of violence and terror are as much a threat to us as terrorists themselves” While India couldn’t incorporate references to cross-border terrorism due to Chinese resistance but agreement is reached over holistic approach in fighting terrorism including “dismantling of terrorist bases”. Modi was successful in bringing about unanimity among the BRICS countries in fighting terrorism.

Besides, cogently denouncing the terrorism, Goa Declaration expressed concerns over the persisting security challenges in Afghanistan, security, Middle East and North Africa. Pitched for expansion of the UN Security Council and supported permanent membership status to Brazil, India and South Africa. Other significant outcomes of the summit meet included- agreement on setting up a credit rating agency for emerging countries, BRICS Innovation Fund, BRICS Railway Research Network and BRICS sports council. BRICS countries signed three pacts for establishment of Agriculture Research Platform, Mutual Cooperation between Diplomatic Agencies and regulation on customs cooperation committee of the BRICS. Summit has proposed to setup a think tank to New Development Bank under the name of BRICS Economic Research Council. Members countries agreed to scale-up intra BRICS economic relationship, promote digital economy and start-up culture.  By and large the summit infused new energy into the grouping of the emerging countries that has immense potential to revitalize the slowing World economy and rewrite the rules of fluctuating global order.

However, Indian strategists maintained that Indian agenda of isolating Pakistan was undercut by China at the multilateral summit in Indian soil. Indeed, while BIMSTEC unequivocally condemned cross-border terrorism, India’s attempts to name Pakistani terror outfits in the declaration were impeded by insurmountable China wall. Alternatively, the terror outfits designated by the UN -ISIL and Jabhat Al-Nusra both threats to China and Russia were referred in the declaration. China, with its dubious propositions stalled India’s efforts to name and shame Pakistan’s terror operatives on a multilateral grouping, reiterating that the legendary Nehruvian paradigm of Hindi-Chini bhai bhai is a delusion. Indian strategic experts opined that while Russia wasn’t averse to Indian keenness of proscribing Pakistani militant groups in Goa declaration, it simply buckled under Chinese opposition. With US and Europe gearing to impose fresh set of sanctions on Russia and Syria for cease fire violations, Moscow will be forced into Beijing’s embrace though rather disapprovingly.

BIMSTEC document too finds no mention of the militant outfits. But the member countries called for stern action against states providing safe havens to terror groups and denounced glorification of terrorists.

It must be admitted that till now Pakistan territory was considered as a strategic asset by super powers who supported, financed its roots of terror. Till the turn of the century and even little later, Pakistan was a close chum of the US. Sino-Pakistan relations which initially thrived on the oxygen of anti-Indian agenda reached a hilt with Pakistan turning into a Chinese colony. Hence anticipating China’s support on cross-border terrorism might be whimsical. As a matter of fact, consecutive Indian political regimes remained smug and never made any concerted efforts to globally expose the nefarious activities of Pakistan. India just started making right kind of noises under Modi now and began making right calls in right direction. At this juncture, it must be recalled that Modi’s unrelenting efforts in garnering international support for adoption of Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT) received a major thumbs up from all the countries. CCIT can effectively be utilized as a strategic tool to nail Pakistan for its clandestine activities. Hence the massive diplomatic outreach maneuver of Modi is highly commendable.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Opposition Parties Casting Aspersions on Surgical Strikes

The series of tirades raised by opposition leaders casting aspersions on the veracity of surgical strikes are deplorable and reprehensible. The author in her article on surgical strikes made opening remark indicating that “the hues of response varied from elation, surprise and suspicion”. The unequivocal show of confidence and support demonstrated by the political party leaders’ post-surgical strikes lauding the bold action of Prime Minister Modi simply vanquished into thin airs. Within days, the jubilation of bringing the clandestine neighbor to its knees was replaced by the strong urge of conquest over vote bank. Brandishing his true political colors, Arvind Kejriwal in a video message while praising Modi and saluting the Army had asked for proof of surgical strikes instigating all other political parties to jump into the fray. Kejriwal’s callous remarks are no different from his stand on Kashmir when he supported Prashant Bhushan’s Give Kashmir to Pakistan statement. This was followed by Congress Leader Sanjay Nirupam’s controversial press statements “Every Indian wants surgical strikes against Pakistan but not a fake one to extract just political benefit by BJP”. The Congress while distancing itself from the statement reiterated similar stand by carefully rephrasing the sentence and party spokesperson Randeep Surjewala expressed “It’s time for the government to expose malicious propaganda. The evidence should be made public”. On the same day, Chidambaram, who has served as the Home Minister of India too demanded for a proof. Congress leaders, Digvijay Singh, former Union Minister Anand Sharma too joined the brigade. Digvijay Singh in an interview remarked that he was not bothered about Pakistan’s denial of the surgical strikes but concerned about UN spokesperson and observers unwarranted denial and its impact on Army’s credibility.

