Author: David Ignatius
Publication: The Washington Post
Date: May 10, 2002
URL: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63059-2002May9.html
Sometime this month, the Indian
intelligence service -- known as RAW because of the initials of its more
genteel official name, the Research and Analysis Wing -- will complete
a report on whether Pakistan has complied with an Indian ultimatum that
it halt terrorist infiltration into Kashmir and hand over alleged terrorists.
The Indians will doubtless report
the truth, which is that Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf -- for all
his good intentions -- has so far failed to meet the two demands the Indian
government made last December, after pro-Pakistani terrorists bombed the
Indian parliament.
But what will the Indian government
do then? Up to 500,000 Indian troops are poised along India's 1,800-mile
border with Pakistan, in what experts say is the highest state of Indian
mobilization in the past 30 years.
With a three-to-one superiority
in conventional forces, the Indians could burst across the border and,
in a matter of days or even hours, overrun Lahore and effectively cut Pakistan
in half. And many hawkish Indians will demand military action when RAW
and other security agencies issue their reports, perhaps next week.
What would Pakistan, a state with
nuclear weapons and sophisticated missiles to deliver them, do in response
to an Indian military move?
Pakistan is vague about its nuclear
doctrine, so it's hard to be sure. But many analysts fear Pakistan's missiles
are targeted against Indian cities, and that facing an Indian conventional
onslaught, it would launch a retaliatory nuclear attack on, say, New Delhi,
that would leave millions dead. India would probably retaliate with its
own nuclear weapons, probably dropped from bombers -- killing many millions
more.
Welcome to what a senior State Department
official calls "the other crisis." It's difficult these days to focus on
anything other than the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with its grisly daily
death toll. But in this case it's essential. Because if the India-Pakistan
situation gets out of hand, the death toll could run, not to dozens, but
to tens of millions.
The Indian subcontinent is the only
part of the world where nuclear war is today a serious possibility. U.S.
and European officials are increasingly worried about what could happen
there this summer. They warn that all the ingredients are in place for
a disastrous chain of miscalculation on the order of August 1914, when
over-armed European nations blundered into World War I.
The State Department is alarmed
enough that it is hurriedly sending a senior official to visit India and
Pakistan -- probably next week. Secretary of State Powell is expected to
call top officials in the two countries by telephone this week to caution
against miscalculation.
Intelligence reports make clear
why U.S. and European officials are so worried. Western analysts believe
Musharraf doesn't have the political clout to comply with the Indian demands,
even if he wanted to. These analysts argue, for example, that Musharraf
still doesn't fully control the Pakistani intelligence service, the Inter-Services
Intelligence agency, or ISI, even after firing its chief, Gen. Mahmoud
Ahmad, last October.
The Indians believe ISI is deeply
involved in the long-running terrorist campaign to free Kashmir from Indian
control, and the list of 20 alleged terrorists they have given to Pakistan
for extradition includes some people who are reputedly close to the ISI.
Musharraf cannot meet the other
Indian demand, for an end to Pakistani infiltration of Kashmir, even if
he finds some face-saving compromise on the 20 names. The Pakistani president
already ordered such a halt in a widely praised Jan. 12 speech, but analysts
say the flow of potential terrorists into Kashmir has continued. Indeed,
they say it has increased in recent weeks as the Himalayan snows have begun
to melt and transit routes have opened.
It's almost inevitable that pro-Pakistani
terrorists eventually will strike again inside India -- triggering demands
for military retaliation by the fully mobilized Indian forces.
Another factor worrying U.S. and
European analysts is the political weakness of India's prime minister,
Atal Behari Vajpayee. Though he has restrained Indian militants in the
past, and held what appeared to be a productive summit with Musharraf over
Kashmir last year, Vajpayee is in poor health. The dominant Indian political
figure now is the home minister, L. K. Advani, a hard-liner who has no
interest in making a deal with Musharraf for outside mediation that could
at last defuse the Kashmir time bomb.
India has maintained its costly
mobilization since January, and analysts note that it has scheduled the
rotation of troops and equipment to keep its forces at peak levels through
June and July -- when analysts fear the danger of military action will
be highest.
A nuclear war between India and
Pakistan would mean loss of life on a scale the world has never before
seen. The simple but unpleasant fact for the Bush administration is that
to reduce this danger, it must play a more active diplomatic role. As in
the Middle East, the United States is the only power with enough leverage
on both sides to make a difference.
The apocalyptic scenarios may prove
wrong, but the Indians and Pakistanis will have trouble averting them on
their own. This is the real thing, Mr. President -- one of those moments
when history is watching and will not forgive inaction.