India Analytics

The nature of this attack is such that any state reserves the right to take whatever action is necessary to bring the perpetrators, and those who aid them, to justice. Yet, as India chooses the next course of action, it will be difficult to shake off the sense of despair this kind of terrorism produces. A successful military operation might be an act of justice. It might restore a sense of confidence in the capabilities of the state, and, in some quarters, satiate a desire for revenge. But even if these actions were successful in a limited sense, we will remain close to the edge of an abyss.

The Pakistani army has not, for a long time, had an even minimally imaginative view of the country’s future. Its greatest strength is not honourable negotiation with adversaries. It is proxy wars, the use of chaos and terror to substitute for its strategic failures and dalliance with religious fundamentalism. The problem with such a state is that it is not clear what counts as deterrence or punishment. At best, it positions itself for tactical reprieves. Like its economic programme, which lets it do the bare minimum till the next IMF tranche becomes available, its response to its own geo-strategic and internal conundrum is tactical adjustments that leave basic weaknesses and resentments in place. Punishing such an establishment is not easy; in fact, it fuels the very chaos it thrives on. So, while the Pakistani state may deserve to be weakened, it does not produce the solution. The paradox of Pakistan is how much its establishment thrives on its own implosion and humiliation. It manages to lose every war yet destroys every peace.

...the view that while these acts are horrible, acting in retaliation would produce worse consequences is no longer tenable. After Balakot, the norms on how to deal with these incidents have changed. Having the strategic patience to diplomatically grind out Pakistan is no longer a politically viable option. So, action there will be, even if there is no “solution”.