fatman17
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 32,563
- Reaction score
- 98
- Country
- Location
India's War on Terror
BY M.K Bhadrakumar
Pitfalls of throwing stones from glass house
India’s war on terror hit three bumps last week and the country’s credibility has suffered. A rethink on the battle plan becomes necessary.
The first mishap took place when India failed to get the endorsement of United Nations Sanctions Committee for its move to get action taken against Pakistan on account of the release from detention of Zaki-ur- Rehman Lakhvi, the accused mastermind behind the terrorist attacks in Mumbai in 2008.
The Indian media reports put the blame on China for blocking India’s path. It is unclear what would have been the stance taken by the other veto-holding members of the Security Council represented in the Sanctions Committee if China hadn’t held out its neck to block India’s move.
Would they have wanted the UN Security Council to move against Pakistan, a nuclear power, at such a delicate juncture in regional politics for allegedly consorting with terrorists when all remaining hope for the stabilization of Afghanistan rests on that very country’s cooperation and goodwill?
It seems a bit like our case to be a permanent member of the UN Security Council; no P-5 country doubts India’s credentials, but none will move the little finger to help India, either.
Evidently, China has become the fall guy. India chooses to forget that the US too stonewalled Delhi’s repeated requests regarding David Headley.
The harsh reality is that the international community’s war on terror is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma. Things are seldom what they appear to be to the naked eye.
It doesn’t need much ingenuity to comprehend that China’s stance is not directed against India so much as it protects Pakistan. China – and other P5 countries – simply cannot afford Pakistan to be branded a terrorist state at this juncture, which would have necessitated sanctions against it.
Couldn’t India have guessed that China’s ties with Pakistan have become a template of that country’s global strategies? Couldn’t India have factored in that China and Pakistan are closely partnering in negotiating the Taliban’s reconciliation? That being the case, why did Delhi force the issue in the Sanctions Committee?
There can be only one answer – the “itch” to indulge in some Pakistan-bashing got the better of us and reason and cool judgment became the casualty, as diplomacy gave way to rhetoric.
The war on terror has a military track, a political and diplomatic track and a rhetorical track. When it is clear that the military track is non-existent against a nuclear power and the rhetorical track is an absolute waste of breath, it is about time to open the political and diplomatic track. This is also what a major national daily from Delhi has recommended to the government.
To my mind, it is injudicious to have made this Lakhvi case into a Sino-Indian bilateral issue, and completely unnecessary for Prime Minister Narendra Modi to have staked his prestige on it. There are far better issues that India could have chosen to apply the litmus test to China’s sincerity in respecting India’s core interests. Simply put, Lakhvi is not at all Modi’s cup of tea.
Ironically, no sooner than Modi took up the issue with the Chinese leadership, BBC television came out with a sensational report that the British authorities are in possession of information to the effect that Indian intelligence has been secretly funding forces in Pakistan and training “hundreds” of Pakistani militants “over the past ten years” in explosives, weapons and sabotage in secret camps in north and north-east India.
No doubt, the report by Owen Bennet-Jones, a highly respected veteran South Asia hand, seriously dents India’s reputation as a participant in the global war against terrorism. Now that Modi has waded into the Lakhvi file, how about looking into the veracity of the BBC report, and if the report is baseless, taking up the matter with David Cameron?
Suffice it so say, the fundamental question remains: How can India throw stones at Pakistan from a glass house? A stunning exclusive with banner headlines in the Indian Express newspaper on Wednesday details that the Modi government is interfering with the course of justice in several terrorist attacks that took place in India, which were allegedly conceived, planned and executed by a group of fanatical Hindus bent on revenge against Muslims.
Pakistan has long been alleging that Delhi indulges in doublespeak on Lakhvi, as India’s own record in bringing to justice the perpetrators of the Samjhauta Express blasts (which killed Pakistani citizens) is abysmal.
Indeed, where are we heading as a country with the rule of law? One of post-independent India’s most respected police officers, Julio Ribeiro, whose name is synonymous with professional integrity and bravery, has made an impassioned plea in today’s Indian Express that his beloved country “is steadily being led on to the path trodden by our surly neighbor on our western border. We are not there yet, but if hidden hands nudge the judicial system to free murderers of the saffron (Hindu fundamentalist) variety, we will be soon.”
Ribeiro writes with a lot of pain in his heart: “Our leaders need to think of these consequences before they covertly try to sabotage the course of justice. They should desist from making our great country in the image of our neighbor.”
The point is, rhetoric is a double-edged sword, because it will only provoke Pakistan to return the stuff by highlighting India’s Achilles heel. People like Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar are only too willing to serve Pakistan’s cause by admitting that India uses terrorism as a tool against other countries.
Unsurprisingly, Pakistan has lost no time to make a demarche with the British government seeking access to the facts that formed the basis of the BBC report by Bennet-Jones. Don’t be surprised if it is Pakistan’s turn now to approach the UN Sanctions Committee to censure India as a state sponsoring terrorism.
If that were to happen, do we request China to block the move by Pakistan? Clearly, countries like China, US or Britain must be feeling embarrassed, caught in the middle between these two raucous South Asian nuclear powers laundering their dirty linen in public.
