Gurmeet Kanwal

Distinguished Fellow, IDSA, Brig Gurmeet Kanwal’s article on Pakistan Army’s atrocities on LoC, titled ‘Pakistan’s Rogue Army must be Punished’, was published by rediff.Com on November 14, 2016.

Read Complete Article

• Published: 14 November, 2016

Distinguished Fellow, IDSA, Brig Gurmeet Kanwal’s article on US President elect, Donald Trump, titled ‘Can Donald Trump launch a nuclear attack?’ was published in ‘Daily O’ on November 9, 2016.

Read Complete Article

• Published: 9 November, 2016

Distinguished Fellow, IDSA, Brig Gurmeet Kanwal’s article on comprehensive national power (CNP),  titled ‘Demographic dividend should not turn into a disaster’ was published in Deccan Herald on November 1, 2016.

Read complete article [+]

• Published: 31 October, 2016

Nuclear sabre-rattling is the favourite pastime of Pakistan’s political and military leaders. Defence minister Khawaja Asif has once again held out a nuclear threat to India.

He said, “Islamabad is open to using tactical (nuclear) devices against India if it feels its safety is threatened.”

The story of Pakistan’s tactical nuclear weapons (TNWs) goes back several years. Pakistan’s Strategic Forces Command tested the 60km range Hatf-9 (Nasr) short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) in April 2011, May 2012 and February 2013. It is claimed to be nuclear-tipped and is reported to be a replica of the Chinese M-20 missile.

Dr Shireen Mazari, chief executive officer, Strategic Technology Resources, had said after the first test that the Nasr missile was a technology demonstrator and had not been inducted into the nuclear arsenal.

"We are signalling our acquisition of tactical missile capability and miniaturisation technology. This will allow our already developed cruise missiles - the Hatf-VIII (Ra'ad), which is an air-launched cruise missile (ALCM) and Hatf-VII (Babur), which is a ground-launched cruise missile (GLCM) – to be miniaturised for sea-launched submarine capability in order to move on to a second-strike capability."

Since then, it may have been operationalised.

Short-range missiles like the Nasr armed with TNWs are inherently destabilising and there are several compelling reasons for leaving these out of the nuclear arsenal. Firstly, these are extremely complex weapons (particularly sub-kiloton mini-nukes, because of the precision required in engineering) and are difficult and expensive to manufacture and support technically.

Inducting them into service even in small numbers is a drag on the budget of the strategic forces.

Secondly, the command and control of TNWs needs to be decentralised at some point during war to enable their timely employment. Extremely tight control would make their possession redundant and degrade their deterrence value. Decentralised control would run the risk of their premature and even unauthorised use – Kissinger’s "mad major syndrome".

Thirdly, since the launchers must move frequently to avoid being targeted, dispersed storage and frequent transportation of TNWs under field conditions, increases the risk of accidents. Lastly, the employment of conventional artillery and air-to-ground precision weapons by the enemy may damage or destroy forward stored nuclear warheads.

It was for many good reasons that the US and its NATO allies and the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact forces developed, produced, stockpiled in large numbers and planned to use TNWs as weapons of war. Even the mini-nukes and the so-called "clean" enhanced radiation neutron bombs would have, if used in substantial numbers in a European war, afflicted a few hundred million civilians, including future generations, with long-term radiation sickness of incalculable magnitudes.

The professed military utility of blunting a major armoured offensive is debatable as the attacker would ensure that he does not present a concentrated target before the bulk of tactical nuclear weapons, or at least their delivery systems, have been destroyed in an initial phase that itself would turn out to be apocalyptic.

Even then, the attacker would concentrate rapidly for short durations only at the point of decision and then disperse quickly. In the well-developed, semi-urban terrain of Punjab on both the sides of the India-Pakistan boundary, collateral damage would be unavoidable. Hundreds of thousands of civilian casualties would be politically unacceptable and unmanageable for an army fighting a war.

Political and diplomatic reasons also militate against the use of tactical nuclear weapons. A nuclear posture with a first use option – NATO’s in Europe and Pakistan’s current nuclear policy – is both repugnant and dangerous. It is also destabilising and naturally escalatory in nature. With the ongoing megamedia revolution public opinion is bound to undermine the credibility of the use of TNWs and, as deterrence is more than anything else a mind game, the lack of credibility does nothing for enhancing deterrence.

