Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s comment that Pakistan has taken revenge for the 1971 war seems highly questionable. Is there really any comparison between a war that led to the disintegration of the country and defeating the recent Indian attack? The 1971 tragedy was more than India’s military invasion; it was also a war within that we as a nation must never forget. The tragedy is etched in our conscience.
Attempts to politicise national security must also be avoided. The Indian aggression has united the country across the political spectrum. Political parties set aside their differences and stood behind the armed forces. But soon after the hostilities eased the daggers were out again, not realising the serious challenges the nation’s security continues to confront. The major responsibility obviously lies with the government to bring down the political temperature as the threat of another Indian escalation looms large. A politically divided country weakens the country’s defence.
Then there is also a question about the elevation of the army chief to field marshal and the extension in the air force chief’s tenure. Undoubtedly all the three forces did remarkably well in thwarting the Indian attack. The air force particularly played the most critical role not only in defending our airspace but also downing several Indian aircraft. It re-established Pakistan’s deterrence even in the conventional field. There is also no doubting of the leadership of the army chief.
Most troubling for India has been the strengthening of China-Pakistan defence collaboration.
Still, it’s difficult to understand the need to promote the army chief to the highest position just on the basis of four days of conflict. It was certainly not winning an all-out war. Gen Munir is the second military chief to be promoted to the five-star rank after Ayub Khan, the country’s first military dictator.
While giving full marks to the professional capabilities of our armed forces in taking on a much more powerful adversary, there is also a need to do a critical assessment of our vulnerabilities. It must be a cause for concern that the Indian missiles managed to hit some of our key airbases, including Nur Khan Airbase close to the capital. Surely the damage was not as much as being claimed by the Indian prime minister. Nevertheless, these gaps have to be plugged, as another Indian military strike seems very much on the cards.
The four-day military face-off that drove the two nuclear-armed neighbours close to a full-blown war also brought to the fore the fast-shifting regional and global geopolitics. India’s expectation of winning international approval for its military operation against Pakistan in response to the terrorist attack at a tourist spot in disputed territory failed miserably. Perhaps the most shocking development for the Modi government was President Trump’s claim to have brokered the ceasefire using trade as leverage.
One of the reasons for India’s failure to muster support for its military action even from its strategic allies in the West was that it failed to provide any solid evidence of Pakistan’s alleged involvement in the Pahalgam terrorist attack. India mostly relied on past incidents that allegedly had links to local militant groups. Israel was perhaps the only country which publicly backed India’s military action against Pakistan.
Another plausible reason for the US and other Western countries to counsel restraint to both states was the fear of the conflict turning into a nuclear confrontation; this would have had disastrous consequences for global peace. The Modi government in its hubris completely miscalculated India’s strategic and economic importance. But it will be a mistake to read too much into Trump’s offer to mediate between the two countries on Kashmir and other outstanding issues. No external mediation will be accepted by New Delhi. Moreover, India remains a strategic ally of the US despite the friction between the two countries on trade and tariffs issues. But there is certainly an opportunity for Pakistan to reset its relations with Washington.
Most troubling for India, however, has been the strengthening of China-Pakistan defence collaboration. Pakistan’s spectacular success in air warfare is largely the result of our strategic alliance with China. Besides close cooperation between the two air forces, the China-Pakistan naval axis is also visible.
Pakistan and China both share security, military, and financial concerns. Advancing and reinforcing conventional and strategic relations with China is an essential component of Pakistan’s foreign and national security policies. Beijing, however, would not like the conflict between its two nuclear-armed neighbours to escalate. Surely any fresh flare-up between India and Pakistan will have serious implications for the entire region and beyond.
It now seems that the battlefront has moved to the field of diplomacy with both countries sending teams to various capitals to explain their respective positions on the sources of conflict. It’s obvious that both sides will be raising the issue of terrorism apparently being used against each other as a tool in the ongoing covert war. But there are limits to what the international community can do in bringing the two countries together on the negotiating table. Both sides have now declared victory in a conflict that has resolved nothing. It’s a war without an end.
Published in: Dawn News
Link here: A war without end