Pahalgam, Operation Sindoor and after: Lessons India must learn (plus: Pahalgam, Operation Sindoor, Ceasefire: Pressing questions awaiting answers)

First published at CPI(ML) Liberation.

Operation Sindoor and its immediate military aftermath that threatened to escalate into a full-scale war between India and Pakistan have given way to at least a temporary truce. The Sangh brigade, the loudmouth godi media anchors and the vocal community of Modi bhakts who were already in a celebratory mode anticipating another 1971-type decisive outcome are deeply disappointed and frustrated. The short-lived triumphalist exuberance over, there is now an orchestrated campaign to silence and persecute every voice that preferred peace to war and stood boldly against war hysteria and anti-Muslim hate. This can be seen not just in the form of abusive social media trolling that targets even people like Himanshi Narwal who lost her husband in the Pahalgam terror attack or Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri who led the public briefings during Operation Sindoor, but in violent attacks on anti-war meetings and marches and the vindictive arrest of a scholar like Professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad on totally baseless charges.

The trajectory of events from the horrific terrorist attack in Pahalgam to the sudden announcement of ceasefire has given rise to many questions regarding India's national security and foreign policy. The Modi government has been claiming great successes in these two areas but facts now clearly suggest that it has completely failed even on its own terms. From Uri and Pathankot to Pulwama and now Pahalgam, there have been major attacks on India's security forces and military installations and on civilians during the last ten years. Add the Galwan valley clash with China in 2020, and it is evident to all that, unsurprisingly, Jammu and Kashmir has not become a more peaceful region in the Modi era. With Pakistan India has now had to settle for a ceasefire that Trump says was brokered by his government, and as for the clash with China we still remember how Modi told the country that there was no incursion or occupation by China, making us wonder what the clash then was all about.

The countrywide mock drills and the spread of military exchanges across almost the entire stretch of the India-Pakistan border rekindled memories of the 1971 war. Any sober comparison between the 1971 war and the latest conflict should however tell us how much things have changed since then. We must never forget that 1971 was primarily Bangladesh's own liberation war which turned into an India-Pakistan war only after India's open military intervention and declaration of support for Bangladesh. The international strategic environment and balance of forces has also undergone a dramatic shift since then. In 1971, India had the fullest backing of the Soviet Union without which the war could not possibly have been clinched so quickly and decisively. This time round India had hardly any external support while Pakistan had the full backing of China. We must also remember that for all their disparities in size and strength, there is now nuclear parity between the two countries, a reality that both can only ignore at their own peril.

In his post-ceasefire address to the nation, Narendra Modi sought to come up with a new doctrine of national security when he said that every act of terror would henceforth be treated as an act of war and India would not accept any ‘nuclear blackmail’. Nuclear parity produces nuclear deterrence, which if ignored can only guarantee mutually assured destruction. Whatever Modi may mean by nuclear blackmail, no nuclear power in the world today can risk a nuclear war with another nuclear power. Nuclear weapons apart, constant upgradation of technology has also drastically changed the nature of warfare. The latest military showdown between India and Pakistan gave us some glimpses of this new mode of technology-driven warfare. If India can buy sophisticated weaponry and military technologies from the US, Israel or France, so can Pakistan from China and other weapons-exporting countries, the US included. A permanent threat of war can only mean a spiralling arms race between India and Pakistan.

The question we need to ask ourselves is obvious. If a former superpower like the Soviet Union collapsed under the weight of an unsustainable arms race with the US, should not India avoid such a suicidal course by all means possible? This is where the role of diplomacy and foreign policy becomes so important. In the wake of the Pahalgam terror attack, India had sympathy from across the world. But when the Modi government launched Operation Sindoor and the threat of a full-scale war between two nuclear-powered neighbours began to loom large, the sympathy for India dissipated and almost the entire world called for de-escalation and dialogue. Israel and to an extent Afghanistan have been the only two countries that have appeared to side with India, whereas the United States, after initial expressions of indifference, stepped in and broke the news of ceasefire. At the hour of its biggest test, the Modi era foreign policy proved to be an abject failure and India virtually stood thoroughly isolated in the global arena.