The command and control of tactical nuclear weapons has naturally to be decentralised during war to enable their timely employment. Extremely tight control would make their possession redundant and degrade their deterrence value by several orders of magnitude. Decentralised control would run the risk of their premature and even unauthorised use based on the discretion of field commanders, however discerning and conscientious they may be.

Dispersed storage and frequent transportation under field conditions, since the launchers must move from hide to hide to avoid being easily targeted by the adversary, increases the risk of accidents as well as complicates nuclear security. The employment of conventional artillery and air-to-ground precision weapons by the adversary may damage or destroy forward stored nuclear warheads and, though the probability is low, may even set off a nuclear explosion.

Also, widely dispersed nuclear warheads are difficult to guard effectively and may fall into jihadi hands – a fear that cannot be taken lightly in the epicentre of Islamist fundamentalist terrorism.

Even though Pakistan has chosen to acquire these dangerous weapons, India has wisely opted not to go down the TNW route.

The Nasr missile is said to be Pakistan’s answer to India’s Cold Start doctrine. The Pakistan army proposes to use the Nasr missile to drop a low-yield nuclear warhead on Indian mechanised forces that have entered Pakistani territory with a view to stopping the Indian offensive in its tracks.

It is a patently flawed approach as, in response to a nuclear attack on its forces, India will execute its doctrine of massive retaliation and Pakistan will cease to exist as a functional nation state.

Surely, that is not the end state that the Pakistan army is prepared to accept. Hence, Pakistan’s TNWs are a bluff that India can call.

The article was originally published in Daily O

• Published: 30 September, 2016

In an article I wrote within hours of the terrorist attack at Uri ten days ago (Time to hit and hurt the Pakistan army! Rediff.com, September 18, 2016), it had been suggested that 'such large-scale casualties must not go unpunished' and that 'for every act of terrorism on Indian territory for which there is credible evidence pointing to the Pakistan army and the ISI's involvement, carefully calibrated military strikes must be launched against the Pakistan army.'

It is gratifying to note that the government has moved swiftly to launch surgical strikes to neutralise terrorist training camps across the Line of Control inside Pakistan occupied Kashmir.

Troops of the Indian Army's famed Special Forces were employed to launch trans-LoC raids on the night of September 28. They infiltrated through gaps in the defences and stealthily made their way through the Pakistan army's minefields. Then they neutralised the targets given to them and returned to their bases by different routes, once again crossing minefields and other obstacles.

It has been reported that seven terrorist training camps have been destroyed and 30 to 40 terrorists, who were poised to launch infiltration bids, were killed. These complex operations across challenging mountainous terrain were planned systematically and executed with professional elan. There were no Indian casualties.

The spectacular success achieved by India's Special Forces has left Pakistan's political and military leadership confused and in disarray. They faced a major dilemma when India made its surgical strikes public. If they admitted that India had indeed launched trans-LoC raids, they could call India's action irresponsible.

However, within Pakistan they would suffer a loss of face and would be expected by the citizens to do something equally big in return. In the event they opted to remain in denial -- in keeping with their national psyche.

The blame game has begun in Pakistan. In a television interview, Imran Khan was severely critical of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's leadership. He said he 'will show Sharif how to respond to Modi.'

Pakistan's leaders find their country diplomatically isolated both in the region and beyond. True to form, they have once again begun to indulge in their favourite pastime of nuclear sabre-rattling. Defence Minister Khawaja Asif has once again held out a nuclear threat to India. 'Islamabad,' he said, 'is open to using tactical (nuclear) devices against India if it feels its safety is threatened.'

The ability to launch surgical strikes by the Special Forces is but one option available to India. In the military domain there is a range of options that India can exercise.

These include hitting the forward posts of the Pakistan army through the direct firing of artillery guns so as to minimise collateral damage; air strikes by fighter aircraft of the IAF; the employment of attack helicopters; the destruction of key military targets using PGMs from a stand-off distance; and, the employment of border action teams (BATs) to improve the army's defensive posture.

Besides military options, there are many other arrows in India's quiver. Several of the available political and diplomatic options must be exercised simultaneously to effectively counter Pakistan's proxy war.

The aim should be to gradually raise the cost for Pakistan's Deep State till it becomes prohibitive.

Efforts should be made to have Pakistan declared a terrorist State. India should take the first step in this regard and make a declaration to this effect.

If necessary, India should withdraw its high commissioner from Islamabad and scale down the size of its mission.

The imposition of unilateral economic sanctions is also a measure that India could consider, especially if the UN Security Council fails to impose economic sanctions at India's request.

