Latest news with #MaritimeWarfareCentre
New Indian Express
11-05-2025
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Nuclear threat and more: Pakistan's old ruse meets India's new resolve in path to ceasefire
May 11 proved exceptionally intense and emotionally turbulent. It began with reports of Pakistan moving its troops to forward areas and rumours of them having had deliberations on the tactical usage of nuclear weapons. But defence experts in India were already aware of what was at play. According to them, Islamabad was once again reaching for the oldest trick in its geopolitical playbook. That is, to escalate the conflict just enough to invite international concern, then use that pressure to secure a ceasefire and declare victory at home, as it had done numerous times before. And that is precisely what transpired. By sundown, at around 5:25 pm to be precise, US President Donald Trump took to his very own Truth Social to announce that "after a long night of talks mediated by the US, India and Pakistan have agreed to a full and immediate ceasefire." The grand ruse So what were all of Pakistan's military assertions for? "It was all a ruse," said Col S Dinny (retd), a veteran of several counter-terrorism deployments in Jammu and Kashmir. "It is Pakistan's old textbook philosophy. They do something nasty, initiate a war, and then don't know how to continue. They rely on international pressure to force a ceasefire." In previous instances, India might have been more accommodating. But that tolerance, experts say, has eroded. "If you recall, after 26/11 and even Pathankot, we entered into a dialogue with Pakistan," said Cmde Srikant Kesnur (retd), former director of the Maritime Warfare Centre. "Later, after Uri and Pulwama, we wisened up and stepped up our offensive, unwilling to yield to threats of escalation," he added. This time, too, India didn't blink. "Pakistan is famous for blackmailing the rest of the world, saying, 'If you don't help me, I'll kill myself'. But India has caught on," Cmde Srikant said. "There is now a clear realisation within Indian military and political leadership that these guys will not commit this kind of hara-kiri. And we must not allow ourselves to be blackmailed — and this time, we haven't." The why The reported Pakistani troop movements were no surprise either. "These are very expected moves," said Lt Gen Dushyant Singh (retd), Director General of the Centre for Land Warfare Studies. "When escalation is rising, it's logical for a country to reposition forces. And it did escalate, didn't it? There were air attacks on our bases, and we responded similarly. It's all part of the chessboard being redrawn in real time," the veteran added. Cmde G Prakash (retd), a Navy veteran who has extensive experience in operations, training, and policymaking, said that this restlessness of the Pakistan Army can be attributed to its larger-than-life image. "Their army survives on the idea that it is the sole protector of the country from India. The centre of gravity in Pakistan is its army, and it cannot allow itself to appear weak," the veteran added. The nuclear question Pakistan's nuclear sabre-rattling, however, raised deeper concerns. "Even the North Koreans haven't talked about nuclear weapons with such a chalta hai, casual attitude as Pakistan has," Cmde Srikant said. "It is perhaps the most irresponsible nuclear power if the N-word has to be brought out at the very first step." Even before India launched Operation Sindoor, Pakistan had begun hinting at its nuclear capabilities. "There were already noises — 'We have nuclear weapons, and we will not hesitate', and 'blood will flow', etc. It's the most absurd thing you can hear in a modern conflict," said Col Dinny. So then, what was Pakistan getting at, especially given how a war of attrition invariably favours India? This was not war, experts unanimously say. It was building a narrative. An honourable exit "They wanted an honourable exit," said Col Dinny. "Then they could claim, 'Oh, we halted the mighty Indians. We're equals'. That's the kind of narrative they could sell to their public — as they have done before.' Lt Gen Dushyant agreed. "This wasn't a confident response from them. It was aiming at getting the optics right. They were showing their public that they were responding to Indian strikes. Their actual strikes on our airbases and military headquarters were largely symbolic." The move also served a domestic purpose. "The Pakistan Army was under pressure," Lt Gen Dushyant noted. "It was being criticised for its failure to counter the Balochistan Liberation Army and the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan. So, what did they do? Shift the battlefield east — towards India. The plan was to turn internal dissent into external confrontation." Stalemate? Pakistan's true objective, the expert said, was not victory but a stalemate. "That was their endgame — to freeze the conflict through global mediation and save face domestically. The nuclear posturing was part of that puzzle," Lt Gen Dushyant said. Some may find the resulting ceasefire — framed as a US-brokered peace — a bit anti-climactic. But India, as Cmde Srikant pointed out, never sought an indefinite war. "We gave them 'off-ramps' at several stages. Our objective was never prolonged conflict." The others concurred. "India certainly was not rushing toward war. But it is ready for it. We have the capability and the political and the national consensus for it. But since day one of the conflict, our responses were responsible," said Col Dinny. "India's reality is this — we want peace so we can grow," added Lt Gen Dushyant. "Our aim is to meet the developmental goals we've set for 2047. That's the mission. Not a needless war." The ceasefire As for how the ceasefire came about, Cmde Srikant explained that "only a few would dismiss Pakistan's lack of real success with drone strikes, our neutralisation of their air bases, and the categorical stand we have maintained against terrorism as contributing factors." Col Dinny concurred, saying, "Pakistan has sustained heavy damage over the past days, and it was difficult for them to push us any further. That's the ground reality." He further added that India "is no longer bogged down by Pakistan's threats — be it a conventional war or nuclear escalation. We've entered a new phase in our fight against terror." That new phase was captured in the Indian government's press briefing. "Any act of terror will be considered an act of war", they had insisted, Lt Gen Dushyant highlighted. 