For all the bone-less courage displayed in questioning the Modi, Kejriwal’s tireless services were rewarded by donning him as the Indian hero championing Pakistan’s cause in all its newspapers. Not to be left behind of all the laurels from the regional adversary, JD (U) joined the AAP in demanding government to furnish proof of evidence. Congress spokesperson announced that “We are proud that, even in the past, our forces had successfully conducted such surgical strikes on numerous occasions- particularly on September 1^st 2011, July 28^th 2013 and January 14^th 2014, giving a befitting reply to the enemy”. He added, “UPA government led by Manmohan Singh, had its maturity, wisdom and interest of the national security, avoided making a loud claim to ensure the effective response and action of the Indian Army, which had the full support of political leadership”. To its worst embarrassment, former DGMO of the Army from 2012-2014 Lt. Gen. Vinod Bhatia refuted Congress claims of strikes in 2013. He replied “Earlier strikes, they were not even strikes, they were cross-border operations done at the local level without much planning and without much thought” puncturing Congress’s bluster. Sharad Pawar of NCP joined the raging political debate and added that UPA conducted four surgical strikes but never boasted about the action.

Series of flip-flops, unconditional apologies tendered by various political leaders on the TV show in past couple of days’ testimonies their avarice for power and money. The ridiculous mockery of the surgical strikes by the AAP leader Kapil Mishra in a public meeting yesterday vouches for their deep seated lust for political ascendency. The brazen, ludicrous comments and untenable tone of the politicians undermining the great valor of Indian Armed Forces is simply disgusting. Ungracious remarks of politicians might cost India its sovereignty. If not for the indomitable courage, valor and sacrifice of the Armed Forces, India would have lost its territories to belligerent neighbors.

The discussion about the controversial statements of opposition leaders is not to show that BJP is all clear and sanctimonious. Rather BJP must show more restraint and refrain from chest-thumping since the real heroes who deserve the credit are the soldiers at the frontiers who are guarding the borders 24X7 relentlessly. The concurrence of opposition chorus against the government is a worrying development. Surgical strikes have stuck a cord of assertive nationalism among people. There has been a sudden surge of growing public adulation and opposition parties are unable to withstand Modi’s grudging admiration domestically and internationally. Sadly, at a time when multi-pronged diplomatic strategy adopted by the NDA government started yielding results and Pakistan started feeling the pinch of isolation, Indian politicians are shamelessly engaged in a war of words. The Pakistani news agency Dawn carried an exclusive article where the civilian government “in a blunt, orchestrated and unprecedented warning has informed military leadership of growing international isolation of Pakistan and sought consensus on several key actions by the state”. Clearly, Pakistan is reeling under the strain of Sharif Vs Sharif.

Unfortunately, the constant political bickering and simmering incongruences in crucial aspects like national security is highly debilitating. While the political slugfest is a common feature of a democratic country, it is highly unusual to find contrastingly opposing voices about issues vital to national interest. The hesitation of Indian politicians in out rightly condemning issues related to safety, integrity and security of nation is appalling. In no other nation of the World does politicians demand a proof for any action conducted by their army. Pakistan is known for its subterfuge, duplicity and pretense. Pakistan initially condemned the surgical strikes but rather quickly articulated that strikes have never occurred. Does the sudden twist of statements not ring alarm bells for the Indian politicians? By demanding proof of surgical strikes, they are simply playing into hands of Pakistan. It’s common sense. It’s not rocket science.

International community stood by India and strongly defended its position. Countries like US, Russia, Germany, France and other Muslim nations expressed their solidarity. What makes these politicians sing the tune of Pakistan that no strikes ever happened? If strikes haven’t happened where is the need to take the international media on a tour to its borders? Moreover, if strikes have never happened what did the Pakistan government show, in the sense what are the areas surveyed by the journalists. Why is there a damning urgency for the opposition to demand a proof? In this internet age, nothing can stay secret for long and eventually the proofs would be out sooner or later. Aren’t they simply playing into hands of Pakistan by keeping the security interests of India at stake? Moreover, at a time when India has shown the courage and dynamism to take the bull by its horns, why spoil the efforts? It is now obvious, that the so called political leaders are just worried about the outcomes of the upcoming assembly elections.

The venomous campaign against the government reached a hilt today with Rahul Gandhi’s Khoon ki Dalili comment. This outburst reverberated Congress’s visceral hatred towards Modi. It is in tune with Sonia Gandhi’s projection of Modi as Maut Ka Saudagar in the run up to General Elections. Clearly, the impatient rants, collaborative opposition fulmination of the opposition originates from their deep seated hatred towards Modi. It is unfortunate that the opposition blinded by anti-Modi maxim are resorting to imbecile offensive which is deleterious to national interests. Moreover, Military is a national asset. As former Lt. Gen. Shankar Ray Chaudhary pointed that just as Indira Gandhi was credited for the most convincing victory in 1971 similarly, the governments in power currently is entitled for the honor. But this should necessarily mean that BJP should draw political mileage from it. Realizing the acerbity of the political developments, Modi asked his ministers to stop chest-thumping and speaking about surgical strikes. Hope BJP leaders would stop indulging in unwarranted jingoism before the damage is done. In the meanwhile, to provide convincing evidence of strikes, Indian News Agencies are working on ground. The report by Praveen Swamy of Indian Express and the investigative journalism of Manoj Gupta of CNN-News 18 have provided valuable clues confirming the authenticity of surgical strikes.