India could also use its buyer's clout with defence MNCs to ensure that companies that sell weapons and defence equipment to India refrain from selling the same to Pakistan.

Pakistan has been sending terrorists into India to strike at civilian targets for almost three decades.

India's response -- or the lack of response -- used to be entirely predictable. Now an element of unpredictability has been added and Pakistan can never again be sure of how India would respond to something the army and the ISI may be planning.

At least for the time being, the Panipat Syndrome that has afflicted India for long (I wrote about it: Why India suffers from the Panipat Syndrome, Rediff.com, February 2016) has been buried.

Today, in the wake of the trans-LoC surgical strikes, India stands united as a nation; its people stand together as one with their heads held high. And India has the support of almost the entire international community as the world is tired of the crippling impact of fundamentalist terrorism.

Pakistan is a house divided; its leaders are blaming each other; and, its army is once again in denial mode. And Pakistan stands alone in isolation both among is neighbours in South Asia who are tired of its sponsorship of terrorism; and, in the international community.

Pakistan has become a pariah State and it remains to be seen whether its leaders will see the light of day and make a course correction, or if they will continue down the path of ruin.

If Pakistan implodes, the repercussions will be felt far and wide as its nuclear warheads will in all probability fall into jihadi hands.

The credit for this refreshing change in course goes to the prime minister, his colleagues in the Cabinet Committee on Security and the NSA.

Of course, the gallant officers and jawans of India's Special Forces deserve special credit for their outstanding contribution to the change in the discourse of Pakistan's proxy war and India's response to it.

India has ensured that the sacrifice made by the 20 soldiers who lost their lives at Uri shall not have been in vain.

The government has sent a clear message to India's recalcitrant neighbour: It is no longer business as usual.

The rules of the game have changed and a new game is at play.

Brigadier Gurmeet Kanwal (retd) is Distinguished Fellow, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, New Delhi.

The article was originally published in rediff.com

• Published: 30 September, 2016

Like panthers prowling in the dead of night, several teams of the Special Forces of the Indian army crossed the Line of Control (LoC) on the night of 28 September. They struck with deadly effect and, as quietly as they had come in, they exfiltrated back across the LoC.

In his briefing after the attack in Uri on 18 September, the DGMO had said that the army “reserves the right to respond” to the terrorist strike at Uri at a time and place of its choosing. It took ten days to plan the operation, which was based on accurate intelligence.

Strong Message to Pakistan’s Deep State

While the credit for the success of these complex operations goes to the officers and jawans of the Special Forces, the Prime Minister and the members of the Cabinet Committee on Security also deserve to be complimented for giving the go-ahead to the army to launch trans-LoC raids on terrorist training camps. For the first time since the 1971 war with Pakistan, the political leadership of the country has exhibited firm national resolve.

For three decades, the Pakistan army and the ISI — known as the deep state — have been waging a proxy war against India as part of their strategy of bleeding India by a thousand cuts. Neither after the attack on Parliament in December 2001 nor after the multiple terrorist strikes at Mumbai in November 2008 did India choose to address the perpetrators of terrorism in Pakistan and PoK.

Uri Attack was the Last Straw

So far India has conducted its counter-proxy war campaign within its borders and on its own side of the LoC. While the strategic restraint shown by India despite grave provocation enabled the country to keep the level of conflict low, and sustain a high rate of economic growth, it did not succeed in creating any disincentives for Pakistan’s deep state.

The terrorist attack on the air force base at Pathankot on New Year’s day could be deemed to have once again crossed India’s red lines. Despite that, the Indian government gave Pakistan yet another opportunity to make amends by inviting an investigation team to come to Pathankot to evaluate the evidence of Pakistani involvement that India had provided. The attack at Uri was the last straw and the rules of the game have now changed.

Wanton Killing of Civilians Won’t be Tolerated

By launching trans-LoC strikes on terrorist training camps with its Special Forces, India has sent several messages to Pakistan.

Firstly, the present Indian government will not tolerate the wanton killing of innocent Indian civilians or soldiers by state-sponsored terrorists from Pakistan.

Secondly, the surgical strikes are a warning to the Pakistan army that if it does not put an end to cross-border terrorism, it may expect an even more vigorous Indian response.

Strategy to Counter Pakistan’s Proxy War

India has exercised a range of political, diplomatic, economic and military options in response to the terrorist attack on Uri. These include cancellation of the SAARC summit and indefinite postponement of the next meeting of the Indus Waters Treaty Commissioners. Other measures pertaining to the Indus Waters Treaty and the MFN status given to Pakistan are under consideration of the government. However, what is necessary is to formulate a comprehensive national-level strategy to counter Pakistan’s proxy war.

