‘Fighting India is in Pakistan's DNA, only deterrence is increasing costs for terror': Pak expert Tilak Devasher

First Post

31-05-2025

The anti-India sentiment is in the DNA of Pakistan, which means that the only way to ensure deterrence is imposing increasing costs for every act of terror, said Tilak Devasher, a former Special Secretary at Cabinet Secretariat, in an interview with Firstpost. read more
Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, along with Chief of the Army Staff (COAS) of Pakistan Asim Munir, reviews the parade at the passing out ceremony of 151st Long Course at the Pakistan Military Academy (PMA) Kakul, Abbottabad, Pakistan, April 26, 2025. Press Information Department of Pakistan via Reuters
With Operation Sindoor, India entered a new age in the war on terrorism.
Unlike 2016 when India conducted cross-border surgical strikes or 2019 when India conducted airstrike on a terrorist facility, India this time struck at the heart of terrorism as it struck headquarters of Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed among other sites.
In an interview with Firstpost's Madhur Sharma, Pakistan expert Tilak Devasher said that Indian actions, both kinetic actions like airstrikes and non-kinetic actions like holding the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance, took Pakistan by surprise.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
ALSO READ: Operation Sindoor: With battlefield edge, India cornered Pakistan to seek peace & that's new normal
'They had not anticipated being attacked in Punjab — both the terror headquarters and airbases. So, yes, Asim Munir has lost face and hence his elevation to Field Marshal is an act of damage control, tell the people falsely that they won even though they suffered a major defeat,' said Devasher, a former Special Secretary at Cabinet Secretariat.
As for the India-Pakistan relationship, Devasher said that the anti-India sentiment is in the DNA of Pakistan and the only way to ensure deterrence is imposing increasing costs for every act of terror, said Devasher, the author of 'Pakistan: Courting the Abyss', 'Pakistan: At the Helm', 'Pakistan: The Balochistan Conundrum', and 'The Pashtuns: A Contested History'. Read the full interview:
With Operation Sindoor and the accompanying messaging from the government, do you believe that we now have a new 'Modi Doctrine' of national security?
Yes, we do have a Modi Doctrine now. Its key components are that if there is a terrorist attack on India, there will be a fitting response; the nuclear blackmail will no longer work and India will strike precisely and decisively; and that there will be no distinction between terrorists and their sponsors.
It had been said that the weak position of the Pakistani Army was one of the reasons behind approving the Pahalgam attack — the idea being that a confrontation with India would rally people around the flag and restore the Army's primacy. Do you believe in this line of thought? If yes, do you believe that Field Marshal Asim Munir miscalculated and has now lost face?
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
This has been Pakistan's template when faced with serious domestic issues. They divert the issue and externalise the problem to manufacture a crisis. Nothing unites the population behind the Army more than a confrontation with India. However, in this case, the Indian reaction, both kinetic and non-kinetic, took Pakistan by surprise. They had not anticipated being attacked in Punjab — both the terror headquarters and airbases. So, yes, Munir has lost face and hence his elevation to Field Marshal is an act of damage control and tell the people falsely that they won even though they suffered a major defeat.
As Pakistani military stands weaker after being battered by India, do you believe that various insurgent groups in Pakistan are now going to ramp up their operations to make the most of the situation?
Yes, it is a strong signal to the Baloch and the Pashtuns — and even Sindhis. They could well ramp up their operations.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
In your book, 'Pakistan: Courting the Abyss', you have mentioned that being in a state of confrontation with India is a must for the Pakistani Army and hatred of India is quite integral to it. With such anti-India fundamentals, do you believe there is a possibility of Pakistan being deterred in the long-term?
To retain its primacy in Pakistan, a confrontation with India is expected from the Pakistani Army. Any peace or normal relations with India will make the Army lose that primacy. So, the only way to deter Pakistan is to keep increasing the cost of confrontation. Given their economic situation, they will find it difficult to recoup their losses after every confrontation with India.
For many years, it was said that the age of conventional warfare between India and Pakistan was over. Do you believe that India really called out Pakistan's nuclear bluff? Or did India keep the attacks well below the threshold to rattle Pakistan?
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
I think India did call Pakistan's nuclear bluff. Pakistan is the only nuclear weapons country that treats nuclear weapons as war-fighting weapons. For other countries, nuclear weapons are deterrents. Despite their bluster, when it came to the crunch, India tested this and called out the nuclear bluff. Several of Pakistan's so-called red-lines were crossed when their air bases were targeted but they did not or could not react.
Do you believe that internal troubles in Pakistan, such as insurgencies, financial troubles, or political chaos, can ever put a check on its anti-India campaign?
I don't think so since being anti-India is in Pakistan's DNA. The whole philosophy of eating grass for a thousand years stems from this deep-rooted anti-India hatred.