The meaningless rants of the political iconoclasts reminded of the Winston Churchill’s Prophecy about India after independence. “Power will go to the hands of rascals, rogues, freebooters; all Indian leaders will be of low caliber and men of straw. They will have sweet tongues and silly hearts. They will fight amongst themselves for power and India will be lost in political squabbles”. In his speech made in the British Parliament House of Commons on March 6^th 1947 with reference to India Army he said- “Nevertheless, the great volunteer army in the World that fought on either side in that struggle was formed in India. More than three and a half million men came forward to support the King-Emperor and the cause of Britain; they came forward not by conscription or compulsion, but out of their loyalty to Britain and to all that Britain stood for in their lives”. Though the acerbic references made by racist like Churchill towards India are cynical they are unfortunately true. India, home to the one of the ancient civilizations had been a crowning glory among the World nations for its vast commercial, cultural and religious wealth. But the gradual decadency that loomed over the Indian subcontinent reduced it into a colony of the British Empire. Indeed, Indian history is littered by the stories of inept, callous, sacrilegious rulers who were instrumental for eventual downfall of the mighty country. Unfortunately, despite suffering brutal setbacks at the hands of various foreign invaders who mercilessly plundered the nation, desecrated religious places and ruthlessly committed genocides, neither the Indian rulers of those times nor the Indian politicians of the 21^st century failed to learn any lessons. Perhaps, it is right time that comprehensive studies on Indian history become part of the curriculum so that future generations would be wary of treacherous pitfalls overpassed by Indian rulers and leaders alike. The real scourge on India currently is absence of unity among the political dispensation when the nation is bracing a war-like situation. The top trend in Pakistan: # PakstandswithKejriwal says it all.

India is at crossroads and government is making calibrated moves to catapult the country to the next stage. Domestic political squabbles and lack of consensus on issues of national concerns might be detrimental. The diverse political voices should rather strengthen the democracy and facilitate the growth of country but not stifle the progress.

@ Copyrights reserved.

India ratifies the Paris Climate Agreement

India celebrated the International Day of Non-Violence and the birth anniversary of father of the Nation Mahatma Gandhi, by depositing ratification instruments of Paris Climate Agreement at UN headquarters New York. India has thus become the 62^nd nation to ratify the climate pact.  Making the announcement about India signing the Climate accord on Oct 2^nd, at the BJP National Council Meeting Kozhikode, Prime Minister Modi indicated that “the country is embarking on a sustainable developmental pathway of development without destruction”.

Paris Climate Accord

The treaty envisaged at Conference of Parties (COP)-21, Paris last year was the first comprehensive climate treaty adopted by 195 countries. India signed the agreement on April 22^nd, 2016. Reports published by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) indicated that extreme climate changes would set in if global temperatures rise beyond 2 degrees Celsius. Climate experts estimate that an overall emission cuts of 40-70% from 2010 to 2050 is required to clock the 2 degrees’ goal. The objective of the climate accord is to peg the increase in global temperatures to “well below” 2 degrees Celsius and preferably limit to 1.5-degree mark. While reduction of emissions hardly puts any onus on developed countries that reached the top rung of the developmental ladder undue pressure is exerted in developing countries. Hence in a bid to harness collaborative efforts, rich countries have pledged $100 billion a year towards global climate finance for developing countries working towards climate change projects. The progress of treaty will be reviewed every five years. But there is no penalty on nations missing the targets.

For the climate accord to come into force at least 55 countries accounting for latest 55% of the global greenhouse emissions causing climate change must ratify. While the first obligation was already fulfilled, India’s ratification has brought the pact tantalizingly close to implementation. India with a population of 1.2 billion is currently the fourth largest emitter of GHGs. As of now 62 countries accounting for 51.59% emissions have ratified the treaty. Once, the threshold range of 55% emissions is reached, climate pact would become legally binding on all signatories after a period of 1 month. Climate Pact received the needed momentum with China and US signing the pact at the inaugural session of G20 Summit at Hangzhou, China. China and US with 20.09% and 1 7.89% of the global emissions are biggest emitters. Besides, China, US and India the other major emitters are Russia and the EU. But Russia has to yet agree the Paris Agreement. On September 30^th, all environment ministers of 28 countries in a joint meeting informally gave an approval to EU to go ahead with ratification. Now, EU is all set to ratify the climate accord on 5^th Oct. Leaders are now hopeful that Paris Agreement could be in force before November 7^th, Marrakesh, COP-22 meet. Though EU warned that internal processes would allow EU to ratify by 2017, this sudden development is widely celebrated by environmental groups. After EU, reports now indicate that Canada and Japan are expediting the ratification process. Congruently, these propitious developments are bound to culminate in collective global action offering a hope for a better life for future generations.

India’s Stand on Ratification

India under Modi has demonstrated a new enthusiasm to work towards global warming. At the inaugural session of the Paris Climate Meet, reiterating India’s ancient tradition of working in harmony with environment, Modi declared that India will reduce emissions by 33 to 35% of 2005 levels and that 40% of the installed capacity will be from non-fossil fuels. He added that India will aim to reach it by adding 175 GW renewable energy capacity by 2022 and promised to increase the tree cover by five million hectares to act as sink for at least 2.5 billion tons of Carbon dioxide. It is formidable challenge for India for its needs $2.5 trillion to reach this objective. This ambitious goal can be pursued provided developed nations share technology and actively finance the climate change projects. He urged developed countries to cut emissions, mobilize $100 billion annually by 2020 for mitigation and adaptation in the developing countries to fulfill their commitment in a “credible, transparent and meaningful way”. He also launched International Solar Alliance (ISA) of over 120 countries with President Francois Hollande at the COP-21 summit to make the dream of universal access to clean energy a reality.