The political aim should be to raise the cost for Pakistan’s deep state for waging its proxy war with a view to eventually making the cost prohibitive. The aim of Indian diplomacy should be to isolate Pakistan in the international community and work towards having the country branded as a terrorist state by the UN Security Council.

Economic measures should be designed to choke Pakistan’s economy.

Future Course of Action

The military aim should be to inflict punishment on the Pakistan army deployed on the LoC for every act of terrorism on Indian soil for which there is credible evidence of its involvement or its organs such as the ISI. For each subsequent act of terrorism, the scale and the intensity of the dose should be increased by an order of magnitude.

Military operations designed to inflict punishment should include artillery strikes with guns firing in the ‘pistol gun’ mode to destroy bunkers on forward posts with minimum collateral damage; stand-off PGM (precision-guided munition) strikes on brigade and battalion HQ, communications centres, logistics infrastructure, ammunition dumps and key bridges; and, raids by Special Forces and Border Action Teams (BATs). Every Pakistan post through which infiltration takes place should be reduced to rubble by artillery fire.

Continuing Covert Operations

Counter-proxy war operations should be supplemented by covert operations. Since Pakistan is not inclined to bring to justice the leaders of terrorist organisations like the LeT and the JeM, terrorists whom they call ‘strategic assets’, they must be neutralised through covert operations.
When the Pakistan army begins to hurt and bleed, gradually the deep state will realise the futility of its nefarious designs on India. While Pakistan may not give up its claims on Jammu and Kashmir, it will be forced to come to the negotiating table to discuss a long-term solution to the dispute through peaceful means.

(The writer is Distinguished Fellow, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA) and former Director, Centre for Land Warfare Studies (CLAWS), New Delhi. He can be reached at @gurmeetkanwal. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)

The article was originally published in The Quint

• Published: 30 September, 2016

The Pakistani Army and its sidekick the ISI thought we would not react this time when 18 soldiers were killed and several others wounded in a terror strike in Uri by Jaish e Mohammed operatives, with guns, grenades, clothes and rations all with Pakistan’s markings on it. Yet Pakistan is in denial and why should we expect a different reaction?

This is a country that gave North Korea the bomb; harboured Mullah Omar and Osama bin Laden; exports terror with impunity; still harbours the Haqqani network in Quetta; is in league with the Taliban to destabilize Afghanistan – the list is endless—enough to label Pakistan a rogue state.

The world knows it but yet North Korea and Cuba and Sudan are considered terror harbouring states by the US and not Pakistan! In fact, it is because of the US that Pakistan gets away with terror strikes, again and again, even supplying arms and aid to the Taliban who kill US soldiers in Afghanistan. One just wonders what US foreign policy is all about and whether it will change.

For the last 30 years, Pakistan has been using its terror proxies to wage war against India. They have hijacked planes; serial bombed Mumbai in the 1990s; sent huge sums of money to create radical Islam in parts of Kashmir that led to the ethnic cleansing of 400,000 Kashmiri Pandits; attacked the parliament; and were responsible for 26/11 when ten terrorists from Pakistan killed hundreds over three days in Mumbai. The list is endless from creating havoc in Kashmir to arming and encouraging the Khalistan movement. It has cost India dear both in blood and treasure.

As I write this Pakistan sent another 12 groups of militants into Kashmir and we managed to stop them all but lost another soldier.

It almost seems like General Sharif wants a war with India, so he can take over the country. He is about to retire in the next few months and a war would likely help him to declare a state of emergency and take over. The Pakistani public would be all for it.

I am certain the Uri attack was an attempt to embarrass Nawaz Sharif before his address at the UN General Assembly and General Sharif has more aces up his sleeves. If India does not attack then he may even allow his proxies to stage a bigger attack on our country. After the Panama Papers that implicated the Pakistani PMs family of having huge amounts of unaccounted money, Nawaz has been a lame duck prime minister. It seems the Pakistan Army has a game plan and its government has none.

Though every single country has condemned the Uri attack, India will have to keep reminding the world that Pakistan is a terror state. Countries have their own problem and are apt to forget once the fuss is over.

The fact that PM Modi has spoken about the atrocities in Balochistan and PoK has also been an embarrassment for Pakistan.

In addition, the big five, France, Russia, China the UK and the US have all been firmly on India’s side and not even allowed Pakistan to bring up the Kashmir issue. It almost seems as if the world is tired of terror and this time Pakistan went too far.