Known for his declared policy of seeking opportunities in adversity, Modi has now outsourced his foreign policy fiasco to parties of the very opposition the Sangh brigade had been dubbing anti-national all this while. A few opposition MPs have been selectively chosen to join and even head parliamentary delegations that will visit select countries in the world on a so called diplomatic outreach mission. China and India's other South Asian neighbours, along with Iran and Canada are however conspicuously missing among the delegation destinations. In the Modi era India has been busy abandoning and ignoring relevant regional and global south platforms like SAARC and BRICS while becoming obsessed with West-dominated groupings like G7 and G20 and becoming increasingly dependent on and subservient to the US-Israel axis. The result is there for all to see - utter isolation in India's own neighbourhood which the government now seems to accept as a permanent reality.

India needs an urgent rethink on national security and course correction on foreign policy. The opposition had rightly demanded an immediate special joint session of Parliament for a proper update on the situation and discussion on the pressing questions. The Modi government is trying to avoid its accountability by now hiding behind this global outreach mission comprising selectively curated delegations. The world has been watching the entire course of post-Pahalgam developments. The vicious targeting of Himanshi Narwal, the abusive trolling of India's own foreign secretary, the derogatory remarks about Colonel Sofiya Qureshi by Madhya Pradesh BJP minister Kunwar Vijay Shah and the arrest of Professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad are all global news. If Narendra Modi's much publicised foreign visits and the pursuit of a foreign policy that caters to the corporate greed of India's crony capitalists at the cost of India's own strategic needs, and the failure of the Modi government's Kashmir policy have landed India into the current crisis, the seemingly bipartisan diplomatic outreach mission where handpicked opposition MPs provide a thin facade of 'national unity' around these same failed policies cannot change the scenario. What India needs is a decisive policy shift - reject the disastrous course of the Modi regime and reorient the country's internal and external policies in consonance with the constitutional proclamation of a sovereign socialist secular democratic republic and the legacy of the inclusive and anti-imperialist nationalism nurtured in the course of India's historic freedom movement.

Pahalgam, Operation Sindoor, ceasefire: Pressing questions awaiting answers

First published at CPI(ML) Liberation.

Three eventful weeks have elapsed since the horrific terrorist attack in Pahalgam that claimed twenty-six lives including twenty-four Indian tourists, a Nepali tourist and a local Kashmiri pony operator. India responded by first announcing a series of measures against Pakistan including the controversial decision to suspend the 1960 Indus water-sharing agreement. Pakistan responded with a set of retaliatory measures including the suspension of the historic Simla Agreement of 1972 which had ruled out any third-party intervention in Indo-Pak bilateral matters. Two weeks later India launched a military reprisal against alleged terror camps in Pakistan. Retaliation ensued from the Pakistan side and the conflagration threatened to escalate into yet another full-scale war.

With the whole world apprehensive of the consequences of this growing military combat between these two nuclear-powered neighbours, there came the announcement of a truce. The news was broken on social media by US President Trump who credited it to a long night of American mediation, before formal announcements followed from India and Pakistan. Two days later Prime Minister Modi acknowledged the ceasefire, describing it as a watchful and conditional suspension of the Indian military response, codenamed Operation Sindoor, and attributing it to a desperate plea from Pakistan for respite. But once again, moments before Modi's address, President Trump reiterated that the truce had been achieved through American intervention and the US did it by leveraging its power in international trade. And after Modi's address, Trump has again repeated his claim during his visit to Saudi Arabia along with his offer to invite the PMs of India and Pakistan to 'a nice dinner'.

Three weeks since the Pahalgam terror attack, we are thus faced with a number of pressing unanswered questions. Modi has made two major speeches in these three weeks, the first from what can only be called an election rally in Bihar's Madhubani where he announced his government's resolve to pursue the perpetrators of terror to the end of the earth and now his post-ceasefire televised address to the nation. For all his rhetorical bravado, his silences continue to ring louder than his assertions. By the government's own proclamations, Operation Sindoor was meant to secure justice for the victims of the Pahalgam terror attack and now the government claims that justice has been served. But even as we are told that several terror camps in Pakistan have been destroyed and many 'dreaded terrorists' eliminated, we know nothing about the perpetrators of the Pahalgam carnage.