By M K Bhadrakumar – June 27, 201
---------------------------------------------------------
BY M.K Bhadrakumar
Pitfalls of throwing stones from glass house
India’s war on terror hit three bumps last week and the country’s credibility has suffered. A rethink on the battle plan becomes necessary.
The first mishap took place when India failed to get the endorsement of United Nations Sanctions Committee for its move to get action taken against Pakistan on account of the release from detention of Zaki-ur- Rehman Lakhvi, the accused mastermind behind the terrorist attacks in Mumbai in 2008.
The Indian media reports put the blame on China for blocking India’s path. It is unclear what would have been the stance taken by the other veto-holding members of the Security Council represented in the Sanctions Committee if China hadn’t held out its neck to block India’s move.
Would they have wanted the UN Security Council to move against Pakistan, a nuclear power, at such a delicate juncture in regional politics for allegedly consorting with terrorists when all remaining hope for the stabilization of Afghanistan rests on that very country’s cooperation and goodwill?
It seems a bit like our case to be a permanent member of the UN Security Council; no P-5 country doubts India’s credentials, but none will move the little finger to help India, either.
Evidently, China has become the fall guy. India chooses to forget that the US too stonewalled Delhi’s repeated requests regarding David Headley.
The harsh reality is that the international community’s war on terror is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma. Things are seldom what they appear to be to the naked eye.
It doesn’t need much ingenuity to comprehend that China’s stance is not directed against India so much as it protects Pakistan. China – and other P5 countries – simply cannot afford Pakistan to be branded a terrorist state at this juncture, which would have necessitated sanctions against it.
Couldn’t India have guessed that China’s ties with Pakistan have become a template of that country’s global strategies? Couldn’t India have factored in that China and Pakistan are closely partnering in negotiating the Taliban’s reconciliation? That being the case, why did Delhi force the issue in the Sanctions Committee?
There can be only one answer – the “itch” to indulge in some Pakistan-bashing got the better of us and reason and cool judgment became the casualty, as diplomacy gave way to rhetoric.
The war on terror has a military track, a political and diplomatic track and a rhetorical track. When it is clear that the military track is non-existent against a nuclear power and the rhetorical track is an absolute waste of breath, it is about time to open the political and diplomatic track. This is also what a major national daily from Delhi has recommended to the government.
To my mind, it is injudicious to have made this Lakhvi case into a Sino-Indian bilateral issue, and completely unnecessary for Prime Minister Narendra Modi to have staked his prestige on it. There are far better issues that India could have chosen to apply the litmus test to China’s sincerity in respecting India’s core interests. Simply put, Lakhvi is not at all Modi’s cup of tea.
Ironically, no sooner than Modi took up the issue with the Chinese leadership, BBC television came out with a sensational report that the British authorities are in possession of information to the effect that Indian intelligence has been secretly funding forces in Pakistan and training “hundreds” of Pakistani militants “over the past ten years” in explosives, weapons and sabotage in secret camps in north and north-east India.
No doubt, the report by Owen Bennet-Jones, a highly respected veteran South Asia hand, seriously dents India’s reputation as a participant in the global war against terrorism. Now that Modi has waded into the Lakhvi file, how about looking into the veracity of the BBC report, and if the report is baseless, taking up the matter with David Cameron?
Suffice it so say, the fundamental question remains: How can India throw stones at Pakistan from a glass house? A stunning exclusive with banner headlines in the Indian Express newspaper on Wednesday details that the Modi government is interfering with the course of justice in several terrorist attacks that took place in India, which were allegedly conceived, planned and executed by a group of fanatical Hindus bent on revenge against Muslims.
Pakistan has long been alleging that Delhi indulges in doublespeak on Lakhvi, as India’s own record in bringing to justice the perpetrators of the Samjhauta Express blasts (which killed Pakistani citizens) is abysmal.
Indeed, where are we heading as a country with the rule of law? One of post-independent India’s most respected police officers, Julio Ribeiro, whose name is synonymous with professional integrity and bravery, has made an impassioned plea in today’s Indian Express that his beloved country “is steadily being led on to the path trodden by our surly neighbor on our western border. We are not there yet, but if hidden hands nudge the judicial system to free murderers of the saffron (Hindu fundamentalist) variety, we will be soon.”
Ribeiro writes with a lot of pain in his heart: “Our leaders need to think of these consequences before they covertly try to sabotage the course of justice. They should desist from making our great country in the image of our neighbor.”
The point is, rhetoric is a double-edged sword, because it will only provoke Pakistan to return the stuff by highlighting India’s Achilles heel. People like Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar are only too willing to serve Pakistan’s cause by admitting that India uses terrorism as a tool against other countries.
Unsurprisingly, Pakistan has lost no time to make a demarche with the British government seeking access to the facts that formed the basis of the BBC report by Bennet-Jones. Don’t be surprised if it is Pakistan’s turn now to approach the UN Sanctions Committee to censure India as a state sponsoring terrorism.
If that were to happen, do we request China to block the move by Pakistan? Clearly, countries like China, US or Britain must be feeling embarrassed, caught in the middle between these two raucous South Asian nuclear powers laundering their dirty linen in public.
By M K Bhadrakumar – June 27, 201
---------------------------------------------------------
