Fuelling a Proxy War
Pakistan is Paying a Ruinous Price
By K SUBRAHMANYAM
IT should now be obvious to India and the international community that General Pervez Musharraf is not likely to restore democracy in Pakistan and retire to play golf for quite a while to come. Pakistanis, having
got used to misgovernance and military rule for nearly half the period
of their independent existence, are not likely to rise in revolt against
army rule. In any case, India can do precious little to influence events
in Pakistan. Therefore, India's strategy should be to assess carefully
the likely course of developments in Pakistan and their positive and
negative impact on India and Indian security and to work out steps to
limit any possible damage to this country. This has to be done without
any sentimentality, in a cold and calculated manner. While some amount
of public relations rhetoric on democracy is in order, our bilateral
relationship with Pakistan should be guided solely by India's national
interests.
Direct Experience
General Pervez Musharraf has had first-hand direct experience of what
happens when he tries out military engagements with the Indian Army. He
might try to overreach himself and take the Indian Army by surprise.
However, when the Indian Army gets its act together, Pakistan finds it
is not even able to give hundreds of its soldiers the decent burial they
deserved and had earned in valiant combat. Of all the four military
defeats suffered by Pakistan, the Kargil one is the most humiliating.
The release of 93,000 prisoners, honourably taken captive at Dacca in
December, 1971, was not as much of a humiliation compared to hundreds of
soldiers dying without even being acknowledged. This experience could
make General Musharraf a sober person and compel him to concentrate on
attempts to stem the rot in Pakistan's economy and avert its sliding
into the status of ``failed state''.
While that would be a more sensible option, he might choose to wreak
vengeance and try out yet another misadventure against India. In some
cultures, vendetta is one of the core strands of societal tradition. One
hopes that having been born in Delhi, General Musharraf is free of such
tribal attitudes. As seen from the address of the Indian Prime Minister
to the combined commanders' conference, and his press conference at
Lucknow, India is wary of the new Pakistani regime's next moves. In the
light of the Kargil experience, the Indian Armed Forces are better
prepared and continue to improve their capabilities to deal with the
proxy war in Jammu and Kashmir.
The Pakistanis are under the impression, and some Indians too unfortunately share that perception, that the proxy war conducted by
Islamabad has either been cost-free or is of relatively lower cost to
them compared to what India has to spend. While there is a large element
of truth in this, this is not absolutely correct. There are both direct
and indirect costs to Pakistan. The majority of the infiltrator
terrorists are mercenaries who have to be paid fees of Rs 3-5 lakhs for
contractual services as terrorists for a short period of a few months in
the Kashmir Valley. There are costs involved in training these hired
killers, equipping them, keeping track of them in the Valley and staying
in communication with them. Nearly two thirds get killed. There are
costs of compensation for their families. These are direct costs which
no doubt are only a small fraction of the cost India has to bear to keep
the marauders' activities under control. There are, however, indirect
costs to Pakistan which are quite substantial.
Economic Decline
The first and foremost is the punitive firing by the Indian forces
across the Line of Control. Neelam Valley bears the full brunt of it and
even in Kargil Pakistanis do suffer considerable punishment. Second, the
additional Indian force deployment in Kashmir does exact a price in
terms of Pakistani force deployment. Given that Pakistan's GDP is one
sixth India's, Pakistan bears a much heavier proportion of the burden.
Third, the miscreants who manage to get back after a mercenary stint in
the Kashmir Valley become a major problem for Pakistani society as they
fan the flames of sectarian and other violence, including large-scale
killings. They are like tigers, which having tasted human blood, turn
into man-eaters. They exact the maximum penalty from Pakistani society
and the state for its proxy war in Kashmir.
While Pakistani army generals, politicians and civil servants may not
have computed the true costs of the proxy war in Kashmir for their
country, one hopes the newly-imported American-trained economists hired
by General Musharraf will be able to undertake this task in a
comprehensive fashion. It is not a mere coincidence that the period of
proxy war in Kashmir and Pakistan's steady economic decline and slide
towards a ``failed state'' status are coterminus. No doubt the proxy war
is not the only reason for Pakistan's misfortunes, but it is one of the
important causes and an easily remedied one. If Pakistan continues in
its ways, the minimum defensive measures India will adopt would push up
the costs to Pakistan even more.
Islamic Image
This is the message India has to get across to the General. It has to be
done in three ways. First, the Indian information campaign through the
electronic media should be rigorously pursued. Television and the
Internet are extremely powerful channels of communication. Second, third
country diplomatic channels should be used. India should take the
initiative to talk to western powers and Japan about a common strategy
on nursing Pakistan back to democratic health. Third, the international
financial institutions and the international business community should
be mobilised to project to Pakistani rulers (who are today generals) the
true costs of their confrontationist policy towards India and its impact
on Pakistan's economy and society.
General Zia-ul-Haq had the knack of talking more about Nizam-e- Mustafa
than in actually implementing extremist Islamic policies. General
Musharraf too may indulge in various gimmicks to nurture his Islamic
image but he should be careful about what he does on the ground. By this
time, he should have realised the true state of Pakistan's economy and
the nature of the obscurantist and feudal elite which makes any sensible
economic governance impossible. In order to pursue this three-pronged
strategy, India should have no hesitation in engaging Pakistani in an
official- level dialogue.
