Log has written
FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 2009

The Pakistani military establishment is under severe pressure from the US to stop sponsoring jihadi militant groups, on the one hand, and to actually join the fight against them, on the other. Now, even in the unlikely event that the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency decides to dismantle its jihadi connections, the army will still find it impossible to purposefully prosecute a counter-insurgency war against the Taliban. Why? Because the dominant belief among Pakistani military personnel—across the ranks—is that it is the US that is the real enemy and the Taliban are righteous fighters for the Islamic cause. One has only to imagine what a brigade commander would say to his troops to motivate them to fight their compatriots to realize that the Pakistan army is incapable of fighting the Taliban.

Photograph: Narinder Nanu / AP

Photograph: Narinder Nanu / AP

In a way, those who argue that the Pakistan army lacks the capacity to fight this war are right; but this is a lack of capacity that no amount of night-vision goggles and helicopter gunships can ameliorate. And this unpalatable reality is obfuscated behind the India bogey—the pretence that the Pakistan army could do much better against the Taliban if only it didn’t have to defend itself from its much stronger adversary to its east.

If the “India threat” were to recede, Pakistan—and for that matter the US—will have no more excuses left to avoid having to do what is necessary. New Delhi should, therefore, call Pakistan’s bluff by mounting what we propose to call Operation Markarap.

First, the new Union government, at the highest levels, must categorically declare that Pakistan need not fear an Indian military attack so long as the Pakistan army is engaged in a battle against the Taliban. Now, such a verbal commitment might not convince the military brass in Rawalpindi, but it is likely to play well in Washington. It will take the wind out of the sails of Pakistan’s American apologists by depriving them of their strongest and seemingly plausible argument.

Second, India should move back some of the army strike formations currently deployed in Rajasthan and Punjab. Such a bold, strategic move will not only make India’s verbal assurances credible, but will also immediately result in irresistible pressure on the Pakistan army to commit more of its troops to the western border. According to our rough estimate, the Pakistan army can shift around 150,000 troops to its western front without lowering its presence along the Line of Control.

Since the risk of Pakistani armoured columns rolling into India is not serious at this time, India can easily afford to move several divisions of its strike corps away from the border to more inland positions. Such military movements can be accomplished without affecting border security. Indeed, this is where India can exploit the existence of nuclear weapons to its advantage—for nuclear deterrence makes such strategic moves possible by lowering the risk of a conventional war. And even if the Pakistan army irrationally tries to exploit the Indian move by launching a conventional attack along the border, it will be hopelessly isolated internationally, not to mention at serious risk of yet another military defeat at the hands of the Indian Armed Forces. In the nearly seven years since Operation Parakram—the military build-up after the December 2001 attack on Parliament—the Indian Army has improved its mobility sufficiently to be able to quickly rebuff a foolhardy invasion.

Third, India should proceed with the normalization process in Jammu and Kashmir that includes reducing the visible presence of security forces in population centres. At the same time, this should be accompanied by greater vigilance along the Line of Control to prevent the infiltration of jihadi militants. It is conceivable that the Pakistani military jihadi complex will attempt to heighten tensions with India by increasing the tempo of terrorist attacks in Kashmir—as well as other parts of India—in a bid to maintain its alibi. An analysis of the reports of infiltration attempts this year suggests that the jihadis are exploring non-traditional, harder routes in northern Kashmir. This calls for the Indian Army to change its post-Kargil posture from merely holding the heights to proactively curbing jihadi movements in the valley.

Finally, Indian diplomacy must extract maximum advantage— mainly in Washington, but also in other capitals—by signalling India’s invaluable role in helping the international community solve its “migraine”. It is important to remember that there will be four, if not eight, more years of the Obama administration. Cooperating on the Afghanistan-Pakistan (Af-Pak) problem will provide a positive basis for engaging it and will provide India with greater leverage in negotiations over other contentious issues.

Given that what passes for Pakistan policy is an astonishingly trivial game of dossiers-and-lawsuits, India won’t be worse off by mounting Operation Markarap, a Parakram in reverse. By calling Pakistan’s bluff, India can shorten the time it will take for the Obama administration to realize that Af-Pak can only be solved by dismantling Pakistan’s military-jihadi complex.

Nitin Pai and Sushant K. Singh are editors of Pragati—The Indian National Interest Review, a publication on strategic affairs, public policy and governance. Comment at theirview@livemint.com

Tags - Find More Articles On:
READ MORE ARTICLES BY:
 
Amit Said:


I wonder what makes you think that the Taliban is not under the control of the Pakistani Army. The Taliban are composed of Pashtun tribals. The first time the Pakistanis used these Pashtun tribals to attack India was in 1948 over Kashmir. If you read the history of the 1948 Kashmir war, Nehru had intense disagreement with Jinnah over Jinnah's assertion that the Kashmiri tribal invaders were not controlled by Pakistan. Events since then have shown that the tribals in 1948 were indeed under Pakistani control - and there is no reason to believe that the Pakistani Army lost control of the tribals since. The Indian policy since then of bottling up the Taliban/tribals in Pakistan by fortifying the border has paid rich dividends by frustrating Pakistani designs over India. It should be continued as a means of holding down Pakistan while India progresses in all fields.

