What is their strategy?
16th June 1999
Vani Murarka @manaskriti.com
Some very very relevant points raised by Srinath. Any concrete
comments/opinions/insights anyone ?
Vani
------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
Date sent: Sun, 13 Jun 1999 16:54:35 +0200
From: Srinath S
Subject: What is their strategy?
Hi all,
Sorry for this unsolicited mail. But I would really like to know your
opinion. Here are some event patterns that are too disturbing to be
dismissed away outright. These are about the Kargil conflict--
1. We see that the crisis was initiated by an insurgency that was well
planned and prepared long before Vajpayee's bus ride some months back.
2. All through this crisis, Pakistan has actually been trying almost in
a desperate sense, to pull India to war-- shooting down airplanes,
killing soldiers, torturing them and returning the bodies just a day
before the talks were to begin,...
3. It seems as though Pakistan really wants India to go to war. Now why
is this so? Why are they so keen? They are not fools. What is their
endgame?
4. I don't think so much of a keenness and confidence can come by if
they are unaided by other powers.
5. And remember these related events-- few bombs were found in Chennai
right after the Kargil conflict began,... ULFA has openly supported the
insurgency, and yet...
6. Yesterday when I was seeing CNN, the whole issue was so downplayed
that, the reporter simply interviewed some people on both sides of the
border and said something to the end that everything is peaceful! There
was no mention of the insurgency, nor of India's assertions about the
soldiers, nor about the tape evidence, nor about the ISI's admittance
regarding its involvement in the conflict.
7. The US has *lifted* sanctions on both countries!?! This is very very
strange. The sanctions were placed because both nations tested nuclear
weapons, as a deterrant against prodcing weapons of mass destruction.
Now this sanctions are being lifted at a time when both new nuclear
powers are fighting each other out!! This is mighty mighty strange!
Maybe they anticipate a good market for arms purchase from these two
countries in the near future, and so have lifted the ban?
8. The G8 summit expressed its interest to intervene in the Kargil
crisis. According to the Hindustan Times "The most alarming signals are
in the remarks made at a Press conference by Mr Fischer and reported in
great detail in a Pakistan daily published in London. He says: “The
Westt could not permit itself to merely play the role of an onlooker.
The nuclear powers, the US, France, Great Britain, and Russia want to
mediate in the conflict as well.”" and there is no mention of thee
insurgency or any of India's assertions against the insurgency.
What do you make of these incidents? Are they all unconnected? I can
only see disturbing connections.
-s
_____________________________________________________________
Vani Murarka
Manaskriti Software Solutions http://www.manaskriti.com
Calcutta, India Ph: 91-33-4746625 / 4754838
- Customised Software Development -
- Website Development, Web Programming -
- Lyris List Hosting, Reselling & Consultancy -
_____________________________________________________________
16th June 1999
CUSTOMER CARE CENTRE @bom2.vsnl.net.in
Dear Vani,
Thanks for your invite to comment.
Even at the outset, let me make a bold statement that its unfortunate that
India does not have the necessary depth, skills and strategy to constantly
monitor and interpret international events, trends and compulsions.
Pakistan is a case in point. Lets remember that Pakistan unlike India has
lesser but more critical domestic problems. From the time of Bangla Desh
liberation, there was concentrated effort by the Pak Army and a few
officials to design a deep rooted strategy to counter any or all divisive
forces within their country from dismembering Pakistan. Sindh, NE
Frontier, Baluchistan, Azad Kashmir are distict and disperate pockets
of Pakistan with a potential scope for dismemberment. The conflicts within
are sharp, and many a times irreversible both in determination and
actions.
With this background, what did the Pak strategists (synonymous with pak
Army Generals and a few Beaucrats/Politicos/Businessmen) decide ?
They decided a multi dimentional strategy :
1. To project India as the aggressor, a common enemy to all forces, an
anti Islamic force in the subcontinent etc.
2. To encourage Indo-Pak frontiers as the route for smuggling narcotics
thru money hungry merceneraries like Afghan, Kashmiri militants and
thus establish control on them for seeking corresponding favors such as
to create insurgency on Indian soil.
3. Divert world attention on the internal problems of Pak and instead
focus on the age old Kashmir "problem". Also to constantly blame India
as the cause of the problems of the subcontinent.
4. Appease and seek sympathy from USA and notably China to support Pak as
the meeker of the conflicting countries. Also, simultaneously provide
USA a much desired base in the subcontinent and be the agent for
the USA in the associations of Muslim coutries.
Overtime, India was reduced to a reactionary mindset and was kept busy
only reacting, countering, negating all actions of Pak than actually
leading in such a devious conflict. Neither did India possess the skills
nor strategies (except some half hearted efforts) to compel Pakistan to
mind its own business and not to pursue the diabolic design.
In the meanwhile, one must appreciate that Pakistan is controlled, managed
by a coterie with reps from Military, Business, Militants, ISI and also
some Politicos. In short, the formal organisation of governance like the
Federal Government had been reduced to a mere administrative wing of the
coterie than a national government. Also, the military of the land is
in practice made independent of the national government. Hence, the
coterie was able to camouflage itself effectively when India and the rest
of the world are responding and reacting to non functional Pakistan
organisations namely the Govt, ISI, Pak Army etc. This is a typical trend
in smaller and vulnerable countries. The frequent changes of
governments, persons in power, military coups are mere events to retain
and sustain the coterie's grasp on power and the governmental machinery.
Statecraft has come of age. Machievelli or even Kautilya can learn more
from the modern mercennaries. United Nations has outlived its utility.
A new world order is needed. Global statesmenship is now a vacuum.
India need not and should not depend on external advise, opinions or even
support to defend its territorial integrity and national honour.
Pakistan's bluff must be called. India should intitiate a brand new and an
aggresive plan to integrate kashmir incl Pak Occupied Kashmir as a part of
India. Also, India should address the needs of the Sindhis of Pakistan
from the tyranny of Pak military. India should meet squarely the Afghan
rebels and seek the help of USA openly to do the same and grab the present
role of Pakistan on the subject. India should involve Iran to help get
closer to contain Pakistan in the Islamic world.
In short, a national consensus in India with a powerful and a long term
strategy is needed with state of art intelligence to combat this menace
once and for all.
Ramkumar
