|
COVER STORY: WAR ON TERRORISM
Indian Inaction
They are all for
a military rejoinder if Pakistan refuses to hand over the terrorists it
is harbouring to India. And the RSS and Shiv Sena were getting fed up
with Indian inaction. This from a prominent RSS leader, "If the US
can attack a country that is 10,000 km away for killing American citizens,
why can't we settle our scores with Pakistan?"
|
|
|
| |
LOADING UP:
Indian Army soldiers at the Mendhar sector on the Line of Control |
It's not that easy though. A full-fledged war
against Pakistan will be a massive political, military and diplomatic
exercise. For the past few months, the prime minister has been regularly
briefing his NDA partners on not only the rising terrorist menace from
Pakistan but also the likely future scenario. The Government has also
taken the major opposition parties into confidence. Nonetheless, he has
not yet succeeded in creating a consensus. The Government is today preparing
a detailed dossier on new developments which it is likely to share with
all political parties before the winter session of Parliament begins in
mid-November. The objective is to convey the inherent dangers of a delayed
counter-offensive to the entire political leadership of the country. It
was in this context that the Cabinet recently decided to replace TADA
with a new Anti-Terrorist Act that would give the Government powers to
detain potential terrorists without trial for a longer period. According
to Home Ministry sources, there are about 10,000 people in the country
who are potential security threats.
So is it the time for hot pursuit? The supporting
arguments are:
India has been too soft towards terrorists for
the past few years. It has greatly affected the BJP's image as a party
that doesn't tolerate nonsense from Pakistan. Inaction has led to erosion
in credibility and rise of middle-class disillusionment.
If the US can target an entire country for attacks
on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, why can't India avenge the
death of over 30,000 Indians in Kashmir?
India should not succumb to any US pressure
at this moment, since Washington does not have the political or moral
authority to stop India from attacking terrorist camps across the border
in Pakistan.
Action against Pakistan will unite the entire
country behind the Government like it did during Kargil
There are equally powerful arguments against
the military option:
It will lead to India's isolation in the international
community.
It will give an external excuse to Pakistan
to walk out of the international alliance against terrorism.
It will deny India a foothold in post-war Afghanistan.
It will weaken the international war against
Al Qaida.
In fact, the prime minister is not in a mood
to attack Pakistan at this moment. The PMO is of the opinion that it will
harm India's long-term interests. The PMO's argument is that whatever
the nation could have gained has already been gained through quiet diplomacy.
For example,Vajpayee's October letter to Bush sent correct signals to
the international community. It also forced countries like France, Germany,
Bangladesh, Turkey, Nepal and Canada to endorse India's position. The
visits of British Prime Minister Tony Blair and US Secretary of State
Colin Powell were a response to the Vajpayee doctrine. And there was no
worldwide support to Musharraf's attempt to delink the war against terrorism
in Afghanistan from the Pakistan-sponsored terrorism in Kashmir. Powell
also assured the prime minister that the US would not extend any military
help to Pakistan which would harm India. But he counselled India to show
restraint. By holding back India earned many brownie points as was evident
from the sudden White House invitation to Vajpayee. He would be the first
head of a government not actively involved in the war to be invited by
Bush after September 11. If India opts for war, it may lose all the support
it has garnered after Kargil. According to the MEA's assessment, India
may not be able to mobilise international opinion in its favour at a time
when the global focus is on Afghanistan and Osama bin Laden. No nation
will have the time or will to understand India's national compulsions,
for, to all of them, at the moment it is America-and recession-that occupies
the mind. And finally, India may find the Islamic nations, respecting
whose sentiments has been one of the major American diplomatic initiatives
since September 11, rallying behind Pakistan. And above all, any attack
on Pakistan may lead to a full-scale war between two nuclear powers which
would be unacceptable to the international community.
One of the strongest cases against an Indian
attack on Pakistan is the ongoing economic slowdown. According to an estimate,
it will cost the country at least Rs 5,000 crore for a two-week war involving
only the Kashmir area. If it turns into a full scale war, the economic
cost will be enormous.
So, despite a groundswell of national endorsement,
Vajpayee is unlikely to go for a bloody border adventure. The prime minister
may have regained his health and wit. Still, looks like the poet can't
take the heat of hot pursuit.
|
METRO TODAY
Web
Exclusives