Pakistan is Paying a Ruinous Price
By K SUBRAHMANYAM
IT should now be obvious to India and the international community that General Pervez Musharraf is not likely to restore democracy in Pakistan and retire to play golf for quite a while to come. Pakistanis, having
got used to misgovernance and military rule for nearly half the period
of their independent existence, are not likely to rise in revolt against
army rule. In any case, India can do precious little to influence events
in Pakistan. Therefore, India's strategy should be to assess carefully
the likely course of developments in Pakistan and their positive and
negative impact on India and Indian security and to work out steps to
limit any possible damage to this country. This has to be done without
any sentimentality, in a cold and calculated manner. While some amount
of public relations rhetoric on democracy is in order, our bilateral
relationship with Pakistan should be guided solely by India's national
interests.
Direct Experience
General Pervez Musharraf has had first-hand direct experience of what
happens when he tries out military engagements with the Indian Army. He
might try to overreach himself and take the Indian Army by surprise.
However, when the Indian Army gets its act together, Pakistan finds it
is not even able to give hundreds of its soldiers the decent burial they
deserved and had earned in valiant combat. Of all the four military
defeats suffered by Pakistan, the Kargil one is the most humiliating.
The release of 93,000 prisoners, honourably taken captive at Dacca in
December, 1971, was not as much of a humiliation compared to hundreds of
soldiers dying without even being acknowledged. This experience could
make General Musharraf a sober person and compel him to concentrate on
attempts to stem the rot in Pakistan's economy and avert its sliding
into the status of ``failed state''.
While that would be a more sensible option, he might choose to wreak
vengeance and try out yet another misadventure against India. In some
cultures, vendetta is one of the core strands of societal tradition. One
hopes that having been born in Delhi, General Musharraf is free of such
tribal attitudes. As seen from the address of the Indian Prime Minister
to the combined commanders' conference, and his press conference at
Lucknow, India is wary of the new Pakistani regime's next moves. In the
light of the Kargil experience, the Indian Armed Forces are better
prepared and continue to improve their capabilities to deal with the
proxy war in Jammu and Kashmir.
The Pakistanis are under the impression, and some Indians too unfortunately share that perception, that the proxy war conducted by
Islamabad has either been cost-free or is of relatively lower cost to
them compared to what India has to spend. While there is a large element
of truth in this, this is not absolutely correct. There are both direct
and indirect costs to Pakistan. The majority of the infiltrator
terrorists are mercenaries who have to be paid fees of Rs 3-5 lakhs for
contractual services as terrorists for a short period of a few months in
the Kashmir Valley. There are costs involved in training these hired
killers, equipping them, keeping track of them in the Valley and staying
in communication with them. Nearly two thirds get killed. There are
costs of compensation for their families. These are direct costs which
no doubt are only a small fraction of the cost India has to bear to keep
the marauders' activities under control. There are, however, indirect
costs to Pakistan which are quite substantial.
Economic Decline
The first and foremost is the punitive firing by the Indian forces
across the Line of Control. Neelam Valley bears the full brunt of it and
even in Kargil Pakistanis do suffer considerable punishment. Second, the
additional Indian force deployment in Kashmir does exact a price in
terms of Pakistani force deployment. Given that Pakistan's GDP is one
sixth India's, Pakistan bears a much heavier proportion of the burden.
Third, the miscreants who manage to get back after a mercenary stint in
the Kashmir Valley become a major problem for Pakistani society as they
fan the flames of sectarian and other violence, including large-scale
killings. They are like tigers, which having tasted human blood, turn
into man-eaters. They exact the maximum penalty from Pakistani society
and the state for its proxy war in Kashmir.
While Pakistani army generals, politicians and civil servants may not
have computed the true costs of the proxy war in Kashmir for their
country, one hopes the newly-imported American-trained economists hired
by General Musharraf will be able to undertake this task in a
comprehensive fashion. It is not a mere coincidence that the period of
proxy war in Kashmir and Pakistan's steady economic decline and slide
towards a ``failed state'' status are coterminus. No doubt the proxy war
is not the only reason for Pakistan's misfortunes, but it is one of the
important causes and an easily remedied one. If Pakistan continues in
its ways, the minimum defensive measures India will adopt would push up
the costs to Pakistan even more.
Islamic Image
This is the message India has to get across to the General. It has to be
done in three ways. First, the Indian information campaign through the
electronic media should be rigorously pursued. Television and the
Internet are extremely powerful channels of communication. Second, third
country diplomatic channels should be used. India should take the
initiative to talk to western powers and Japan about a common strategy
on nursing Pakistan back to democratic health. Third, the international
financial institutions and the international business community should
be mobilised to project to Pakistani rulers (who are today generals) the
true costs of their confrontationist policy towards India and its impact
on Pakistan's economy and society.
General Zia-ul-Haq had the knack of talking more about Nizam-e- Mustafa
than in actually implementing extremist Islamic policies. General
Musharraf too may indulge in various gimmicks to nurture his Islamic
image but he should be careful about what he does on the ground. By this
time, he should have realised the true state of Pakistan's economy and
the nature of the obscurantist and feudal elite which makes any sensible
economic governance impossible. In order to pursue this three-pronged
strategy, India should have no hesitation in engaging Pakistani in an
official- level dialogue.
Comment