Modi’s commitment towards climate change synced with Obama’s cherished desire to bank on climate legacy. Both leaders during their bilateral talks in June 2016, reaffirmed their commitment towards the shared objective of climate change in the Joint Statement. In the meanwhile, India actively endeavored to get into the nuclear regime, NSG to pursue the dream of reaching its goal of envisaging 40% electricity from renewable sources. But Indian dreams were bulldozed by Chinese road block. Though US lobbied hard for India’s NSG membership, India failed to cross the barrier of consensus decision. After the NSG disappointment, MEA issued a statement saying that “our application has acquired immediacy in view of India’s INDC (Intended Nationally Determined Contributions) envisaging 40% of non-fossil power generation capacity by 2030. An early positive decision by the NSG would have allowed us to move forward on the Paris Agreement”. Vaguely linking Paris Accord ratification to NSG membership.

At the G20 summit when US and China sizzled in the honor of ratifying the Paris Accord, India firmly stayed away from making any commitments. Even the news reports at the G-20 summit projected that India was not domestically ready to ratify the treaty by the end of 2016. Eventually, nations began linking climate treaty ratification to India’s NSG membership pursuit. As a matter of fact, India has been making some progress on civil nuclear commerce front since 2008 when NSG issued an exemption to India. Hence the argument of India not conceding to climate pact for not obtaining NSG may not be appropriate. Moreover, India envisaged to generate clean energy through solar and wind energy as opposed to civil nuclear energy of target 16 GW or 6.91% of clean energy commitments. However, India had used NSG membership as a bargaining tactic to ratify Paris accord. Literally, ambiguity shrouded over India’s commitment of Climate change.  Hence, Modi’s announcement on ratification of Climate Pact took the World by surprise.

Proactive Approach

India’s vibrant stand on the climate pact was widely welcomed by environmentalists and global community. New Delhi till now had earned reputation of being a contrarian by holding onto the carping and obstructive approach. Many a times, it missed the bus for arriving late. The proactive approach exuded by India now reflects its resolve to play a key role in global movements. Indeed, India’s rather hurried decision seems to be motivated by the desire to play a crucial role ahead of the meeting of parties of Montreal Protocol on Substances that deplete the Ozone layer starting from Oct 10^th at Kigali. The meet seeks to foster negotiations on reducing the production and use of hydrofluorocarbons (HFC)s. HFCs trap heat, create holes in Ozone layer and can raise the temperature by 0.5C. Phasing out of HFCs is thus crucial for reviving the depleting ozone layer and pegging the temperature raise. While remarkable convergence was displayed by countries on HFC phase down, different nations have scheduled different baseline year and freezing year. Freezing year is one in which HFC use will peak and then it is phased out completely. Baseline year is instrumental in fixing levels. India has stuck to baseline of 2028-30 and freezing year of 2031. Developed nations are insisting on early freezing year of 2021. India is contemplating on taking an active role in championing the voices of developing countries. It is willing to arrive at a negotiable freezing year provided rich countries ensure proper funding and technology for development of low global warming potential (GWP) alternatives and capacity building.

India toughened its stand on negotiations that impose cap on the emissions by aviation sector. Unlike in rich countries, India’s fledging aviation industry hasn’t realized its potential yet and hence India indicated that it will not commit on emissions in the sector till 2020. While these emissions are not covered under Paris accord, cuts on the emissions in this sector are now discussed in the assembly of International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), Montreal. Having ratified the climate pact, India can now endeavor to effectively articulate the interests of developing countries. Concerted action on climate is one of the major prerequisites for achieving the target of the UN Sustainable Developmental Goals (SDG). Thus India not only demonstrated its commitment towards climate change but upheld the ideals of SDG, the theme of the 71^st UN session.

Post ratification, the immediate task before India is to arrive at a national environmental plan to limit the temperature rise. Unlike the developed countries India had to balance its carbon emissions with economic development objectives. While the per capita emissions of India (ranked 140^th) are much lower than developed countries, the cumulative emissions make it fourth largest emitter drawing the attention of the international community. Nearly 300 million people in India don’t have access to electricity and India’s reliance on dirty coal reserves have irrevocably escalated carbon emissions turning it into largest polluter. Thus to meet the growing energy requirements of developing economy, India should now focus attention on generating energy from renewable resources in an efficient and sustainable way. 

@ Copyrights reserved.

India’s Surgical Strikes Against Pakistan- A game changer

As the news of surgical strikes by India against Pakistan was abuzz, the hues of response varied from elation, surprise and suspicion. For all those, who undermined the Indian leadership and military capabilities this is a formidable lump in the throat. Details apart, the surgical strikes carried out by the Northern Command were much needed to infuse confidence, sense of pride and respect for valor. The massive causalities inflicted by terrorists during the Uri attacks had not only exposed chinks in India’s armor but greatly dented morale of the armed personnel. Indian public too felt infuriated as Indian government had in no clear terms called for an instantaneous response. Having borne the brunt of brutal terrorist attacks Indian public felt cheated when the party which vociferously denounced every act of Pakistan in opposition failed to deliver instantaneous justice. Though the DGMO Lt. Gen. Ranabir Singh asserted that “We will avenge the killings of our soldiers, but we will do so on cold-blooded professionally military assessment, and on a timeline of our choosing, not one dictated by political imperatives or the prime-time news cycle” people hardly found any respite.