Modi has remained conspicuously silent about the claims made by Trump and senior US officials. His silence only lends credence to the American claims. India has in the past always been against American intervention in India's internal matters or Indo-Pak bilateral affairs. By suspending the 1972 Simla Agreement, Pakistan has clearly signalled its intention to open the Kashmir question to international mediation, and Trump has quickly stepped in with his renewed offer to mediate. Modi's silence about the growing signs and claims of American intervention does not inspire any confidence or clarity about the future of India's foreign policy when India continues to get increasingly isolated in the region even as India's dependence on the US-Israel axis grows by the day.

In the context of Russia's war on Ukraine, Modi came up with the grand formulation: this is not the era of war. Now after the ceasefire, he chose the occasion of Buddha Purnima, to return to that formulation: this is the era of neither war nor terror. He would like us to believe that with Operation Sindoor, his government has made a bold and defining statement against terror. But as of now, even the military balance sheet of the exercise does not suggest any clear victory with India's military establishment telling us that losses are a part of combat and will be counted when the combat is truly over. We are told that our pilots are all safely back home but there is no clarity about the reported loss of India's fighting aircrafts.

If anything, this operation has taught us once again that a country must not rush into war without exhausting diplomatic options. The media which was spreading the fake news of capturing Karachi and Lahore now has to live with the reality of a ceasefire. In his address to the nation, Modi has said that from now on every act of terror will be treated as an act of war. Such a generalised conflation of terror with war, will put India and Pakistan in a permanent warlike situation, and as the chain of events from Operation Sindoor to ceasefire has demonstrated, such a situation will only turn the subcontinent into an extended theatre of a US-China showdown. If we have to overcome the twin threats of terror and war and keep the subcontinent free from the strategic implications of a US-China showdown, India and Pakistan will have to work for lasting peace in the region and improved bilateral understanding and cooperation.

Enraged by the new turn of events, the Sanghi troll army targeted Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri and his family, forcing him to lock his twitter account, and the government refused to condemn this abusive trolling of one of its own senior officials. Madhya Pradesh BJP Minister Kunwar Vijay Shah has made insulting remarks against Colonel Sofiya Qureshi, calling her a sister of the terrorists. The war hysteria and communal venom is not giving rise to only abusive trolling, but also to heightened attacks on Kashmiri people and migrant Muslim workers. BJP hooligans are also attacking citizen assemblies and marches for peace and harmony.

As the myths built assiduously around the so-called great global standing and power of the Modi government get shattered in real life, the frustrated Sangh brigade and bhakt army are likely to give vent to their anger by unleashing more communal venom and violence in the coming days. But these tension-filled days since the Pahalgam terror attack have also shown us enough glimpses of the strength and courage of the people to face the challenges with unity and calm resolve. We saw the people of Kashmir come out in large numbers on the streets to unequivocally condemn terrorism and the heinous attacks on tourists. We heard Himanshi Narwal insisting on justice with peace and appealing against any targeting of Kashmiris and Muslims in the name of avenging terror. We watched Shaila Negi confront a violent hate-filled mob on the streets of Nainital with inspiring courage and clarity.

The entire opposition has demanded an urgent special session of Parliament to discuss the current crisis in depth and seek answers on the whole gamut of questions the government is trying to evade. We need to acknowledge every life we have lost, of civilians or soldiers, in the Pahalgam terror attack and in the course of Operation Sindoor and Pakistani retaliation. The state must compensate for the deaths and stand with the families that have lost their breadwinners. Action has to be taken against the propagators of hate and lies in the media that only weakened India at such a crucial juncture. The politics of hate and violence and the policies of persecution and suppression of dissent will have to stop.

On May 20, the united trade union movement of India has called for a one-day strike against the anti-worker codes the government wants to inflict on the working class. Just as we the people of India had supported the farmers in the battle against corporate takeover of agriculture, let us also support the working class with all our might in this battle for labour rights. The spirit of nationalism and concern for national unity must not be used as a smokescreen to deprive the people of their rights and curb their just democratic struggles. India's national security is best defended through India's composite culture, constitutional rule of law, and a conducive environment for the people to exercise their democratic rights.