Peace through strength is a common idea that has been instrumental in the rise and expansion of some of the world’s empires. It has also played a crucial role in the dominance of countries like the US for over a century. Despite the global political order undergoing multiple changes since the end of the Cold War in the 1990s, India too has grown in strength and resolve. The strengthening of the resolve is particularly seen in its determination to eliminate the cross-border terrorism perpetrated by its arch nemesis Pakistan.
India’s latest action against the haven of terrorism Pakistan by annihilating nine terror sites in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) and in Pakistan through Operation Sindoor indicates its resolve that any more shenanigans by the neighbouring country will not be tolerated.
While Pakistan ‘retaliated’ to the Indian airstrikes by launching a relentless two-day assault using a barrage of drones and missile attacks, India responded with deadly yet proportionate force, making in the process amply clear that while India does not intend to escalate the situation, it will not remain a mute spectator to Pakistan’s devious activities.
On May 10, India and Pakistan signed a ceasefire. While the ceasefire agreement has come under heavy criticism from domestic constituencies and intellectual circles in India, it is imperative that a deeper analysis of the rationale and considerations be taken into account while articulating the ceasefire.
India’s action of annihilating nine terror sites in PoK and Pakistan through Operation Sindoor indicates its resolve that any more shenanigans by the neighbouring country will not be tolerated
India’s Posture of Strength
While some thinkers consider that India squandered away vital gains by letting go of Pakistan’s ‘jugular vein’ in the retaliatory strikes on Pakistani territory, it is necessary to bear in mind that the stakes in the game of escalation between two nuclear-armed neighbors are extremely high.
By agreeing to a ceasefire with Pakistan, New Delhi has bargained from a position of strength in that New Delhi’s terms and conditions of the ceasefire are something that wasn’t present in earlier forms of negotiations – treating any further act of terrorism as an act of war.
India has rejected the offer of mediation by the United States and has made it clear any semblance of peace between India and Pakistan would be possible only when Pakistan has returned the portion of Kashmir it has occupied illegally for over seven decades. This is a clear depiction of how India is playing hardball with Pakistan when it comes to the issue of protecting India’s territorial sovereignty and integrity.
Other Ways to Deal with the Enemy
While India’s foreign policy has a rich blend of philosophical idealism, it is necessary to bear in mind that we live in a world of myriad threats by both state and non-state actors. In that context, it is imperative that the foreign policy of the world’s fifth largest economy be guided by realism of Kautilya. Even though India has signalled its intention to settle for peace, it by no means should be taken as a sign of India’s weakness. Kautilya in his theory of statecraft outlined four key expedients – Sama, Dama, Danda, and Bheda.
By focusing on building peace, India must explore punitive yet more non-kinetic actions to punish Pakistan and make them pay for their intransigence. For instance, in this era of hybrid warfare, India must explore new tactical responses – cyber warfare, particularly waging information warfare against our neighbor through a misinformation and disinformation campaign; further, New Delhi must coordinate with its all-weather ally Israel to disrupt the electrical grid system and critical infrastructural sites of Pakistan.
Though the India-Pakistan ceasefire has been slammed in India, a deeper analysis of the rationale and considerations must be taken into account while articulating the ceasefire
Abolishing the Indus Water Treaty and fully utilising the waters of the eastern rivers – Ravi, Beas and Sutlej coupled with fast-tracking dam projects and exploration of new projects, which can fully harness the waters of the eastern rivers, must also be a priority for New Delhi.
Further, New Delhi must counter the China-Azerbaijan-Turkey nexus that is supporting Pakistan. While India has reached some sort of rapprochement with China following the dialing down of border tensions around the northern and north-eastern sectors, the need of the hour is to counter Turkey and Azerbaijan.
India must support the cause of freedom of the Kurdish people living in Turkey; it must actively lobby at relevant multilateral forums to advocate that Kurdish people have the right to self-determination. Also, India must strengthen its relationship with Greece and Cyprus by upgrading it to the level of privileged strategic partnership and the Indian Navy must play a more proactive role in the Mediterranean Sea region.
India has made it clear that any semblance of peace with Pakistan is possible only when Pakistan returns the portion of Kashmir it occupied illegally for over seven decades
As India boasts of a two hundred million strong Muslim population, which is the third highest in the world, the Modi government, which has strong Hindu nationalist credentials, should for the sake of realist statecraft exercise religious diplomacy to counter attempts by Turkey to carve out a more expansive role for itself in the Muslim world. While the constitution of India is secular, realism demands that India must exercise all options that suit its national interest.
As for Azerbaijan, India must further strengthen its ties with Armenia in more sectors. Further, as both Turkey and Azerbaijan are tourism-dependent economies to a large extent, a boycott of both countries by Indian travellers by launching a social media campaign as well as exploring other travel destinations can be done.
In conclusion, it needs to be understood that India hasn’t lost the battle of narratives in choosing a ceasefire with Pakistan, it has made it clear that India will no longer tolerate the violation of its sovereignty and has every option at its disposal to deal with the recalcitrant element called Pakistan.
–The writer is currently working as a Research Associate at Defence Research and Studies (dras.in) and is a columnist. The views expressed are personal and do not necessarily reflect the views of Raksha Anirveda