In the meanwhile, Indian leadership critically evaluated plausible options to inflict damage to Pakistan on a long term. India finally harped on a multi-pronged approach to rein upon the brazen terror attacks. A range of diplomatic, political and economic assaults were considered. On diplomatic front, exercising right to reply India lacerated Sharif’s claims at UN word by word by saying that “the Land of Taxila, one of the greatest centers of ancient learning is now host to Ivy League of terrorism. It attracts aspirants and apprentices from all over the World”. India added that Pakistan had a “long standing policy of sponsoring terrorism, the consequences of which have spread well beyond our region.” The first secretary Eenam Gambhir added that Pakistan “channelizes billions of dollars, much of it is diverted from international aid, to training, financing and supporting terrorist groups as militant proxies against its neighbors”. This coincided with US Senators Ted Poe and Dana Rohrabacher tabling a bill in Congress designating Pakistan as terror state. Simultaneously Indian Americans launched an online White House petition seeking the declaration of Pakistan as terrorist state gained tremendous response. The petition which promises action on local, state or international problems if the campaign receives 100,000 signatures. Before its official deadline of Oct 21^st the target was reached. Now the White House is forced to respond to it within 60 days. Besides, India openly snubbed Pakistan and decided not to attend the SAARC Summit at Islamabad. Fresh from the humiliating reception extended to Rajnath Singh when he attended the Interior Affairs Ministers Meeting of SAARC, Finance Minister refrained from participating in SAARC Finance Ministers meet. Continuing the precedent, Prime Minister will abstain from SAARC. With India’s position actively backed by Bangladesh, Bhutan and Afghanistan the process of the regional isolation of Pakistan has officially begun. While experts questioned the relevance owing to SAARC’s miniscule clout internationally, India religiously followed the agenda of diplomatic isolation irrespective of the outcomes. Interestingly, after the surgical strikes even Sri Lanka, Maldives and Nepal expressed their reservations about SAARC. Consequently, Islamabad was forced to take a call. Pakistan announced that SAARC meeting stands cancelled indefinitely. With this, Indian efforts of diplomatic isolation in the region has reached a new hilt.

To turn on the heat, India began reviewing the historical Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) brokered by World Bank in 1960. While India initially contemplated on scrapping IWT, it was perceived to be counterproductive. Instead India is considering three ways to use provisions of treaty to its advantage-firstly, suspension of meeting of Permanent Indus Commission so that grievance redressal mechanism is halted and Pakistan would meet a dead end, secondly restarting the Tulbul Project ( Pakistan calls it Wullar Bridge), India suspended the construction across Jhelum river in 1987 following objections from Pakistan, thirdly an inter-ministerial task force would be set up to monitor the water usage from Western Rivers-Ravi, Beas, Sutlej. India is considering on maximizing the use of waters from rivers governed by Pakistan-Jhelum, Chenab and Indus. While the repercussions may not be spontaneous desired effect will be felt within a span of 5-10 years. Finally, India is now seriously reconsidering the Most Favored Nation (MFN) status accorded by it in 1996 under the GATT where country grants a special favor like lower custom duty. But Pakistan hasn’t reciprocated citing non-tariff barriers and huge trade imbalance. Modi government is now critically reviewing all these aspects on a war-footing basis. Since perceptible outcomes are not immediate, Indian public failed to comprehend and appreciate the endeavors of NDA government.

The astounding success of the surgical strikes can be attributed to the element of the surprise. India took a measured approach and carefully executed it actions with diligence. India waited for Sushma Swaraj to deliver her address at the UN before carrying out surgical strikes and carefully used the international platform to expose Pakistan’s role as sponsor of terror state and the atrocities perpetrated by it in Baluchistan. Even Prime Minister Modi in his back to back address after Uri attacks refrained from mentioning about surgical strikes. Intellectuals hurried to construe that Modi’s speech at National Council meeting of BJP, Kozikhode reflected strategic restraint. His attempts to draw parallels between India and Pakistan in terms of economic progress and other aspects indicated that India was in no mood of retaliation. Even the tone and tenor of speech at the Prime Minister’s Mann Ki Baat on Sept 25^th hadn’t provided any clue about the upcoming military strikes against Pakistan. Indian masses, too resigned to the thoughts that Uri attacks too would go down the Indian history as yet another humiliation. But little did people realize that Indian leadership was strategizing a befitting reply. The days preceding surgical strikes too were dominated by several cease fire violations and massive infiltration bids. 

Over the decades, emboldened by India’s meek response to relentless terror attacks, Pakistan heavily relied on its low cost warfare to inflict heavy damage on India. Unchecked, unhindered the terror outfits flourished. The surgical strikes by Indian Army were thus timely, sending strong message to war-mongers and sections of Indian public that decried leadership for its inaction. India refrained from a full-blown conventional war, as India is at the cusp to progressive economic resurgence. In the Global Competitiveness Report for 2016-17 released few days back India climbed 16 places to settle at 39 position among 138 countries, while China is ranked 28.  Clearly, a conventional war might undo the recent economic gains, India rightly overcame the catch-22 kind of situation by conducting timely surgical strikes. Meanwhile, National Sensex crashed after the reports of strikes and suffered its worst fall post-Brexit. Despite the negative impact on trade and economy Indian Chamber of Commerce strongly supported surgical strike. Aside, retribution at this point has become inevitable to drive home the point that India is capable of defending itself and if need arises can retaliate reciprocally.

