Chanakya's View: Surgical strikes - End the cacophony

Following the surgical strike carried out by our armed forces many elements have come up in the national discourse, and need urgent clarification. First, all political parties have stood by the government in support of this action. Nitish Kumar was among the first to congratulate the Centre and our brave armed forces for the decisive action against terrorism emanating out of Pakistan. Such action was, after the affront of Pathankot and Uri, and the daily cross-border infiltrations, sorely needed and needed to be made public. Second, there is no imperative for the government to release evidence in support of this strike immediately, or at all. In a democracy, governments have to be trusted when they make public statements relating to national security, and our DGMO was authorised to make this statement. If the government feels the need, keeping all factors in mind, including that of national security, to release evidence, it is the prerogative of the government.

Third, while the surgical strike has sent the right message to Pakistan, the action by itself is not enough. The goal of isolating Pakistan on its verifiable nexus with terrorism must be a multi-pronged strategy. A diplomatic offensive needs to be waged with vigour in the important capitals of the world, including Beijing and Washington. Evidence of Pakistan emerging as the epicentre of global terrorism needs to be provided, along with the argument that, while India may be facing the brunt of the terrorist attacks sponsored by Pakistan, terrorism is a global threat, and no country is insulated from its reach and impact. Hence, there is a need for all countries to work to isolate Pakistan on this issue.

In addition, the government must do whatever necessary to ensure that the operational needs of our armed forces in J&K, including in terms of material, equipment, funds and military hardware, is fulfilled. Simultaneously, there is an urgent need to upgrade our intelligence apparatus. We cannot have a situation where fidayeens from across the border literally stroll into high security military bases. In fact, regrettably, at Uri, where terrorists struck, the perimeter of our base at that point was only ringed off by barbed wire. I understand that funds for a concrete wall have been asked for but not been sanctioned for years.

Fourth, the politics unfolding on the surgical strikes must stop. This applies equally to the ruling party as to the Opposition. The strikes were authorised by the government of the day, and represented a national resolve to provide a befitting — and much needed — riposte to Pakistan. This was not an action taken by the BJP. Therefore, the attempt to use this by the BJP for partisan political gain, especially keeping the forthcoming Uttar Pradesh and Punjab elections in mind, is reprehensible. Why have posters come up all over Uttar Pradesh depicting Narendra Modi as Ram vanquishing Nawaz Sharif as Ravan? The argument that this was done by some low-level “karyakartas” is hogwash. The nation will have enough opportunity to see how the BJP seeks to capitalise on this event in the days leading up to the Uttar Pradesh elections, and this will be done with the approval of the highest echelons of the BJP-RSS combine.

Again, why is our respected Raksha Mantri Parrikar Saheb going from one felicitation ceremony to the other, claiming that our Army was impotent until the BJP government came to power in 2014? The BJP must understand that it cannot have it both ways. On the one hand, it deflects any queries regarding the surgical strike by saying that it is an act of national betrayal to question the achievement of the Army. On the other, it sets aside the Army and seeks to appropriate the credit itself. Fifth, however proud we are of the valour and sacrifice of our armed forces, we must resist the temptation to put them above all democratic interrogation. In a democracy, all institutions are subject to review and assessment. If a former Raksha Mantri says that similar strikes, albeit on a smaller scale, took place in the past, why is the BJP privileging the statement of a retired DGMO over that of a former defence minister?

If tomorrow, a serving general of the Army, on retirement, says something that indicts the current government or its Raksha Mantri, will the BJP say that he is right and their own defence minister wrong? This form of politicking is fraught with danger, and the BJP must think twice before encouraging such dangerous trends only to score immediate debating points. Moreover, even in a country like Israel, whose armed forces are held in very high esteem, there have been occasions when their conduct has been scrutinised in public interest. In the cacophony of the political slugfest now going on, any questions asked about the armed forces is now being equated with being anti-national. This must stop. Last, in the competitive politics of praising our armed forces, sanction seems to being given to a wholesale denunciation of the political class, and of the political leadership.

There is every reason to be proud of our armed forces, but in a democracy the armed forces work under the civilian government. There can be no compromise of this fundamental principle. Unfortunately, we are seeing today an entire array of retired generals and others who almost seem to be saying that we know best what is needed for the well being and security of our country, and anyone who interferes, or has been seen to be interfering in this role, is working against the national interest. Equally, unfortunately, the BJP appears to be encouraging this trend so long as the retired generals have praise for it. But has the BJP given a thought to what such a line of thinking means for the basic tenets of a democratic Republic, and what it could mean for the BJP itself when instead of praise it is at the receiving end of this misguided hubris?