'In many ways," said Cmde Srikant, "India has declared a new normal. What we've demonstrated is political and institutional stability. And its full strength will become evident as, inevitably, interesting developments unfold in Pakistan in the days ahead." About the ceasefire violations Predictably, just hours after the ceasefire was announced, unprovoked firing was reported in several places in Jammu and Kashmir. This, defence experts point out, was again all part of the ruse. "It's narrative building on the part of the Pakistan Army to let their people know that their country is indeed on par with India, and that they have forced the evolving conflict into a stalemate," explained Col Dinny. The Pakistanis just wanted to be the last to holster their weapons, and that is all, the experts unanimously said. The ceasefire will, no doubt, be sustained, they said, given how both India and Pakistan want this, albeit for different reasons. Of course, the geopolitics at play, too, can't be discounted, they added. So, what now? Whatever transpired in the past week cannot be taken to assume that cross-border terrorism would not cease, experts warn. "Operation Sindoor can only be considered a deterrent. Sure, it is of sound intensity. But you can't fully eliminate terrorism lock, stock, and barrel. After all, it is an ideology. And to root out an ideology is near impossible," Lt Gen Dushyant said. Air Cmde Sandeep Sathpathy (retd) concurred. "Detterences must continue. Assuming any response will eliminate terrorism is a mistake. We have to further strengthen our military capability, internal security, and national power. Also, bolster international support." "We've done similar things in the past. If we had invested in long-term strategies — like building dams or deterrent infrastructure — our leverage today would be far greater," highlighted Cmde Prakash. Indeed, if past decades of India's war on terror have taught us anything, it's that "it is a long fight, and Pakistan can't help but slink back to its old, 'silly' ways," Cmde Srikant concluded.
New Indian Express
07-05-2025
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Operation Sindoor unprecedented, brilliant but our fight against terror a long one, say military veterans
Operation Sindoor, India's measured response to the Pahalgam attack, was unprecedented on so many levels. For one, the boldness of the strike deep inside the Pakistani 'mainland' has, in addition to showcasing our military prowess, 'demonstrated India's growing resolve to root out terrorism, no matter how far, how deep', says Cmde Srikant Kesnur, an Indian Navy veteran. Yet, for all its capabilities, India has shown restraint, choosing to only attack terror infrastructure, thus preventing an escalation. 'There was an enemy headquarters mere kilometres away from one of the nine sites we hit at Bahawalpur. But that wasn't our target, was it?' points out Siachen hero Lt Gen Sanjay Kulkarni. 'Our fight is and always has been,' the veteran elaborates, 'against terror outfits, and if this happens to manifest in Pakistan, well, that's just bad luck for them.' Two, the precision of the strike was matched by the transparency with which news of the development was briefed to the nation — by a three-person panel comprising foreign secretary Vikram Misri, Wg Cdr Vyomika Singh and Col Sofiya Qureshi. 'They walked us through everything – why these nine sites were targeted, what's out there, and with clear visuals of the strike. It was surgical, and the entire operation, well thought-out,' explains Col S Dinny (retd), who served several tenures in counter-terrorism operations in J&K. Cmde Srikant says it is a lesson out of 2019's Balakot airstrike and its post-operation fizz. 'Earlier, commanders never thought it necessary to gather 'proof', but post-Balakot, there is a realisation that a lack of palpable evidence allows narratives to spiral. This time, that gap was closed,' says Cmde Kesnur, former director of Maritime Warfare Centre. 'After all, battlefields today are more transparent - artificially, perhaps, but perception matters,' he adds. It signals, if anything, an India that has come to accept new age realities. Cmde G Prakash says, 'India's reaction has not been emotional. We've also taken the effort to show the world a broader context - the long-standing link between Pakistan and terrorism.' Third, the optics, and Cmde G Prakash, who has extensive experience in operations and policy making, says, 'the press briefing oozed in symbolism.' Indeed, you have the foreign secretary flanked by two senior women officers - one a Hindu, another a Muslim. Vikram, a civilian, in their midst – someone who was born and raised in Kashmir and who know the issues there well. 'Fittingly, the operation was called Sindoor,' points out Col Dinny, 'and we all know what it signifies and how it refers back to the Pahalgam incident – yet another layer of messaging.'