India’s surgical strikes against Pakistan invariably reminded of Indian Army’s “Operation Hot Pursuit” conducted along the Indo-Myanmar border to avenge the killing of 20 military personnel by the militants of National Socialist Council of Nagaland (Khaplang), NSCN (K) in Chandel District of Manipur. India then warned that “Western disturbances will be equally dealt with. Friendship and tolerance will go hand in hand. This is a beginning. India is Strong. This message should go to everyone” implying that India is not averse to launch such operations on its neighbors that harbor anti-Indian terror groups. However, Pakistan chose to downplay and deliberately hinted that Pakistan is not Myanmar and India shouldn’t think of any such action. These surgical strikes, a first by Indian army across LoC, undoubtedly punctured the bloated ego of Pakistan.

As the details emerge, DGMO announced that these strikes were launched to neutralize the terror pads gearing to push infiltrators across the border and were extremely successful. In the operation that lasted for four hours, Indian paratroopers ventured into 6.5km of PoK, and destroyed 8 launch pads. 38 terrorists and 2 Pakistan soldiers were killed. Now with Pakistan accusing India of fabrication of truth, Indian attacks evaded international attention. Also, since Indian operations are carried out in PoK, a legitimate Indian territory, this operation was considered as a massive combing operation aimed at extricating militants. Moreover, presence of Pakistan soldiers at the terror dungeons confirms Pakistan’s Army is hand is glove with its illegitimate bed partners-the UN designated terrorists.

Days after surgical strikes- World nations are slowly backing Indian stance. US, Russia, and other Muslim countries echoed Indian sentiments. But by all means, this retributory action would indeed propel Pakistan to retaliate with more force and India must be prepared for any eventuality. Further, these kind of action can’t force Pakistan to mend its ways. But inflicting significant damage might make enemy wary and threat of punitive retaliation will force enemy to reconsider the veracity of its clandestine activities. For the past seven decades, in various encounters with Pakistan it was proved beyond doubt that Pakistan understand the language of guns. India, by strategically executing the surgical strikes delivered the message in a language Rawalpindi clearly understands. Finally, Modi government deserves a big pat on back for walking the talk and demolishing the rhetoric. But for the exceptional valor and supreme sacrifice of Indian military and political commitment country would be wallowing the swarm of pusillanimity.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Uri terror attacks: Who is calling the shots?

As expected Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s address at the 71st session of UN General Assembly (UNGA) bereft of any reference to Uri terror attacks and bequeathing freedom fighter tag on Burhan Wani left India fuming. Exercising right to reply, Indian gave strong rebuttal. The UN has once again turned into platform for acrimonious exchange of words between the warring South Asian neighbors. Modi government which stormed into power on the promise of acche din, uniquely blended trade and economic ties with foreign policy. A promising beginning of massive global outreach began to resurrect the Indian economy. Fortuitous Uri terror attacks of Sept 18th besides generating unprecedented public anger, rechanneled India’s attention from the NSG membership campaign. The emotional despair and growing public pitch for an aggressive retaliation muffled a promising financial milestone of shrinking current account deficit in the first quarter.

Seven-decade long acrimony between India and Pakistan for Kashmir province resulted in four long conventional wars that gobbled accrued meagre economic gains and resulted in competitive nuclear weapons accumulation. The regional adversaries being non-signatories of NPT, growing nuclear stockpiles have become cause of international concern. In 2001, India moved forces towards border following a clandestine attack on Parliament by the terror outfits of Pakistan, threatened by a possibility of a nuclear war the West immediately intervened. While India characteristically imposed reins on nuclear weapons usage by embracing No-First Use (NFU) Policy, Pakistan’s no holds barred and invincibility of the non-state actors always evoked concerns among the World nations. Precisely, for the same reason any provocation, insurgency/escalation or war of words between India and Pakistan inevitably catches international attention. Strategic cooperation among South Asian countries was under siege due to Kashmir issue, burgeoning hegemonic influence of China is all set to decimate the flailing rubric. China’s perception of India as potential challenger in Asia and proximity with erstwhile Soviet Union found convergence in Pakistan’s hostility towards India. The foundations of Sino-Pakistan friendship seeded on mutual enmity towards India, strengthened by land border agreement of 1963 are now thriving on elements on military, nuclear and economic cooperation. Bold diplomatic moves of Modi and his ambitions agenda for India as balancing power in the region flustered China. India’s economic growth story began to gain momentum emerging as the fastest growing large economy outpacing China. In sharp contrast, China was bracing the torrents of stock market collapse and slipping growth rates. Much to the chagrin of China, India posted highest FDI investments and is steadily brimming hopes of surging growth rates ahead. Economic development of India is making new headlines. This trend was in contravention to Chinese objective of restraining India to the status of sub-regional power.

