Opinion

Shrewd move: India’s surgical strikes delivered the right messages to multiple audiences at once

India seems to be making progress in identifying and implementing strategies that will more effectively pre-empt and deter terrorism over the long run.

For the moment at least, India’s decision to launch “surgical strikes” across the Line of Control seems to have passed the Goldilocks test: neither too hot nor too cool, too hard nor too soft, too large nor too small. It was just right. The strikes plugged a big hole in India’s policy repertoire and simultaneously delivered the right messages to multiple audiences at once. Rarely has New Delhi managed such a shrewd response to terrorist provocation.

Facing political and strategic compulsions to respond to the Uri attack with force, Prime Minister Narendra Modi correctly judged that business-as-usual policies (such as cross-border artillery fire and diplomatic gestures) were unlikely to convince his Indian constituents that he was truly a tougher leader than his predecessor. Although some of Modi’s staunchest supporters might still prefer an outright war with Pakistan, surgical strikes – along with the way they were announced to the world – were sufficiently novel and robust to sate domestic appetites.

Unfortunately, managing India’s agenda with Pakistan is even more complicated than its domestic politics. A successful Indian strategy would need to end cross-border (or cross-LoC) terrorism and thereby set the stage for a negotiated path to normalisation. But as George Perkovich and Toby Dalton argue in their perfectly timed new book, Not War, Not Peace? Motivating Pakistan to Prevent Cross-Border Terrorism, to accomplish this end, New Delhi must compel Pakistani generals to shift course, primarily by convincing them that terrorist groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba bring more pain than gain. This has proven to be an extremely difficult task, and not just for India. Exhibit A: the United States has failed repeatedly since 2001 to compel Pakistan to turn forcibly against Taliban leaders who took up residence inside Pakistan after their overthrow in Afghanistan.

No one should expect that one round of surgical strikes could tip Rawalpindi into a fundamentally different approach with LeT or similar outfits. Even so, the strikes were smartly designed to hit militants that Pakistani leaders profess not to support, and in a manner that Pakistan’s generals were likely to downplay. In both respects, they resemble recent American strikes against Taliban leaders inside Pakistan, such as the one that killed Taliban chief Mullah Mansoor last May.

The Goldilocks test

Killing terrorists on Pakistani soil reinforces the message that India is not primarily engaged in a post-colonial territorial dispute with its smaller neighbour, as Pakistan would have it, but is determinedly defending itself against violent extremists in a conflict that affords little moral ambiguity. In an ideal world, this message would resonate with Pakistan’s own leaders, given that they are in the midst of a counterinsurgency campaign against groups whose animating ideologies are not, in fact, terribly different from the groups attacking India. So India is right to try to drive a wedge between the Pakistani state and anti-Indian terrorist groups, even if the effort does not yield immediate benefits. A sustained campaign of this sort could conceivably bear fruit over time, at a cost short of all-out war.

India’s surgical strikes also deserve praise for not forcing Pakistan into an immediate escalation of violence. Pakistan has decided to reject India’s version of events, presumably because the alternatives – admitting India’s success and coming up with a suitable military response of its own – were judged even more difficult or risky.

In addition to their other virtues, India’s strikes play exceptionally well in Washington, DC. As compared to the many other military actions New Delhi could have taken, United States officials can hardly criticise preemptive counter-terror missions that bear more than a passing resemblance to America’s own strikes inside Pakistan. Moreover, this episode unfolds just as US sympathies are clearly tipping in India’s favour. American attitudes began to shift after the September 2001 attacks. Whereas past generations of US policymakers viewed South Asia through the lens of the intractable Indo-Pakistani dispute (and Kashmir in particular), now they tend perceive India as a fellow victim of global terrorism. Mumbai was a particular turning point in the development of this narrative which, of course, is reinforced by other strategic, people-to-people, and ideological connections that draw India and the United States closer together day by day.

