Author: Sunil Sawant
Publication: www.tehelka.com
Date:
URL:http://www.tehelka.com/aspsite/rightstory.asp?id1=commentary&id2=politics&id3=HEADLINES&id4=20000623611&fname=com022001sunil%2Ehtm
A lamentable lack of will power
and the killer instinct is what keeps India from getting the better of
Pakistan or China. We need to look for instant retribution and hit Pakistan
where it hurts, says Sunil Sawant in the concluding section of his article
A lack of desire to win, a lack
of will power to gain from our victories, and a lack of strategic foresight
have been responsible for India's early losses to Pakistan and China. It
is especially amazing that Pakistan, in particular, has been able to get
away with so many terrible offences till the late 1980s, when Pakistan
was nuclearised. Then the nuclear factor instantly became a hot excuse
for the Indian policy makers to hide their lack of will power. Since that
time, Pakistan has stoked terrorist fires in Punjab and now Kashmir. Pakistan
has been getting away with it because we have let them!
Some apologists of the current passive,
reactive policies contend that the goal should be a final war to utterly
destroy Pakistan. The aim seems laudable, but is utterly impractical. It
will be playing right into the hands of the enemy. The "sau sunar ki, ek
lohar ki" policy of diminishing responsibility does not work in the practical
world. If we wait for the enemy to complete its proverbial 100 atrocities
and only then decide to strike big, we will be waiting forever.
Such a war, given our strength,
our traditional lack of will power, and outside interference, will never
happen. It is not even desirable. For what will we do with a defeated Pakistan?
Occupy it forever? Ha! It is more justified to seek instant retribution,
instead of waiting for too long and losing outside popular support.
In today's world, conventional war
is a no-no for a non-superpower. As in the past, most of the wars today
are fought in the minds. Since India imports most of its weapon systems
and their spare parts, she is in no position to initiate a conventional
war. Today, a full-fledged war is a last resort, only to be indulged in
when directly imposed upon by an enemy.
But all of India's actions and inactions
have been leading us to precisely such a war. That too, those taking us
on this path swear they are trying to avoid exactly that! How is this happening?
None of the Indian governments has
responded to Pakistani terrorism effectively. All we have been doing is
fighting the insurgents when they are already inside India. This is no
way to defeat state-sponsored terrorism! Such passive, reactive defense
only encourages the enemy, who believes his aggressive policies are beginning
to break us down. The only way to fight a war - even a proxy war - is to
take it to the enemy.
Currently, hundreds of thousands
of our soldiers are literally stuck in Kashmir. They are in a purely defensive
mode inside our territory. Such concentration of our forces makes it a
magnet for terrorist attacks. It leaves gaping holes on the China border.
Worse, it achieves nothing, because our army is not allowed to hit at the
root of the problem! No amount of defence is perfect defence. Pakistan
will keep haemorrhaging us if we stick to our defence-only policy.
India must tackle terrorism appropriately.
We have conventional superiority, and it must be used to keep Pakistani
military within Pakistan. Indian apologists of policies like the ceasefire
claim that any offensive action by India will bring the Pakistani nuclear
factor into play. This logic is nothing but a victory of the mind-war Pakistan
has been waging. The nuclear deterrence, which kept Indian forces on our
side of the Line of Control during Kargil, will also keep the Pakistani
army within its borders. That will happen when our policy makers leave
room enough so that the enemy is not guaranteed of a lack of threat from
India. So what about the Pakistani terrorists?
The only solution for that is to
eliminate the terrorist leaders in Pakistan. India must go after the terrorist
masterminds, their financiers, and their top commanders. India must demonstrate
that our long arm is capable of reaching anywhere to punish those who seek
to harm Indians. To achieve this, India must infiltrate its own armed anti-terrorist
units in Pakistan. Just like Pakistan denies providing terrorists with
material support, India can deny sponsoring these anti-terrorist units.
Hitting directly back at the terrorist bosses in Pakistan will demoralise
and unravel the terrorists. Once India starts to inflict immediate and
effective punishment for incidents like Kandahar, they will stop happening.
In short, here is the equation:
Pakistani nukes check Indian nukes. Indian military checks the Pakistani
military. But who checks Pakistani terrorists? Why, Indian anti-terrorists!
The key, in this nuclear age, is to play the game at the same level as
the enemy - no more and no less.
This solution is wonderful because
it is economical in every sense. An offensive group of four or five thousand
dedicated people will achieve what an army of lakhs has trouble doing.
Indian counter-terrorist actions will instil fear in the minds of potential
terrorists, creating deterrence. Those terrorists seeking martyrdom can
be granted that right in their own nation. Most importantly, it will free
our military to take care of its regular duties. This will improve the
morale of our armed forces tremendously.
But our armed forces cannot keep
absorbing the self-imposed deaths much longer. If a dramatic change in
our policies doesn't come about soon, the army may crumble sooner rather
than later. If India does not act now, Pakistan will keep pushing us till
we hit the wall. We don't want our current conventional superiority to
decompose with time, or to be forced to react desperately in a tight bind,
do we? It is best to act while we can retain control of the situation.
This anti-terrorist action plan
only requires will power. Apologists of Indian inaction claim that no party
has a majority in the parliament to take decisions. This argument is misleading,
at best. Even today, all security decisions of the government are executive
ones; the parliament is not even consulted on most issues. This simply
means that the leadership must have the right vision, and lots of courage
and will power. But the policies need to change soon. It must be remembered
that those who are not part of the solution become part of the problem.
(The writer is a retired Wing Commander)