Posted On 5/20/2009 10:46:07 PM
Rajendra Said:


Strategic Chanikyan thinking!!! Wow! Moving forward, have the creative authors stretegized about calling Pakistan's ultimate bluff...what if India gifts Kashmir to Pakistan? Na rahegi baans, ne bajegi bansuri? Come to think of it, no Kashmir, no problem! Case closed. Ergo, India becomes a superpower! I hope the PaiSingh jugalbandi can write the notes to this tune in their next column.

Posted On 5/20/2009 11:23:55 PM
suresh Said:


Contrary to what Pakistan says that Indian troops at the border are for attacking Pakistan, they are their to prevent terrorist that are supported by Pakistani army and ISI to infilterate and cause indiscrminate killings in India. If India removes its troops from the border, you will see a surge in terrorist activities. It is a stupid idea to even suggest.

Posted On 5/21/2009 12:00:33 AM
Re: RK Said:


Yeah right. Three armoured divisions and numerous armoured brigades, with forward deployed strike elements of the IAF are there to stop cross border infiltration. Give me a frickin' break. The Indian Army is Pakistan centric and the force deployments - which are public knowledge - are ample evidence of this fact. Pakistan's "bluff" can't be called on this matter because there is no bluff to be called. Only an ignorant idiot would consider India's force posture to be "neutral" with respect to Pakistan after seeing 80+% of the Indian army deployed at Pakistan's borders.

Posted On 5/21/2009 9:30:54 PM
suresh Said:


Contrary to what Pakistan says that Indian troops at the border are for attacking Pakistan, they are their to prevent terrorist that are supported by Pakistani army and ISI to infilterate and cause indiscrminate killings in India. If India removes its troops from the border, you will see a surge in terrorist activities. It is a stupid idea to even suggest.

Posted On 5/21/2009 12:00:33 AM
Re: Narayan Said:


This is in reply to a reply to your comment. Like the authors say, there's a nuke perspective to this which rules out an unprovoked conventional war.

Posted On 5/30/2009 5:43:36 PM
Ka Said:


Pakistanis want Indian troops pulled back because they have thousands of jihadis waiting to infiltrate India and the Indian army is a hurdle.

Posted On 5/21/2009 12:37:59 AM
Bilal Said:


A typical pakistanphobic article by a indian obsessed with pakistan who does not realise that india has failed itself for lying to the people of the world of its fake democracy and killing thousands in kashmir and supporting mass murder by the soviets in afghanistan in 1970 this post by the indian writers belongs in a bollywood movie to dupe indians in there already solid false patriotic rants and beliefs.

Posted On 5/21/2009 1:25:04 AM
Lionel Said:


This is an absurd suggestion. Withdrawing troops will only result in massive infiltration and even overt aggression on the part of the Pakistan army which retains the illusion that it can defeat the Indian army. It is for an analogous reason that the 2nd Infantry division of the US is at the 38th parallel along with regular South Korean forces - their withdrawal will result in the equally imbalanced North Koreans swamping South Korea.

Posted On 5/21/2009 1:43:30 AM
Amrit Said:


The danger to India is not from the Pakistani army but from suicidal jihadists who will promptly take advantage of an unguarded Indo-Pakistan border to launch Mumbai-type attacks. India should give Pakistan a verbal promise that the Indian army will not cross cross the border but must not decrease its presence there. That should be done only after the jihadi infrastructure is completely liquidated by Pakistan. Verbal promises from Pakistan are worthless.

Posted On 5/21/2009 1:49:05 AM
mohammad Said:


i think both india and pakistan should forget their diffrences and be friend with each other and must not allow america to exploit them for their their own political design in the sub-continent.America is thousands of miles away from our countries.in case of a war yankies will sit back and lough at our foolishness while we kill each other.americans do not want the people of our countries to progress while they hav done every they can to make their own life easy.we should wake up and tell them to be off before they make us fight. who will suffer? our own poor people not americans.i urge the leaders of both countries to sort out their problems them selves and not let the yankies come in between them.surly bothe countries are quite capable of sorting their own problems.americans will never allow peace and tranquility to prevail in that region.please look after ur poor people in ur countries. the life is too short.

Posted On 5/21/2009 2:46:12 AM
Adnan Said:


Its not childs play , Pakistan, India taliban, isi, My freind you should be a film writer I wish things were so simple.