India is in a position of strength now and the fact that at the UN General Assembly world leaders gather and Uri is very much news will help our case further with the world community.

Having taken the diplomatic route and alerted the world, what more can India do?

Brigadier Gurmeet Kanwal (Retd), Distinguished Fellow, Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses, wrote in Rediff:

“The army and the IAF should ‘hit to hurt’ the Pakistan army on the LoC where it is deployed in large numbers and can be easily reached. For every act of terrorism on Indian Territory for which there is credible evidence pointing to the involvement of the Pakistan army and the ISI, carefully calibrated military strikes must be launched against the Pakistan army. These should include artillery strikes with guns firing in the ‘pistol gun’ mode to destroy bunkers on forward posts with minimum collateral damage; stand-off PGM strikes on brigade and battalion HQ, communications centres, logistics infrastructure, ammunition dumps and key bridges; and raids by Special Forces and border action teams. Every Pakistan post through which infiltration takes place should be reduced to rubble by artillery fire.”

Personally, the Brigadier has made some good points but it would be taken as an act of war by Pakistan and they would retaliate hard but perhaps such actions if planned well can be done covertly as well. It would require Special Forces trained by the best. For this, I would choose Israel. We need commandoes that can strike valuable assets in the deep of the night and slip away.

We also have to strengthen the borders with Pakistan. Why are so many militants coming in even if they are shot? This would require the state of the art equipment and huge expense but would be worth it. The police in Punjab are compromised and our borders are still very porous. We need to stop trade as along with goods Pakistan sends in drugs and perhaps militants and arms to India. India exports 2 billion dollars’ worth of goods to Pakistan. This would hurt our exporters initially but there are many other countries that we can export to. We simply cannot have business as usual anymore.

Brahma Chellaney wrote a fantastic piece on how we should revisit the Indus Water Treaty, signed in 1960 by Nehru with Pakistan that gave the enemy state most of the Indus river water systems without any quid pro quo. This treaty reserved for India just 19.48% of the total waters of the six river Indus system! He says that we must revisit this issue. Water is a resource, which we also need desperately and it would prove to Pakistan that we are going to be tough on this issue as well.

Lean on countries that are exporting to Pakistan and want to do business with us. We may not be successful with all states but even if some refuse to do business with Pakistan it will hurt them.

Build up our intelligence and human assets on the ground in Pakistan and let Israel teach us how to take out militant outfits and the heads of it. They are especially good at this and this too can be done covertly. This will take time but it will have the maximum effect.

No more trains and buses to run between the countries. This is essential to show Pakistan we mean business.

As I said before, I say again, the drumbeat of atrocities by Pakistan in Baluchistan, Gilgit and PoK has to be loud and consistent. It should be part of every diplomatic effort in every country, every day till it gets into the very psyche of foreign diplomats and foreign media. For too long our governments have ignored this even while Pakistan kept bringing up India’s human rights violations in Kashmir.

We should not expect much help from America as they will not stop aiding Pakistan even though at a recent Senate Committee meeting in Washington every senator spoke about how Pakistan has always played a duplicitous game with the US and all options to punish Pakistan should be on the table including, stopping aid; cutting off the arms supply; terming it a state sponsoring terror and even bringing in sanctions.

But even they agreed that the government may not accept their suggestions.

The only way we can arm twist the US is trying a quid pro quo as they want us to buy their arms, Boeings, cars, burgers and so much else. They need our huge market for their goods. This endeavor will have to wait till we see who comes in as the new US President.

In the end, India has to depend on itself to make its move. I agree it must never be a knee jerk reaction as it will only serve Pakistan’s purpose. All the government needs to do is strengthen our borders on a war level. Isolate Pakistan as much as possible and give our armed forces and intelligence agencies the best equipment.

The rest should be strategic, and very, very secret and not even involve the opposition parties as I do not trust them as they gave Pakistan too long a rope for too long and none of them have the best interest of India at heart or they would not have said that they are pained by the death of our soldiers but and then came to a political angle. This is so disgusting that it is sickening. To think they wanted to score brownie points at a time like this!

Thus I advise my Prime Minister to keep every action that will be taken a surprise— A surprise for the media; a surprise for the political parties and most of all a surprise for Pakistan.

The article was originally published in The Times of India

• Published: 21 September, 2016

The advocacy by Pakistani analysts of the Indian disinclination to retaliate massively in response to their use of TNWs on their own soil indicates either a flawed analysis or a bluff that the Indian armed forces would be inclined to call.

