|
COVER STORY: INDIA
Worrying Neighbour
A prolonged war could spell instability in Pakistan
and cause headaches for India
|
|
|
| |
FRESH TROUBLE: A militant
killed in an attack on an army camp in Kashmir |
As the war in Afghanistan
enters its second month, there is increasing anxiety in India over the
implications of a prolonged battle in the region. Especially over the
stability of Pakistan and what it would mean to India if things went terribly
wrong with its neighbour.
That's a concern shared by Washington. Defence
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's whistle-stop tour of the countries in the
neighbourhood of Afghanistan, including India, was part of the US effort
to look beyond Pakistan for intelligence and military support to bolster
its campaign against terrorism. While Washington expands the anti-terrorism
coalition-currently, by seeking three air bases in Tajikistan-the rumble
of public discontent in Pakistan against the US strikes gets louder by
the day.
Pakistan's strategic assets figured in the meeting
between Rumsfeld and Defence Minister George Fernandes on November 5.
While Rumsfeld hoped that countries with nuclear weapons would have in-built
safety features, he went on to add that there was always a risk of terrorists
getting hold of weapons of vast destruction. India is equally worried.
According to intelligence inputs, Pakistan's missiles do not have adequate
ground mobility; its nuclear delivery systems are largely confined to
fixed silos or to a limited number of aircraft. Though Islamabad has recently
acquired 72 missile vehicles from China to carry its Shaheen I and II
missiles, they are being modified as the missiles could not be fitted
on to them.
India
is concerned that Pakistan might settle pro-taliban Pashtoons masquerading
as refugees in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.
|
|
Experts like K. Santhanam, director, Institute
of Defence Studies and Analyses, Delhi, say that given the technical complexities
involved in arming a nuclear device, it's unlikely that fundamentalists
will take over Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. "Normally, the nuclear
core and the non-nuclear part are kept separately with in-built safety
devices," he says. "It will be rather difficult to find a fundamentalist
who is trained in assembling the nuclear devices." But others in
the security establishment do not rule out the possibility of a suitcase
bomb falling into the wrong hands.
The feeling in the Indian Army is the stability
of General Pervez Musharraf's regime in Pakistan hinges on the Afghan
war. The longer the US-led war against Taliban drags on, the greater will
be the domestic pressure on Musharraf. And the army's assessment is that
the war will not end soon because the Northern Alliance lacks communication,
tactical cohesiveness and effective command and control systems. The US-led
coalition will either have to put ground troops into Afghanistan to notch
up a significant military objective or provide leadership and military
strategy to the Alliance troops. According to the army, the battle tactics
of the Northern Alliance show that although its troops are brave, they
cannot "hold territory, resist a counter-attack and apply coordinated
firepower" in battle.
An unstable Pakistan has major security implications
for India. India is concerned that Pakistan might use the US-led campaign
in Afghanistan to settle pro-Taliban Pashtoons masquerading as refugees
in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (PoK). International humanitarian agencies
are already confirming Islamabad's reluctance to built more refugee camps
on the Durand Line. It seems only one camp has come up on the Pakistan-Afghanistan
border, even though the international community has apparently pumped
in more than $100 million (Rs 480 crore). That's why Delhi wants Washington
to understand that besides Afghanistan, the war on terrorism should also
address the terror networks proliferating in PoK. Although Rumsfeld assured
India that the war on terrorism "is much bigger than Afghanistan",
the US has so far showed no signs of acting beyond it.
—Shishir Gupta
|
METRO TODAY
Web
Exclusives
