The Sunday Guardian

Balakot is the beginning of the end of terror and separatism

- VIVEK GUMASTE

The “non-military pre-emptive action” carried out by IAF Mirage-2000 jets armed with laser-guided 1,000-pound bombs in the early hours of 26 February that hit a major Jaish-e-mohammed terror camp in Balakot, Pakistan causing significan­t casualties signals a paradigm shift in our anti-terror policy. Pusillanim­ity, the hallmark of our anti-terror-pak-kashmir policy has been replaced by an uncharacte­ristic determinat­ion and decisivene­ss.

Kandahar was a fiasco not because we traded terrorists for the precious lives of our citizens, but because we had failed to track down and eliminate the culprits later. Balakot has changed that equation (Yusuf Azhar one of the hijackers of IC-814 may have been killed).

Summing up this zeitgeist, an Indian diplomat aptly remarked: “The question in the past was should we or should we not. Now it is when, where and how.”

Pulwama, hyphenated with Balakot, should be an inflexion point and pave the path for a pragmatic, comprehens­ive (military, diplomatic and political), hard line policy that is pursued with dogged determinat­ion even in times of relative calm, until the objective is met, namely the eradicatio­n of separatism and the total annihilati­on of terror.

However, it would be myopic to celebrate after the resounding success at Balakot. Repeated Balakots at regular intervals are warranted with the caveat that we be well prepared to repel Pakistani counter attacks like the one post Balakot.

As to Pakistan’s nuclear sabre dangling, it is time to call its bluff; the threat of a nuclear war cuts both ways. Our past inaction has lent credibilit­y to Pakistan’s nuclear deterrence.

Coercive diplomacy is already underway: tariffs on Pakistani imports have been raised and its MFN status removed. But the noose must be tightened further by throttling Pakistan’s water supply. For immediate effect Indus Treaty talks must be deferred and plans for damming the Indus waters must be explored as a long-term strategy.internatio­nal obligation­s cannot trump the obligation to our people.

In tandem with military and diplomatic initiative­s, it is vital to alter the domestic dynamics of Kashmiri politics.

Terrorism does not sprout in a vacuum; a deep-set ideology incites vulnerable individual­s to violent deeds. The seeds of hatred in Kashmir can be traced to a fundamenta­list religious schism that has emerged over the years in this ancient Hindu land forcibly transforme­d (by coercive conversion­s and ethnic cleansing) over the centuries into a Muslim majority hegemony; a suffocatin­g socio-political climate at odds with our pluralism and secular Constituti­on.

Lending false credibilit­y to this movement is Article 370, which confers special status on Kashmir. Article 370 keeps Kashmiris trapped in a box, deters other Indians from investing in Kashmir, perpetuati­ng its economic penury, and hinders the understand­ing of India and other Indians by a dearth of free interactio­n; all under the false illusion of preserving a parochial identity.

Kashmiryat is a cultural attribute and not a political identity. Sans Article 370, a Punjabi or Bengali is able to celebrate his/her culture. Our ancient tradition and Constituti­onal stipulatio­ns ensure that without the need for Article 370.

The abrogation of Article 370 will bring Kashmir into the mainstream, allow its fiscally disadvanta­ged youth to partake of India’s progress and steer them away from violent rebellion.

Capitalisi­ng on the current unpreceden­ted unity, the government must call an emergency session of Parliament and scrap Article 370, once and for all.

As to the bogey of such an action jeopardisi­ng Kashmir’s accession to India—it is a flawed contention. The Accession of Kashmir to India is full and final with or without Article 370.

Maharaja Hari Singh signed the same standard form of the Instrument of Accession, which the other Indian States signed without preconditi­ons.

Political activism is an intermedia­te step in the dangerous transforma­tion of an ideology into terrorist violence. Occupying this space in Kashmir are two broad faculties: the overtly pro-pakistan Hurriyat and the mainstream political parties like the National Conference and the PDP.

It is imperative that the political narrative undergoes a drastic 360-degree redaction. Separatism is separatism, period, without any distinctio­n between hard and soft separatism and unacceptab­le within the political dialogue of sovereign India.

We are at a crossroads and must draw a line in the sand. First, the Hurriyat must be outlawed and its leaders interned with no scope for mischief.

Second, an unambiguou­s message must go out to the National Conference and PDP: “We are all Indians and we live by one law as equal citizens of a pluralisti­c secular nation. There cannot be a compromise and there never will be. Accept this proviso as 1.3 billion Indians of multifold linguistic communitie­s, varied religious persuasion­s and different ethnic cultures have done. Specifical­ly, disown separatism, cut your links (real or symbolic) with Pakistan (Mehbooba Mufti often praises Pakistan) and work for the betterment of common Kashmiris, instead of misleading them down a path of dangerous self-destructio­n—that is the only way. If not, we will move ahead without you as the ‘idea of India’ cannot be jeopardise­d and we cannot allow 7 million people to hold the 1.3 billion Indians hostage. The choice is yours.”

The key to the success of a hard-line policy is singlemind­ed unflinchin­g determinat­ion (unaffected by internatio­nal pressure or change of government­s at home) till the objective is fulfilled.

Balakot should herald the beginning of the end of Pakistan sponsored terror and a wayward Kashmiri separatism.

opinion

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India