Politics, policy and war
The nature of Pakistani response was the concluding factor in the current crisis
The writer is an independent researcher focusing on the issues of strategic stability and foreign policy challenges
The simmering crisis between India and Pakistan connotates many basic arguments. It puts in perspective the hugely inappropriate mechanics of escalation between both countries. It focuses on the irrational behaviour with regard to belligerence and it highlights the disparity in thought and action. The crisis also presents the probability of violent conflict that can erupt because of unconnected events and unsolved issues. The need remains to study what lessons can be derived from this crisis.
Perhaps we can easily state the issue in the famous aphorism by Clausewitz, “War is the continuation of politics by other means”. The policy of shoring up political power in domestic ground remains the mantra of Modi in inciting conflict while the composure of Imran Khan and his vehement rejection of escalation remains the cornerstone of Pakistani rhetoric. The dimensions of the current crisis have highlighted some very palpable issues. One is the virility of public discourse and divisive and inclusive patterns of leadership. The bastions of tolerance and collaborative understanding have been demolished in India. The spewing of hatred and the sprawling animosity that the Indian media and celebrities have demonstrated against Pakistan offer a window on current thoughts in India. Whereas the restraint and expansive view of the Pakistani populace remains a witness to the evolved nature of the Pakistani public. Also, the issue highlights the fractious understanding of the enigmas of Kashmir and terrorism in the region.
This stand-off also exemplifies the escalation patterns between India and Pakistan. The overwhelming strategic doctrine of both states relies abundantly on maintaining credible minimum deterrence. The nuclear posturing of Pakistan has always been offensive to preclude a land-based offence by India. This has necessitated finding probable tactical and strategical initiatives that can be undertaken without risking all-out war. The result has been an overwhelming desire on the part of India to employ airpower tactically challenging the red lines and vulnerability of the strategic doctrine of Pakistan. The current crisis is a display of this policy.
Rapidly targeting air strikes by the Indian Air Force have been heavily discussed as the only viable options for conflict with Pakistan under the nuclear umbrella. Several prominent Indian security and strategy analysts have listed this step as the most favourable to counter Pakistan’s nuclear posture and deterrence strategy. The assumption being that such attacks will not merit a response from the Pakistani side, and hence will provide a cover for continuing the conditional primacy of India in any conflict. There was, however, something that was always absent in these analyses. The nature of Pakistani response which is the concluding factor in the current crisis.
The most basic assumption that was shattered due to Pakistani reaction in the downing of Indian plane is the utility of Indian air strikes. This action has demonstrated the actuality in defence calculations of Pakistan that any Indian offensive in airspace will merit an equal response. This closes the door for any further miscalculation on the part of India in its use of air force. Pakistan will respond correspondingly if airpower is employed on its surface.
In the drums of war, it is often forgotten that underneath the clamouring of revenge and retaliation, there remains a loss. This loss of countless dreams, unimaginable consequences, and tender emotions is the cost of any war. In a region of misplaced initiatives, untenable schemes, and egotistical grandiosity, war is not the solution but the bane of any solutions. The aim to undermine stability and provoke hostilities is never a viable political or military option. Because war is not a conclusion, it is the beginning of destruction and demolition. It is, therefore, not only apt but imperative to chant ‘No to War’.
Published in The Express Tribune, March 3rd, 2019.
Perhaps we can easily state the issue in the famous aphorism by Clausewitz, “War is the continuation of politics by other means”. The policy of shoring up political power in domestic ground remains the mantra of Modi in inciting conflict while the composure of Imran Khan and his vehement rejection of escalation remains the cornerstone of Pakistani rhetoric. The dimensions of the current crisis have highlighted some very palpable issues. One is the virility of public discourse and divisive and inclusive patterns of leadership. The bastions of tolerance and collaborative understanding have been demolished in India. The spewing of hatred and the sprawling animosity that the Indian media and celebrities have demonstrated against Pakistan offer a window on current thoughts in India. Whereas the restraint and expansive view of the Pakistani populace remains a witness to the evolved nature of the Pakistani public. Also, the issue highlights the fractious understanding of the enigmas of Kashmir and terrorism in the region.
This stand-off also exemplifies the escalation patterns between India and Pakistan. The overwhelming strategic doctrine of both states relies abundantly on maintaining credible minimum deterrence. The nuclear posturing of Pakistan has always been offensive to preclude a land-based offence by India. This has necessitated finding probable tactical and strategical initiatives that can be undertaken without risking all-out war. The result has been an overwhelming desire on the part of India to employ airpower tactically challenging the red lines and vulnerability of the strategic doctrine of Pakistan. The current crisis is a display of this policy.
Rapidly targeting air strikes by the Indian Air Force have been heavily discussed as the only viable options for conflict with Pakistan under the nuclear umbrella. Several prominent Indian security and strategy analysts have listed this step as the most favourable to counter Pakistan’s nuclear posture and deterrence strategy. The assumption being that such attacks will not merit a response from the Pakistani side, and hence will provide a cover for continuing the conditional primacy of India in any conflict. There was, however, something that was always absent in these analyses. The nature of Pakistani response which is the concluding factor in the current crisis.
The most basic assumption that was shattered due to Pakistani reaction in the downing of Indian plane is the utility of Indian air strikes. This action has demonstrated the actuality in defence calculations of Pakistan that any Indian offensive in airspace will merit an equal response. This closes the door for any further miscalculation on the part of India in its use of air force. Pakistan will respond correspondingly if airpower is employed on its surface.
In the drums of war, it is often forgotten that underneath the clamouring of revenge and retaliation, there remains a loss. This loss of countless dreams, unimaginable consequences, and tender emotions is the cost of any war. In a region of misplaced initiatives, untenable schemes, and egotistical grandiosity, war is not the solution but the bane of any solutions. The aim to undermine stability and provoke hostilities is never a viable political or military option. Because war is not a conclusion, it is the beginning of destruction and demolition. It is, therefore, not only apt but imperative to chant ‘No to War’.
Published in The Express Tribune, March 3rd, 2019.