Tackle collusive threat with firm diplomacy
A two-and-a-half front threat looms as an ominous possibility, with talks for de-escalation in Ladakh getting stalled. Notwithstanding our oft-repeated proclamations about capabilities to tackle such collusive threats, it is best avoided, especially considering our dangerous, nuclear-armed neighbours. While the armed forces are gearing up, it is hoped that our diplomacy, which seems to have hit an unexplained dark phase, will pick up the gauntlet and marshal adequate dissuasive leverage.
Despondency on the diplomatic front has got manifest with China managing to shore up Nepal PM KP Oli, the Bangladesh Prime Minister refusing to grant an audience to the outgoing High Commissioner, and more recently, China holding a meeting on Covid-19 with Pakistan, Afghanistan and Nepal. Beijing has touted an ‘iron brother relationship’ between China and Pakistan, as the recommended model for regional cooperation. Our endeavour to isolate Pakistan in SAARC through the Bangladesh-Bhutan-India-Nepal (BBIN) mechanism seems to have floundered.
Pakistan, despite our propensity to dismiss it as a failing or failed state, is savouring the bonanza of schadenfreude. Apparently on the back foot, after the revocation of Article 370, it now appears to be in a resurgent mode. Lobbies are terming PLA incursions as ‘Siachin in reverse’ and ‘successful Kargil’. Its relevance in the Afghan imbroglio is multiplying, resulting in better relations with even the US. Simultaneously, catalysed by collusive linkages, the RIP-C grouping with Russia, Iran and Pak, anchored by China, is coalescing, with Turkey waiting in the wings. In a recent article, noted expert Ayesha Siddiqa asserted that Pakistan came out better in Balakot and the aerial counter-exchange. This has been endorsed by Christine C Fair, despite her credentials of being a Pak-baiter. On balance, both sides managed to project victory amongst their domestic constituencies and it was more of an uneasy stalemate. India managed to discover a nuanced and limited space below the nuclear threshold and deliver a strategic message. Our exuberance needs to be tempered with the realisation that a stalemate suits the weaker player.
A relevant corollary is — in the eventuality of a Pulwama-type terrorist attack, will there be another round of surgical strikes? Most feel that having crossed the Rubicon, we hardly have a choice. Yet, we may be restrained by the realisation that despite raids, we have neither built the requisite deterrence, nor retained the control of escalatory ladder. Such forays, unless refined, are subject to the law of diminishing returns. Pakistan is already exploiting hyped reports of the PLAF using the Skardu air field to deter us. It was reported that the presence of American troops at Jacobabad and other airbases limited our possible options during Operation Parakram. Most importantly, in the current unresolved situation, strikes have the potential of escalation, necessitating greater risk mitigation.
Pakistan, eager to fish in troubled waters, is constrained by a few factors. First, China may not allow Pakistan to undertake such forays, as it will not want to complicate matters, giving India a reason to resort to desperate counter- measures. Recent Indian articulations on shift to ambiguity may be inferred as propensity for precipitate action and even irrationality. Secondly, while the real intent of PLA’s misadventure may never be conclusively established, in all likelihood, the PLA should scale down their objectives to temporary alteration of LAC, accepting a face-saving stalemate. Thirdly, China may not want to dilute this further, by sharing credit, with consequent inference of it not being able to put it across India. This is relevant as the primary aim of China is probably to teach India an appropriate lesson and show its place. Fourthly, Pakistan may want to limit collusion to project the image of a responsible nation, especially with its all important role in the resolution of Afghan problem. Finally, Rawalpindi has limited capacities and unresolved challenges, both internal and on its western front.
The foundation of collusion between Pakistan and China was laid after the 1962 debacle with the gifting of Shakshgam valley in 1963. Pakistan has followed a compliant role as part of alliances with different camps, stretching back to CENTO (Central Treaty Organisation) and SEATO (Southeast Asia Treaty Organisation), orchestrating the so-called jihad in Afghanistan, at the behest of the US and is now firmly ensconced in Beijing’s lap. China, on its part, was circumspect in the 1965, 1971 and Kargil conflicts, limiting its actions to warnings and limited posturing.
We may have aspired to be the ultimate balancers, but Pakistan has shown flexibility in retaining relevance amongst various groupings, exploiting its geostrategic location, aided by connect with Islamic nations. It has managed to become the sole repository of the ‘Islamic bomb’, albeit till a Shia Iran reduces its salience to a ‘Sunni bomb’. Pakistan has positioned itself well in the ongoing US-China and China-India rivalry. While CPEC may still be short of ‘Colonisation of Pak by Economic Corridor’, it has become the geostrategic glue. It is providing China the handle to consider areas in Gilgit-Baltistan and PoK, as spaces of shared strategic and geo-economic concern. Unless handled with finesse, the possibility of tri-lateralisation of Kashmir lurks with China raising stakes in Gilgit-Baltistan and PoK. Analysts in Rawalpindi are already calling for revocation of the Simla Agreement.
Operational collusive articulations are likely to be limited to Pak posturing formations to tie down our dual tasked formations (DTFs) on the western borders to deny their switch to northern borders. There may be calibrated heating of the LoC and continued proxy war. Limited collusion on call and controlled by China seems to be most likely. Notwithstanding this, India will be well advised to factor in the worst case of Pakistan acting irrationally. While forces will battle all odds, it is time for the diplomats to redouble endeavours for necessary dissuasion and resolution of the ongoing crisis.