Posted On 5/21/2009 4:32:45 AM
hassan Said:


How the hell does this author know what the Pakistani army thinks ? (America being enemy and not the Taliban). What more does one have to do to prove sincereity with the Government, then to risk one's life in the line of Fire. Over 900 Tliban killed and around 50 (at least ) Army men killed. You make hate statements without any proof.

Posted On 5/21/2009 5:11:55 AM
Rash Said:


India and Pakistan was one country and should merge into one country. Time has come that these two countries merge and become one power and one voice for the world. May God bless both countries. A prayer from a Pakistani citizen.

Posted On 5/21/2009 5:16:21 AM
Arvi Said:


Wow man are these guys for real? BTW did u say Operation "Morecrap" LOL?

Posted On 5/21/2009 7:15:42 AM
Ali Said:


It's almost funny; the only force that makes Indians feel proud of whatever(militarily or otherwise) they are is of course not their abilitiy, capability and substantiality of any matter pertaining to their self-imagined greatness, but their intolerable massively worthless partial population over internetwork, which is extremely logical to themselves, merely. Their logicality seems to be serving the verbal aims of their childish dramatic bollywoodlike cast of mind only whilst the facts are blatantly opposite all the time. Around more than 1000 Talebans have been reportedly killed in only a week's duration, such is the might of Pakistan Army. The best that the whole world can expect from abhorrent cattish cowardice Hindus is but presenting subject matter intended to arouse sophomoric preeminence respecting themselves, that is all.

Posted On 5/21/2009 7:46:58 AM
Re: shiv Said:


1000 Talebans killed? LOL. You mean Pakis are killing themselves? Show me the bodies. The Pakistan army is a 700,000 strong army of Talebans.

Posted On 5/21/2009 5:59:03 PM
Pragma Said:


If only things were as simple... the article is well written but it would be foolish to expose ourselves to any fool hardy misadventure. Pakistan is fighting a disease which will cure itself in another 2-3 years MAX !!! (Yes it will) We should maintain the status quo and not become means for other nations to clear up their mess and carry out their agendas (80's Afghan war, Oil grabbers, Armament sellers etc. etc.) I think our leadership has shown great restraint in not getting sucked up into a fullblown conflict (Post 26/11) lets not forget how far back the 65 & 71 wars set us back progress-wise. We are on the verge of becoming a global superpower. lets not lose focus of that eventuality.

Posted On 5/21/2009 3:50:45 PM
pradeep Said:


This article makes no sense. No leader in their right mind will move the troop back and risk a Jihadi attack. All these trouble to just to earn kudos from the US.

Posted On 5/21/2009 5:02:51 PM
shiv Said:


This analysis, which calls for moving Indian conventional forces away and relying on a nuclear threat to thwart Pakistani adventurism is seriously flawed on two counts 1) India has a "No First Use" policy for Nuclear Weapons. That means that if a Pakistani conventional attack should occur (as did occur in 1947, 1965 1971 and 1999), India would not have the forces to resist, nor would India be able to use nuclear weapons unless Pakistan used them first. 2) The future of the world lies in reducing the threat of nuclear war, not increasing it by foregoing the possibility of using conventional weapons and choosing to deliberately place the threat of using nuclear weapons as a priority (as the authors have suggested). The authors have not thought this thing through fully.

Posted On 5/21/2009 5:54:56 PM
vadiraj Said:


pakistan will not roll out its army into indian borders, but rather push militants if we pull back our forces at this point of time.

Posted On 5/24/2009 4:36:11 PM
Atul Said:


Nitin and Sushant, In your well written article, you mentioned the Pak army's requirement to maintian its alibi and consequently carry out attacks in India. But how is that maintaining an alibi? The fact that the attacks are planned in Pakistan and have Pak army written over it should be the furthest thing that helps it in maintaining an alibi. After all, it shows the hollow promise of the Pak army to combat terrorism and nails them as supporters, planners and executors of terrorist attacks. While this is what India wants, why would the Pak army wish to do that? And this might even backfire as Pakistan can put forth a suggestion to the follwing effect : "Due to the army being concentrated at the western border (which the US will attest to) it could not have possibly carried out the attacks and instead they too are victims of the same problems as India. And so in order to combat this menace we must eliminate the Taliban and others in the Northwestern areas and we request India to assist us - Pakistan, who is the real victim here and not the perpetrator." While that conclusively proves that terrorist are running without a care in Pakistan, it might also be seen as the helplessness of the Pakistani state in combating the menace rather than its connivance(which in reality is the simple and pure truth) in such attacks. So, more civilians in the Indian territory perish and Pakistan instead pulls another 'Mumbai' on us with MMS and Co. merely tweedling their thumbs again. Maybe I am missing something here as I am not that insightful in foreign affairs. But perhaps you could answer my queries posted here and help me get a better grip on the situation. Thanks.

Posted On 6/19/2009 9:27:02 AM