The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) verdict of July 12th quashing China’s territorial claims over all the structures in the South China Sea (SCS) and Beijing’s blatant refusal to abide by the same earned it international rebuke. Tensions escalated in the region. Nuclear tests by North Korea and subsequent deployment of THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Anti-Missile Destroyer) in South Korea coupled with Chinese overtures in waters of East China Sea turned the region into potential zone of conflict. Around the same time, China rearing to project its grand standing at the upcoming G-20 summit in Hangzhou, through smart diplomatic moves, managed to avoid discussions pertaining to SCS. However, China’s proclamation of “peace rise” was irreparably damaged. While China reveled in success of self-proclaimed success of G-20, India clearly made a mark at the meet by actively garnering international support for counter terrorism cooperation. In the run up to G-20 summit Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi, visited India seeking support and cooperation. China in turn had to concede New Delhi’s request for commissioning high-level talks on India’s NSG membership and other outstanding issues. 

With the killing of Burhan Wani on July 8th, tensions erupted in Kashmir Valley and Pakistan deployed a committed network of terror operatives to escalate the situation. Islamabad then tried to tarnish India’s image by referring the issue to UN. Indian administration went into tizzy as the domestic insurgency refused to die down. Capitalizing on the situation, Pakistan’s deep state intensified infiltration bids. Irked by Pakistan’s announcement of dedicating Independence Day to Kashmir’s azadi, India unveiled the Modi-Doval doctrine. With India pressing the levers of internationalizing the human rights violations in Balochistan, Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK), Gilgit and Baltistan. Pakistan handed over reign to Rawalpindi leading to a terror attack on the Uri military base. China was discomfited by Indian stance for its aspirations of gaining access to Arabian Sea and vital economic interests in Balochistan would be thwarted. While China overtly declared that “Kashmir is left over from history. We hope concerned parties will pursue a peaceful settlement through dialogue”, an acrimonious diplomatic tirade between India and Pakistan is in Beijing’s best interest. Since India’s hopes of reforming global institutions of governance will be lost. Sustained diplomatic momentum harvested for India’s NSG membership would suffer a huge setback with nuclear-weapon sparring at UN. Tremendous efforts of rallying for investments by Modi government would do down the drain. Foreign Investors might be hard pressed to reconsider if talks of full blown war rekindle. In short, perceptible progress made by the Modi government to usher India into realm of economic prosperity will suffer a major blow. While India would be grappling with economic and strategic uncertainties, China would escape international censure despite escalating rivalries in the North East Asia region.

Simultaneously, in absence of a befitting reply to Pakistan in response outrageous Uri attacks, Modi government Indian public would be incensed. BJP which enjoyed remarkably high regard for nationalistic morals and uprightness might be castigation. It may suffer political debacle at the upcoming assembly elections. Already Pakistan paid heavy price with stock markets crashing yesterday. Constant references to nuclear war will have negative effect on India’s economic environment. Above all, the entire game plan meticulously articulated by China and deftly executed by Pakistan has pushed India into a catch-22 kind of situation. The wave massive public outcry for giving back to Pakistan has hijacked the social media networks demonstrating that there is an urgent need for public education on foreign policy.

@ Copyrights reserved.

Dastardly terror strikes on the Uri Military Base

The dastardly attack by terror agencies bred and propped by Pakistan on wee hours of September 18^th on the Uri army base claimed lives of 17 army jawans and left 30 injured. This attack is one the deadliest attacks suffered by the Indian army in the last 26 years. The terrorist camps operating from the legitimate Indian territory of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) targeted the military base since it is the most important garrison located near the LoC (Line of Control) and guards the border. The base established in the plains is believed to be vulnerable for it can be constantly watched by men in Pakistan bases located in higher mountainous areas. It can be reached from three sides, one of it is as close as 6km from LoC. Four armed infiltrators carrying AK-47 rifles, grenade launchers attacked the administrative unit of the Uri base at around 5:15 am when soldiers were filling diesel in barracks from the fuel tanks. Springing a surprise, militants hurled grenades with launchers which caused massive fire in the tents containing unarmed soldiers, killing 13 of them instantaneously in their sleep. The fires left several injured and four of them later succumbed to injuries. In the fierce gun battle that ensued for three hours, all the four terrorists were neutralised. The sudden, unanticipated attack stuck major blow to the Indian forces. Together, the magnitude of the casualties and the Pakistan orchestrated insurgency that crippled normal life in the Valley for the past two months generated an unprecedented furore and anger among the security forces and the political dispensation.

