Open Forum

New Delhi, 7 January 2016

Pathankot Attack

HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF

By Proloy Bagchi

The attack on Pathankot Air Force Station was expected. It had to happen as it occurres every time after any initiative for India-Pakistan talks. We also know the Government had specific information on Thursday last about it and 12 militants had crossed the border.  One wonders whether the perpetrators of these are really so dumb as to believe that their nefarious designs would not be anticipated despite the historical background.

Of course, it is sad that 7 Indian soldiers lost their lives thanks to the Pakistani Army and its Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) nefarious one-upmanship. That five well-trained terrorists were killed by Indian security forces underscores the assembly line of fidayeens produced by Pakistan’s terror stable and used by its military establishment whenever the occasion demands.

Indeed, life comes cheap there wherein they are the cannon fodder and sacrificed to inflict India by “a thousand cuts.” At best a delusional objective. Curiously, however, the ISI, which patronises these anti-India terror groups, used Maulana Masood Azhar’s (exchanged in the IC 814 Kandhar hijack fiasco) Jaish-e-Mohammed instead of favourite Hafiz Sayeed’s Lashkar-e-Taiba. Perhaps the idea was to put the Indian cognoscenti off the scent.

Perhaps Islamabad’s Army and ISI felt that Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was getting to be too big for his boots and needed to be cut down to size. How could he have agreed to Modi’s visit without their clearance? Regardless of the admiration Modi’s diplomatic masterstroke evoked globally, Pak’s military establishment had to showcase that in so far as relations with India were concerned it was they who called the shots, not the democratically elected civil Government or Prime Minister.

After helming Indo-Pak proceedings since the birth of the Islamic State, it could not let go of its authority it has since 1947. Just because an Indian Prime Minister suddenly decides to descend in Lahore. Greeting Sharif on his birthday and hogging publicity is one thing, but disturbing the status quo is quite another.

That Pakistan has two power centres is open knowledge as also that its Rawalpindi-based Army generally gets the better of its civilian counterpart, especially vis-à-vis ties with India.

In fact, ex-RAW chief AS Dulat pointedly brought this out in his autobiographical book, “Kashmir – the Vajpayee years”. A top sleuth who had talked to most Kashmiri militants, he recounted how one of them had categorically told him that nothing in Kashmir could happen unless it was cleared by the ISI and it was they who called the shots.

We also know that 2008 Mumbai 26/11 attack was planned and executed by the ISI. Similarly, Pathankot could not also have taken place without precision planning by Pakistan’s spy organization.

Clearly, Islamabad’s security establishment will never allow peace initiatives with its Number One enemy, New Delhi to fructify. Succinctly, avers Pakistani journalist Mehmal Sarfaraz, it’s their “world view”. Remember, the ISI upstaged peace initiatives in the late 1990s by capturing Kargil followed by Mumbai. All to undo whatever had been achieved to commence talks.

Presently, with Modi establishing a personal rapport with the Sharif, the mutual bonhomie was anathema for the Army and ISI. Within 8 days of Modi’s Lahore visit, Pathankot happened though it had been planned months ago.

True, Islamabad has condemned the attack and Sharif has promised all help to unravel it. Alas, he has not assured his counter-part Modi of preventing a repeat attack. Perhaps, the Pakistan Prime Minister cannot do so as he has no control over his rogue army.

Look at the paradox.  While the civil authority talks peace, its army wages war. This has happened not once, not twice but times out of number. Undeniably, Pakistan’s democracy is a sham wherein its military establishment works at cross purposes with the civilian authority, in the international theatre.  

Importantly, it has become so powerful and developed enormous vested interests in keeping Indo-Pak tensions high with its civilian Government under its boots that no democratic process could ever shake it away.

No wonder, Afghan President Ghani made a beeline for Rawalpindi as his first port of call in Pakistan. Even the US does business with the Army as evidenced by the Pak Army Chief’s visit to Washington. The US Administration knows that it is not the Prime Minister but the Military Chief who can deliver. The latter has eclipsed the Prime Minister.

This is not all. Army Chief Raseel Sharif has acquired a “cult hero” status by battling terrorism and bringing in relative peace in violent city Karachi. Self-confessedly, Chief Sharif plays a “soldier-statesman” role given the inability of the democratically elected Government to govern effectively.

The Pak Army Chief has opened a front against the jihadists operating in the West and East but India is another matter. These terrorists are his assets against its bête noir for inflicting “thousand cuts”.

The pity is that the Pathankot attack has come so soon after the “détente” arrived at between National Security Advisers and Foreign Secretaries of the two countries at Bangkok early in December last. The main of several take-aways from these talks was engagement with each other, after years of harsh language and diplomatic sulk.

Another outcome was to hold talks on Kashmir and terrorism. But Pathankot happened even before the ink used for the agreement could dry up. If a country could renege so quickly after an agreement at such a high level, maybe, there is no point in having anything to do with it.

Significantly, after having invested so much in his ‘peace-mongering’ with Pakistan, Pathankot is a serious setback for Modi. Already, the Congress is tearing him to pieces, notwithstanding its efforts over the last few decades too did not yield anything.

Modi now has two options: Go ahead with his peace initiatives either with the civil authority or Pak Army Chief. Two, severe all relations (to the extent possible) with Pakistan. Already shrill voices are pitching for the latter course of action. This might be unwise in the long run but seems right in Pathankot’s immediate aftermath. ----- INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)