By Prateek Kapil
After an eventful year for India-Pakistan relations, the Governor of J&K delivered[1] the address to the budget session of the J&K assembly, contents of which could prove critical for the coming year. The address covered all areas of governance. He insisted on holding the Panchayat elections by March 2017 followed by election for local urban bodies as soon as possible. The initial issues around elected panchs indirectly electing the sarpanch delayed the passing of the bill. But the Governor gave his consent to the bill and the matter is now for the government to implement. Therefore, successful conduct of elections is a priority.
“A worrying concern is that the younger generation, especially in the Valley, is less engaged civically, exhibits less social trust and confidence and, consequently, have a weaker commitment to the inherited value systems,” Mr Vohra said[2], adding that addressing this serious issue had to receive very high priority and they needed to urgently go forward to engage the youth. “While it is important that the Indo-Pak dialogue gets resumed early, it is equally important that conversations happen within families, across villages, in towns and cities to build a social and moral consensus so that a congenial atmosphere is created for the government to take the required initiatives for securing peace and development,” he said[3].
The Government of India, though, insists that the onus of stopping terrorism falls on Pakistan before dialogue can be resumed. The last month of 2016 has seen no abating of violence inside J&K besides the annual drop that is registered during winter. The state government therefore should look to prepare itself in this period for the coming year to be in a better position to resume contact with the polity and be less vulnerable to disruption when it occurs. The state opposition protested on the issues of pellets, night raids and the Public Safety Act (PSA) during the address[4].
The question is how far can the state government withstand this pressure and be better prepared for the coming weeks. The state opposition on the other hand, is preparing to expose the government on its alleged bad performance. The Centre will focus on the external situation, but this is a right time to bring in some political capital to bear to speed up certain issues of socio-economic governance which the Governor’s speech underlined.
Pakistan has appointed a new Army chief who is experienced in handling operations on Pakistan’s eastern front. India has appointed a new Army chief who has vast experience in handling counter-insurgency operations in J&K. Pakistan has also tested a sea-based cruise missile while India has tested the ICBM Agni V. The two sides should be hoping for stabilization compared to last year while preparing to handle the intensifying conflict. The bright spots are PM’s birthday wish to the Pakistani PM and the smooth transition of Army chiefs inside Pakistan. Both sides are working to a plan but as Lawrence Freedman elaborates-strategy is not a plan, it is not simply a chronological sequence of controlled events; something always happens and therefore it requires review and adaption; strategy does not have an end point, it has milestones. For Pakistan, the next milestone is further internationalization of the issue through unrest. For India the next milestone is stabilization of the internal unrest. Pakistan’s ‘planned’ end point to force India to a dialogue through use of asymmetric war may not succeed. India’s ‘planned’ end point to make Pakistan stop terrorism by constantly raising costs may not succeed. The more important question is which side is better prepared with a plan B and there India needs to shore up its plan B by improving governance levels inside the state. The CM recently remarked[5]that the agenda of alliance is the only ‘solution’. Therefore, it is imperative that they prepare and work towards it.
The aftermath of the summer unrest will make this process more difficult. The pellet issue is a particularly sensitive one and there are no solutions except finding an alternative crowd control method. However, politicizing that issue makes it worse for all political parties. The question of stronger defence has been hanging fire[6] since the Pathankot attack and the release of the recommendations of the Campose Committee. This government has made clear that the status quo of terror attacks with impunity cannot be accepted but it has failed to satisfactorily justify the reasons for going public with the pre-emptive tactical operation against terror launch pads close to the LoC. Pakistan has tried to demonstrate through the Nagrota and Pampore attacks that if the strike was part of a plan then it failed. But from an Indian perspective, if it is indeed part of a strategy as the government has said, then it requires related actions to demonstrate to the Indian public that the government is clear in its approach. Some such actions would be under preparation for the incoming period of uncertainty and increased conflict at the border by bolstering the internal situation through restoring confidence in article 370, providing space to the local partner in the alliance and reaching out to the people of J&K through policies underlined by the Governor’s address.
From the Pakistani perspective, they have been clear for long that cross-border terrorism is indeed part of a ‘plan’. It appears that Pakistan believes in planning rather than strategic thinking. For if it was thinking strategically, it would not remove Indian government’s incentives to engage by continuously encouraging infiltration and sponsoring terror attacks. Pakistan has other plan Bs to keep the focus on the Kashmir issue which it has chosen so far to ignore in favour of working ‘according to a plan’. That very same plan no Indian government will ever allow to bear fruit. Therefore, Pakistan’s strategy is even more unclear than the Indian government’s. But this relativity will not lead necessarily lead to India’s gains. In fact it is leading to a situation where India is forced to prioritize Pakistan more than it has planned for. Therefore, India is being forced to think more strategically about the security problem with more risks and opportunity costs to the development priority. A conservative in any country is more comfortable with this situation than a liberal. Hence we see effects on India’s domestic politics about the issue. The present conservative government in India has indicated that it is comfortable with this situation as it claims goodwill and right principles. It has also launched a demonetization drive domestically proving that it is ready to confront its domestic political opponents on principles. The opposition meanwhile claims goodwill of their own and has displayed that it is also prepared to confront the government when it comes to the opposition’s own principles. The enduring part of the Indian democracy, however, is that only the elections ever decide such fundamental strategic questions. In Pakistan, the Army Chief does. Therefore, the Indian government needs to shore up its plan A with the steps entailed in the Governor’s address if it is indeed part of strategic thinking. Strategy is not a plan; it is the way to move from one situation to a qualitatively improved situation acceptable to the majority of stakeholders.
No comments:
Post a Comment