India and Pakistan will not fight a war. But they certainly have a stake in creating a war-like situation. That is what the current scenario is leading us to believe. A narrative was shaped, essentially in India, after the September 18 attack on an army base in Uri that left 19 soldiers dead. This story has been dominated by a war cry and has been compounded by the announcement of surgical strikes by New Delhi.
Pakistan denies India’s claims of crossing the Line of Control (LoC) and targeting militant launch pads. But for its part, the India stood firm and even promised to release videos of the action at the appropriate time. The Indian media seized on this to project it as a victory. For its part, the Pakistani media responded with its own vigour. The result was that a war-like situation was thrust upon either side.
Notwithstanding Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s “restrained” approach, the Indian government had to do some tough posturing to persuade its people that there would be no compromise on Uri. So to avenge it, “surgical strikes” had to be brought about. The entire Indian media fell in line to “celebrate” what was described as teaching Pakistan a lesson. But some well-known experts in India questioned the validity of this claim. They may be in the minority but their questions remain unanswered. Either way, these “strikes” deflated pressure (from the media mostly) that was mounting on the Modi government to punish Pakistan. The government addressed this concern by taking this route, even though it risks opening a fresh chapter of tit-for-tat between the two countries.
As pointed out by many analysts, such strikes or attacks on either side are not new and have taken place in the past. Take a look at a few of the incidents that were not publicly owned by the governments:
In March 1998, an Indian special forces unit is alleged to have killed 22 people at the village of Bandala, in Chhamb sector. The Pakistani military then claimed to have found an Indian-made watch from the scene. It was also alleged that this operation was carried out to avenge the massacre of 29 Hindu villagers at Purankote, in Jammu and Kashmir, by the Lashkar-e-Taiba.
In May 1999, Pakistani forces kidnapped Captain Saurabh Kalia, along with sepoys Bhanwar Lal Bagaria, Arjun Ram, Bhika Ram, Moola Ram and Naresh Singh. A post-mortem revealed that their bodies had been burned with cigarette butts and their genitals had been mutilated.
Eight months later, in January 2000, seven Pakistani soldiers were alleged to have been captured in the Nadala enclave, across the Neelam River. Their bodies were returned. Pakistan claimed they bore torture marks.
On February 24, 2000, the Pakistan Army claimed that there was a massacre in Lanjote village in Nakyal-Kotli sector in Pakistan-Administered Kashmir with 16 bodies left strewn across the streets. Pakistan Army officials claimed to have found a handwritten note, saying, “how does your own blood feel?” Pakistan has claimed that the killings were carried out by Indian special forces. India has not responded to the allegations but intelligence officials point out that after this, the mass killing of Hindus by militants stopped.
In June 2008, Pakistani troops attacked the Kranti border observation post near Salhotri village in Poonch, killing between two and eight Gurkha Regiment soldiers in Jawashwar Chhame. Days after, the retaliation came as Pakistani Army officials reported the beheading of one of their soldiers in the Bhattal sector in Poonch.
On August 30, 2011, Pakistan complained that three soldiers, including a JCO, were beheaded in an Indian raid on a post in the Sharda sector, across the Neelam river valley in Kel. It was said that this was in retaliation for the decapitation of two Indian soldiers near Karnah.
On January 8, 2013, Pakistani soldiers came across the Line of Control (LoC) into Indian territory and ambushed a patrol, killing two soldiers. There was a response but the UPA government chose not to go public.
The difference this time is that the surgical strikes came in the backdrop of heightened tension between the two countries. Not only was the Uri attack a trigger, but complex dimensions were added by the three-month long unrest in Kashmir and the war of words between New Delhi and Islamabad at the United Nations.
In spite of this, Prime Minister Modi practiced his blow-hot, blow-cold policy, as his challenge was bigger than Pakistan. One angle is that he had to reach out to his constituency that has built up an anti-Pakistan and anti-terror mood. And the other challenge is to keep the chances of war low to address international concerns. These two compulsions made it difficult for him to weigh the options. His speech at the three-day Bharatiya Janata Party National Council meeting in Kozhikode on September 24 was meant to deliver more than two messages. One message was that attacks like Uri won’t go away without paying a price and the other message was to challenge Pakistani people to see who wins a war—on unemployment, illiteracy and poverty. He continued with this thread even after the surgical strikes. “India has not attacked anyone. [And] neither [is it] hungry for any territory,” he said at a function in Delhi on October 2. “But in the two World Wars (in which India had no direct stake), 1.5 lakh Indian troops laid down their lives fighting for others.”
This is why de-escalation began sooner than expected. The National Security Advisers of both countries spoke on October 3 with Pakistan’s Sartaj Aziz saying that they agreed to reduce tensions. Not only would both countries have been “interested” in de-escalation but prodding from Washington would also have played a role in this outcome. It remains to be seen how this process unfolds in the next few weeks since Pakistan has raised its stakes over Kashmir and New Delhi has preferred to ignore the ground realities in the valley.
Unfortunately, this renewed escalation between India and Pakistan has pushed the volatile situation in Kashmir into the background. Kashmir is a forgotten chapter. For nearly three months it has been locked down between the curfew and strikes which are slowly becoming the norm. It perhaps suits New Delhi to have the schools, colleges and businesses shut. The killing of 90 civilians at the hands of the police and paramilitary forces and injuries to over 11,000 people have been accepted as a norm to contain the protests that are political in nature and are directly linked to a political resolution of the problem. But with both countries having locked horns over it, the militant attacks have taken centre stage and what is happening on the ground is now being defined as reality. India and Pakistan may de-escalate out of their own compulsions, but Kashmir remains unattended and is an open wound that will continue to fester.