• Published: September 21, 2016
• Issue Brief

हम बात करें या न करें, हमला तो हमें सहना ही पड़ता है। इसलिए मौजूदा हालात के मद्देनजर अब वक्त है जब भारत पाकिस्तानी सेना और आतंकवादी सरगनाओं को ऐसे ही हमलों के जरिए जवाब दे।

भारत में आतंककारी गतिविधियों को बढ़ावा देने के पीछे पाकिस्तानी सेना और उसकी खुफिया एजेंसी आईएसआई का हाथ होने के स्पष्ट संकेत सामने आ चुके हैं। उरी में रविवार सुबह हमारी सेना के कैंप पर पाकिस्तानी समर्थित फिदायीन हमले में हमारे कई जवान शहीद हो गए। यह कई वर्षों के बाद हमारे सेना के ठिकाने पर बड़ा हमला है। यद्यपि चारों फिदायीनों को हमारे जवानों ने मार गिराया। लेकिन भारतीय सेना को इतने बड़े स्तर पर हुए नुकसान का दंड जरूर दिया जाना चाहिए।

मौजूदा हालात में अब वक्त आ गया है जब पाकिस्तानी सेना के खिलाफ आतंकी हमलों के अनुरूप, भारत को सैन्य कार्रवाई करनी चाहिए। उरी में सैन्य शिविर में फिदायीन हमले के बाद हमारे जवानों की शहादत को अब सब्र की इंतहा कहा जाना चाहिए। भारतीय सेना की अपनी ही सीमा में पाकिस्तान के छद्म युद्ध के खिलाफ लड़ाई की सोची-समझी रणनीति - जिससे न सिर्फ संघर्ष को कम किया जा सके बल्कि साथ ही आर्थिक तरक्की का माहौल भी स्थायी बना रहे- का कोई सुखद परिणाम नहीं निकलकर आया।

नियंत्रण रेखा पर संघर्ष विराम का बार-बार उल्लंघन और कश्मीर घाटी में पाकिस्तानी आतंकियों द्वारा हमले की घटनाओं से यह साफ हो गया है कि पाकिस्तान ने भारत के खिलाफ बेरोकटोक छद्म युद्ध छेड़ रखा है। इसलिए भविष्य में हमारे जवानों और संपत्ति के नुकसान को कम करने के लिए भारत की ओर से दिए जाने वाले जवाब की समीक्षा करने और उसे अपग्रेड करने की स त जरूरत है ताकि पाकिस्तान को हमारे खिलाफ छद्म युद्ध छेडऩे की कीमत चुकानी पड़े।

खुद आंतरिक चुनौतियों का सामना करने के बावजूद पाकिस्तानी सेना व आईएसआई पिछले तीन दशक से भारत के खिलाफ एक तरह से अघोषित युद्ध में लगी हुई है। पाकिस्तानी सेना यह मान बैठी है कि जब सत्ता संतुलन उसके पक्ष में नहीं हो तो आतंकवादियों का संतुलन उसके पक्ष में होना चाहिए। पाकिस्तान न केवल भारत में बल्कि अफगानिस्तान में स्थित भारतीय संपत्तियों को भी लश्कर-ए-तैयबा और जैश-ए-मोह मद जैसे चरमपंथी संगठनों के जरिए नुकसान पहुंचाने में लगा है। इस साल जनवरी में पठानकोट एयरबेस पर आतंकी हमले के बाद हमारे द्वारा पाकिस्तान को ठोस सबूत देने के बावजूद उसका सबूतों को नकारने की मुद्रा में रहने से अब भारत धैर्य जवाब देने लगा है।

पाकिस्तानी सेना का भारत के खिलाफ सबसे सस्ता और अधिकाधिक फायदा देने वाला विकल्प ही यही है कि वह भारतीय सेना की कई टुकडिय़ों और बड़ी तादाद में सीआरपीएफ के जवानों को संघर्ष में फंसाए रखे। जाहिर है भारत के लिए यह नुकसानदेह है क्योंकि न सिर्फ हमें रक्षा बजट में बढ़ोतरी करनी पड़ती है बल्कि इससे हमारी आर्थिक तरक्की भी धीमी होती है। भारत को सबसे पहले तो पाकिस्तानी सेना को लश्कर-ए-तैयबा, जैश-ए-मोह मद और हिजबुल मुजाहिदीन के आतंकवादियों को भारत भेजने के लिए सबक सिखाना होगा।

