Edit: Fighting spirit
WarrhetorichasbeenreinedinbutotherchallengesremainafterUri
By altering the dynamic of the India-Pakistan antagonism to a question of comparative economic attainments, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has adroitly succeeded in tamping down the febrile war rhetoric from Parivar hawks and elements in the security commentariat after last week’s fidayeen attack on a forward base in Uri in Jammu & Kashmir, along the Line of Control. Increasingly boxed into an undesirable course of action following his initial restrained response that the attack would not go unpunished, Mr Modi chose the time and place to deliver his message well. His call for a “war on poverty and unemployment”, delivered with customary flourish, followed the exchange of oratorical hostilities between Pakistan’s prime minister and the Indian diplomatic contingent to a largely uninterested audience at the UN General Assembly (UNGA) and built on the striking description of Pakistan as the “Ivy League of terrorism”.
By choosing to frame his riposte at a public meeting ahead of the Bharatiya Janata Party’s national council meeting on the beaches of Kozhikode, Mr Modi managed to address three constituencies simultaneously: The party and its Hindutva associates; Indians at large; and, over the heads of the Pakistani ruling and military establishment, ordinary Pakistanis. If the comparison of India and Pakistan as, respectively, the world’s largest exporter of software and the world’s largest exporter of terror would have resonatedonbothsidesoftheborder,thecorollarythatIndiahadtheupperhandwhen it came to a war on poverty, illiteracy and unemployment was hard to miss.
Mr Modi’s speech certainly invested him with statesmanlike qualities in contrast to his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif’s undignified UNGA fulminations. This doesnot,ofcourse,deflectfromthemultiplechallengesthatstemfromhisdeclarations. For one, the matrices Mr Modi specified are not so unequivocally in favour of India to suggest a decisive “victory”. Though India, at 130, is about 17 ranks above Pakistan (147) in the World Bank’s human development indicators, with lower unemployment rates (3.6 per cent versus 5.2 per cent), higher literacy (69.3 per cent to 56.76 per cent), it lags Pakistanintermsoftheproportionofpeoplebelowthepovertylineat21.3percentcomparedto8.3percent.Withjobsgrowth,thecentrepieceofhiselectionpromises,stillelusive, the outcomes of this “contest” could well come back to haunt the prime minister in 2019. The other element of doubt arises from Pakistan’s reactions. Conspicuous gift exchanges and surprise birthday visits did not deter cross-border terrorism. Another attackwouldmakeMrModi’sKozhikodechallengelookdownrightsillyunlessthearmy, security forces and intelligence services significantly improve their operational capabilities to ensure that incidents like Uri or Pathankot are not repeated.
It’s a sign of maturity, however, that Mr Modi has clearly indicated that he will not abrogate the Indus Waters treaty; rather, he would use its provisions to reduce water flowtoPakistanbybuilding/completingdamsonthewesternrivers.Theideatoreopen the treaty was anyway ill-advised. The treaty, negotiated in 1960, has survived five decades of hostilities, and several disputes under it have been to India’s advantage. To squeeze Pakistan’s agriculture, which is acutely dependent on the three rivers flowing through Indian territory, would have scarcely enhanced India’s reputation as a responsible power. Publicly articulated resolves to fight poverty are always a safe political bet, but to make a diplomatic point Mr Modi has done well not to push the issue beyond those barriers and disrupt a settled treaty agreed to in good faith.