The weapons recovered from the terrorists bore Pakistani marks while the maps and the marked location were in Pashtun language confirming Pakistan’s hand in the attack. Lieutenant General Ranbir Singh confirmed that the attack bore hallmarks of the terror group Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) allegorically terming it as the second version of Pathankot attack. Pathankot attack was engineered by JeM, a fact Pakistan refused to accept and act. Since Pathankot attack, India’s Pakistan policy took a massive U-turn. Initially, Modi favoured normalisation of relations with Pakistan for peaceful resolution of Kashmir dispute and explored every possibility to set tone for a bilateral dialogue. But Pakistan reciprocated with impunity. They inflicted severe damage by attacking Pathankot airbase in January, a week after Modi’s impromptu visit to Lahore. Even after Pathankot attack, India made concessions by allowing Pakistan Joint Investigation Team (JIT) to access site of attack at Pathankot base as Pakistan promised to allow Indian NIA to enter Pakistan for investigations. But Pakistan duplicitously exploited Indian largesse. Consequently, Modi who has been apprising nations of the distress suffered by India due to cross-border terrorism on his bilateral visits escalated the campaign against counter terrorism. In the meanwhile, Pakistan with rejuvenated force has intensified infiltration bids and ceaseless unprovoked cross firing continued from across the border. Simultaneously Rawalpindi unleashed the venomous terror networks to act on India. The unbridled terror forces eventually penetrated into the Valley and fomented violence in Kashmir after the killing of Burhan Wani. As a result, normal life was paralysed in the valley for the past two months. To tarnish India’s image and to internationalise the unrest in Kashmir Valley, Pakistan referred the issue to UN. Besides issuing a strong rebuttal diplomatically, India slowly pressed Modi-Doval doctrine into action. India began to voice concerns about the human rights violations in Baluchistan, PoK, Gilgit and Baltistan. Modi steadily raised the issue of Baluchistan and condemned the actions of Pakistan. At the G-20 summit and the ASEAN meet, he urged the international community to impose sanctions on the terror sponsor nations. In the past one month, India’s bold diplomatic moves began to garner support from other nations. Afghanistan and Bangladesh which endured the scourge of terrorism began to support India. Aside the concerns of the countries in the region, terrorist attacks from across the world were found to have Pakistani connect. Further, as the situation in Afghanistan rapidly deteriorated, the US expressed its concerns and recently blocked the $300 million aid for the sale of F-16. Thus, unlike the previous regimes, Modi government has been valiantly building diplomatic clout to isolate Pakistan. Now, this clandestine attack on Uri calls for recalibration of Indian strategy towards Pakistan.

Uri attack came at a time when Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif is travelling to New York to raise Kashmiri issue at the 71^st UN General Assembly sessions. Records indicate that Pakistan had the history of escalating attacks when UNGA is in session. Apparently, Pakistan had rightly used this opportunity to aggravate tensions across the border so that it can take mileage from any aggressive reaction from India. Congruently, reports indicate that in the past one month there have been 12 infiltration bids, 10 were foiled and 2 were successful.  Uri terror attack is perhaps, one of the biggest army causalities caused by single militant attack and drew strongest of condemnations from political parties. Perhaps for the first time in the recent past, the top echelons of India political leadership condemned Pakistan in strongest words with BJP hinting at “complete jaw for one tooth” policy. All political parties hit out at Pakistan for perpetrating terror but AAP and RJD took a swipe at Modi and blamed him for the attacks. Truly, patience of India has reached a threshold as Pakistan breached tolerance levels.

Pakistan of late has been hit by a spate of calamitous reactions. Repealing of aid by the US, India pitching for rights of Baluchistan, attacks in Quetta, terror attacks in Christian majority areas in Peshawar, deteriorating bilateral ties with Afghanistan have come as setbacks to Pakistan. With progress of the CPEC too coming under international scanner, Pakistan in a bid to assert its control has rejuvenated its attacks on India. While Modi government has been diligently building diplomatic pressure recently through aggressive overreach, to handle a rogue nation like Pakistan India must adopt a multi-pronged approach. India must hit Pakistan hard at a place where it hurts the most. To accomplish this, apart from campaigning for declaration of Pakistan as terror state and calling for international isolation, India should attempt to build economic pressure. New Delhi should directly ask nations and trading groups to cut off their business ties with Pakistan to have trade transactions with India. Pakistan in the past buttressed Khalistan movement to blow a wedge into India. To blunt the fangs of Pakistan, with dissent brewing up, India should consider paying back to Pakistan in same coin. Pakistan always sought parity with India and eventually coerced the US to sanction finances for strengthening its defences. Now that Pakistan has emerged as the regional threat with the US too suffering damages in terms of loss of personnel and the associated costs of long war in Afghanistan, India should urge nations to impose arms embargo. Pakistan has been thriving on the illegal drug transactions. India should use its clout, urge international banks and other financial agencies to unearth the hawala transactions and choke the financial conduits. China for long has used Pakistan as a low cost apparatus for containment of India. India should in unequivocal terms indicate that India might close its markets if it continues to aid Pakistan. For the past seven decades, despite accruing humongous losses in terms of men and material because of Indo-Pakistan armed and proxy wars, India refused to learn its lessons. India remained smug, benevolent and Pakistan’s aggression in part was emboldened by India’s cowardice. Indian leadership drawn into the cult of the pseudo-liberals and vested groups failed to give back to Pakistan in its terms. Further, lack of consistent national policy towards Pakistan had undermined Indian efforts at various stages. As valuable time and efforts were frittered away with every new leadership “reinventing the wheel” over and again. It is high time and India must now force the West to take stern action against Pakistan and coerce it to act. Besides, India must carry a relentless campaign by sending diplomats to various countries exposing the incendiary activities of Pakistan. While all these approaches should be adopted to contain the aggression of Pakistan, India must be ever battle ready. With reports of Pakistan building another nuclear site emerging, stakes are really high. For long Pakistan has relied on its nukes to deter India. India should now stop buying that argument. Instead India must strengthen and refurbish its arms and ready special forces to counter Pakistan. 

 @ Copyrights reserved.