The author is a senior journalist based in Srinagar and can be mailed at shujaat7867@gmail.com
Pakistan denies India’s claims of crossing the Line of Control (LoC) and targeting militant launch pads. But for its part, the India stood firm and even promised to release videos of the action at the appropriate time. The Indian media seized on this to project it as a victory. For its part, the Pakistani media responded with its own vigour. The result was that a war-like situation was thrust upon either side.
Notwithstanding Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s “restrained” approach, the Indian government had to do some tough posturing to persuade its people that there would be no compromise on Uri. So to avenge it, “surgical strikes” had to be brought about. The entire Indian media fell in line to “celebrate” what was described as teaching Pakistan a lesson. But some well-known experts in India questioned the validity of this claim. They may be in the minority but their questions remain unanswered. Either way, these “strikes” deflated pressure (from the media mostly) that was mounting on the Modi government to punish Pakistan. The government addressed this concern by taking this route, even though it risks opening a fresh chapter of tit-for-tat between the two countries.
As pointed out by many analysts, such strikes or attacks on either side are not new and have taken place in the past. Take a look at a few of the incidents that were not publicly owned by the governments:
In March 1998, an Indian special forces unit is alleged to have killed 22 people at the village of Bandala, in Chhamb sector. The Pakistani military then claimed to have found an Indian-made watch from the scene. It was also alleged that this operation was carried out to avenge the massacre of 29 Hindu villagers at Purankote, in Jammu and Kashmir, by the Lashkar-e-Taiba.
Not only would both countries have been "interested" in de-escalation but prodding from Washington would also have played a role in this outcome. It remains to be seen how this process unfolds in the next few weeks. Unfortunately, this renewed escalation between India and Pakistan has pushed the volatile situation in Kashmir into the background
In May 1999, Pakistani forces kidnapped Captain Saurabh Kalia, along with sepoys Bhanwar Lal Bagaria, Arjun Ram, Bhika Ram, Moola Ram and Naresh Singh. A post-mortem revealed that their bodies had been burned with cigarette butts and their genitals had been mutilated.
Eight months later, in January 2000, seven Pakistani soldiers were alleged to have been captured in the Nadala enclave, across the Neelam River. Their bodies were returned. Pakistan claimed they bore torture marks.
On February 24, 2000, the Pakistan Army claimed that there was a massacre in Lanjote village in Nakyal-Kotli sector in Pakistan-Administered Kashmir with 16 bodies left strewn across the streets. Pakistan Army officials claimed to have found a handwritten note, saying, “how does your own blood feel?” Pakistan has claimed that the killings were carried out by Indian special forces. India has not responded to the allegations but intelligence officials point out that after this, the mass killing of Hindus by militants stopped.
In June 2008, Pakistani troops attacked the Kranti border observation post near Salhotri village in Poonch, killing between two and eight Gurkha Regiment soldiers in Jawashwar Chhame. Days after, the retaliation came as Pakistani Army officials reported the beheading of one of their soldiers in the Bhattal sector in Poonch.
On August 30, 2011, Pakistan complained that three soldiers, including a JCO, were beheaded in an Indian raid on a post in the Sharda sector, across the Neelam river valley in Kel. It was said that this was in retaliation for the decapitation of two Indian soldiers near Karnah.
On January 8, 2013, Pakistani soldiers came across the Line of Control (LoC) into Indian territory and ambushed a patrol, killing two soldiers. There was a response but the UPA government chose not to go public.
The difference this time is that the surgical strikes came in the backdrop of heightened tension between the two countries. Not only was the Uri attack a trigger, but complex dimensions were added by the three-month long unrest in Kashmir and the war of words between New Delhi and Islamabad at the United Nations.
In spite of this, Prime Minister Modi practiced his blow-hot, blow-cold policy, as his challenge was bigger than Pakistan. One angle is that he had to reach out to his constituency that has built up an anti-Pakistan and anti-terror mood. And the other challenge is to keep the chances of war low to address international concerns. These two compulsions made it difficult for him to weigh the options. His speech at the three-day Bharatiya Janata Party National Council meeting in Kozhikode on September 24 was meant to deliver more than two messages. One message was that attacks like Uri won’t go away without paying a price and the other message was to challenge Pakistani people to see who wins a war—on unemployment, illiteracy and poverty. He continued with this thread even after the surgical strikes. “India has not attacked anyone. [And] neither [is it] hungry for any territory,” he said at a function in Delhi on October 2. “But in the two World Wars (in which India had no direct stake), 1.5 lakh Indian troops laid down their lives fighting for others.”
This is why de-escalation began sooner than expected. The National Security Advisers of both countries spoke on October 3 with Pakistan’s Sartaj Aziz saying that they agreed to reduce tensions. Not only would both countries have been “interested” in de-escalation but prodding from Washington would also have played a role in this outcome. It remains to be seen how this process unfolds in the next few weeks since Pakistan has raised its stakes over Kashmir and New Delhi has preferred to ignore the ground realities in the valley.
Unfortunately, this renewed escalation between India and Pakistan has pushed the volatile situation in Kashmir into the background. Kashmir is a forgotten chapter. For nearly three months it has been locked down between the curfew and strikes which are slowly becoming the norm. It perhaps suits New Delhi to have the schools, colleges and businesses shut. The killing of 90 civilians at the hands of the police and paramilitary forces and injuries to over 11,000 people have been accepted as a norm to contain the protests that are political in nature and are directly linked to a political resolution of the problem. But with both countries having locked horns over it, the militant attacks have taken centre stage and what is happening on the ground is now being defined as reality. India and Pakistan may de-escalate out of their own compulsions, but Kashmir remains unattended and is an open wound that will continue to fester.
The author is a senior journalist based in Srinagar and can be mailed at shujaat7867@gmail.com