This is not to suggest that India must bleed at the hands of terrorists to win American affection. To the contrary, it is India’s unreserved commitment to fighting terrorism that opens the door to closer US-India security cooperation, including sales and co-production of sensitive military technologies of the sort the United States now shares with close democratic partners like Israel.

Looking to the future, India should take care not to surrender the moral high ground that it enjoys in Washington with respect to Pakistan. Surgical strikes against terrorists are smart in a way that veiled threats to foment insurgency in Balochistan are not. As Perkovich and Dalton correctly point out, it is not in India’s interest to have people think it is engaged in the same sort of ugly proxy war games as Pakistan.

Ultimately, policymakers in New Delhi must appreciate that the utility of surgical strikes – or any similar approach – will be judged by whether they begin to reshape the cross-border security dynamic in India’s favour. Although it is possible that we will remember these strikes as a single-shot tactic or even as the precursor to a new round of devastating violence, their initial successes offer encouraging reasons to hope that India is making progress in identifying and implementing strategies that will more effectively pre-empt and deter terrorism over the long run.

Daniel Markey is Senior Research Professor in International Relations and Academic Director of the Global Policy Program at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, D.C. He is the author of No Exit from Pakistan: America’s Tortured Relationship with Islamabad.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Scroll+ here. We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

A musical remix, a delectable dish and a taxi makeover

What do these three works of art have in common?

What connects Raghav Sachar, Ranveer Brar and Taxi Fabric? On the surface, nothing at all. Sachar is known for his genius musical abilities, Brar a chef loved for demystifying food while the essence of Taxi Fabric goes way beyond its name. All three operate, and thrive, in unconnected domains. Upon looking closer, though, a common thread emerges between their work so far - an unmistakable streak of creativity.

Raghav Sachar is a singer, composer and film scorer who was featured in a National Geographic series, My Brilliant Brain, for his prodigious musical abilities - he can effortlessly switch between male and female vocals and play over 30 musical instruments! His adaptations of old Bollywood songs, shot in a multi-screen format, have been especially well received on the Internet.

Ranveer Brar is a well-known chef who is working to expand the idea of food. He has appeared in culinary shows as diverse as Masterchef India, Great Indian Rasoi, Thank God It’s Fryday and Food Tripping. Brar’s work in food media isn’t merely instructional, he seeks to deep dive into food - to the very science of it and its endless aesthetic possibilities. Brar is also a phenomenal food stylist who approaches food presentation as no less than an art, and himself as no less than a food artiste.

Taxi Fabric is a startup that turns taxi seat covers into canvases for artists. Through Taxi Fabric, artists have found a medium to unleash their creativity and activism onto Mumbai’s roads – the iconic kaali peelis. If you get lucky on a Mumbai street, you may hop into a world of Mumbai’s chawls, surrealist Persian architecture, Chandni Chowk and more in your short taxi ride.

The latest projects from these three creatives have a connection too - the same muse, presented by Flipkart. The muse inspired Raghav Sachar to recreate one of his own songs ‘Baahon Mein Tu Aaja’. Watch his new version of the song below.

Chef Ranveer Brar, meanwhile, dipped into his food styling instinct to create a beautiful dish. You can watch his piece of culinary art below.

Taxi Fabric brought on board Arun Chanchal, a graphic designer who describes his aesthetic as geometric surrealism. Watch the stunning result of their collaboration below.

Flipkart revealed the #ExtraordinaryBeauty that launched a musical remix, a delectable dish and a taxi makeover on 20th July. Watch the reveal below.

Honor 9N is the latest in Honor’s range of beautiful, yet highly functional, phones. There’s a lot that makes Honor 9N a worthy muse - it boasts 2.5D curved glass design with 12-layer nano coating process. It, moreover, offers full-screen display thanks to its notch design. Honor 9N will be launched in India as a Flipkart exclusive on 24th July, 2018. To know more about the phone, click here. Stay tuned for the launch, here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Flipkart and not by the Scroll editorial team.