भारतीय सेना और एयरफोर्स द्वारा एलओसी पर बड़ी तादाद में तैनात पाकिस्तानी सैनिकों को चोट पहुंचानी होगी। भारतीय सीमा में किसी भी आतंकी गतिविधि में पाकिस्तानी सेना और आईएसआई का हाथ मिलने पर उसकी सेना पर फौरन नपी-तुली कार्रवाई होनी चाहिए। इसके लिए पाकिस्तानी बंकरों को तबाह करने के लिए तोपों का इस्तेमाल करते हुए ताबड़तोड़ फायरिंग करनी चाहिए। जिस भी पाकिस्तानी पोस्ट के जरिए घुसपैठ होती दिखे, उस पर तोपों से फायरिंग होनी चाहिए। साथ ही पाकिस्तान जिन आतंकवादी संगठनों के सरगनाओं के खिलाफ कार्रवाई नहीं कर रहा है, उनके खिलाफ हमें ही गुप्त (कोवर्ट) हमलों के जरिए न्याय हासिल करना होगा।

आईएसआई भारत में छिपे हमले करती आ रही है, इसलिए हमें भी वहां बैठे आतंकवादी सरगनाओं का इसी शैली में खात्मा करना होगा। इसके अलावा हमारी एकदम सटीक और बहुत पु ता इंटेलीजेंस होनी चाहिए, जिस पर कार्रवाई हो सके। हमें पाकिस्तानी सरकार से संवाद भी करना होगा ताकि दोनों देशों के बीच विवादास्पद मुद्दों का हल ढूंढा जा सके और वहां सरकार में सेना की दखल कम की जा सके। लोगों में मेलमिलाप, वीजा प्रक्रिया में आसानी और व्यापार बढ़ाने सरीखे कदम भी साथ-साथ चलने चाहिए।

भारत जिन देशों से हथियार खरीद करता है, उनके द्वारा पाकिस्तान को हथियार-उपकरण बेचने पर पाबंदी सुनिश्चित करनी होगी। भारत को ज्यादा से ज्यादा अमरीकी कांग्रेस सदस्यों को ये कह कर अपने पक्ष में करना होगा कि पाक, भारत-अमरीका संबंधों को नुकसान पहुंचा रहा है। अमरीकी आर्थिक सहायता से पाक सेना मजबूत होती है, उसे कम से कम कराने पर जोर देना होगा।

कुछ विश्लेषकों का मानना है कि अब वह वक्त भी आ गया है, जब भारत को पाकिस्तान के खिलाफ स ती बरतने के लिए 'सिंधु नदी जल बंटवारे पर पुनर्विचार करे, लेकिन इस कदम की शायद ही आवश्यकता पड़े। इन कदमों से निश्चित ही पाकिस्तान सेना घुटने टेकने पर मजबूर होगी।
हम बात करें या न करें, हमला तो हमें सहना ही पड़ता है। इसलिए मौजूदा हालात के मद्देनजर अब वक्त है जब भारत पाकिस्तानी सेना और आतंकवादी सरगनाओं को ऐसे ही हमलों के जरिए जवाब दे। पाकिस्तान पर दुनियाभर में आर्थिक-सामरिक प्रतिबंधों का सिलसिला शुरू कराएं।

The article was originally published in राजस्थान पत्रिका

• Published: 20 September, 2016

'For every act of terrorism on Indian territory for which there is credible evidence pointing to the Pakistan army and the ISI's involvement, carefully calibrated military strikes must be launched against the Pakistan army,' says Brigadier Gurmeet Kanwal (retd).

The Pakistan-sponsored fidayeen attack on an army camp in Uri on September 18, that resulted in the martyrdom of 17 soldiers, is the worst since 2002. Though all four fidayeen were killed, that is cold comfort for an army at the receiving end.

Such large-scale casualties must not go unpunished.

Clearly, India's carefully calibrated strategy to fight Pakistan's proxies within its own borders and on its own side of the LoC, in order to keep the level and the intensity of conflict low and maintain a stable environment for rapid economic growth, has not yielded the desired dividends.

The increasing attempts at infiltration across the LoC and the spurt in encounters with terrorists in the Kashmir valley recently show that Pakistan's proxy war against India is continuing unabated.

In order to reduce casualties and damage to property, India's response needs to be reviewed and upgraded to a more pro-active one that raises Pakistan's cost for waging a proxy war.

Despite facing seemingly insurmountable internal security challenges, the Pakistan army and the ISI -- together constituting the 'Deep State' -- have been engaged in a low-intensity limited war against India for almost three decades.

The Pakistan army believes that the balance of terror must be in its favour, especially when the balance of power is not.

Pakistan's Deep State continues to sponsor terrorist attacks not only in India but also against Indian assets in Afghanistan through extremist organisations like the Lashkar-e-Tayiba and the Jaish-e-Mohamed.

Incidents like the terrorist strike at the Pathankot air base in January 2016 and Pakistan's proclivity to remain in denial even though hard evidence of the involvement of organs of the State is given to it, are exhausting Indian patience.

For the Pakistan army it is a low-cost, high-payoff option to keep several divisions of the Indian Army and a large number of personnel of the central armed police forces embroiled in conflict.

For India the opportunity costs have been prohibitively high in terms of the strain on the defence budget and slowing down of the rate of economic growth.

India should pursue a four-pronged strategy to gradually force Pakistan to stop waging a proxy war against India.

Firstly, the Pakistan army must be made to pay for sending LeT, JeM and Hizbul Mujahideen terrorists to strike army and civilian targets in India.

The army and the IAF should 'hit to hurt' the Pakistan army on the LoC where it is deployed in large numbers and can be easily reached.

For every act of terrorism on Indian territory for which there is credible evidence pointing to the involvement of the Pakistan army and the ISI, carefully calibrated military strikes must be launched against the Pakistan army.

These should include artillery strikes with guns firing in the 'pistol gun' mode to destroy bunkers on forward posts with minimum collateral damage; stand-off PGM strikes on brigade and battalion HQ, communications centres, logistics infrastructure, ammunition dumps and key bridges; and raids by Special Forces and border action teams.

Every Pakistan post through which infiltration takes place should be reduced to rubble by artillery fire.

Secondly, as Pakistan continues to drag its feet in bringing to justice the leaders of terrorist organisations against whom hard evidence has been provided by India, covert operations should be launched to bring them to justice.

These should be based on hard core 'actionable' intelligence and should be sanctioned at appropriate levels.

Covert operations are certainly a game that two can play, but the Deep State leaves India with few other options.

In any case, Pakistan's ISI has been conducting covert operations in India for long. Since Pakistan is not inclined to bring to justice the leaders of terrorist organisations like the LeT and the JeM, terrorists whom they call 'strategic assets', they must be neutralised through covert operations.

Thirdly, India should continue to engage the elected civilian leadership of Pakistan with a view to resolving the seemingly intractable disputes between the two countries and reducing the salience of the Pakistan army in the country's polity.

India should also engage members of Pakistan's civil society and senior veterans of its armed forces who are amenable to seeing reason as they wield considerable influence with the generals in command.

Efforts to further liberalise the visa regime, encourage people-to-people contacts and enhance trade should continue.

Finally, along with overt military measures and covert operations, India's growing diplomatic clout must be harnessed to influence the outcome by isolating the Pakistan army internationally as a rogue army for the acts of terrorism that it perpetuates along with the ISI.

The international community that is already tiring of Pakistan's shenanigans in Afghanistan will not need too much convincing to accept that the time has come to stop mollycoddling the Pakistan army on the grounds that it must be supported in order to ensure that its nuclear weapons do not fall into jihadi hands.

Instead of wining and dining the military leadership, the international community must censure the Pakistan army in the strictest possible terms and ensure that it stops attempting to destabilise its neighbours.

Failing satisfactory progress, the United Nations Security Council should be approached to approve an embargo on the sale of arms, ammunition and military equipment to Pakistan.

If the UNSC resolution is vetoed by China, as it well might be, India should use its buyers' clout in the military industrial complex to ensure that arms manufacturers that supply weapons and defence equipment to Pakistan stop doing so.

India should lobby extensively with the US political leadership and the members of the US Congress to apprise them of the fact that continuing US support for the Pakistan army is hurting the growing India-US strategic partnership.

US military aid strengthens the Pakistan army and gives it greater confidence to destabilise its neighbourhood with impunity.

This four-pronged strategy should succeed in bringing Pakistan's proxy war to an end in one to two years.

If it does not, it would be time to raise the ante and consider tougher measures such as the abrogation of the Indus Waters Treaty, as has been recommended by some analysts. However, such a drastic step may not be necessary.

Brigadier Gurmeet Kanwal (retd) is Distinguished Fellow, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, New Delhi.

The article was originally published in Rediff.com

• Published: 18 September, 2016