After Uri attack India lost its patience and did surgical strike in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (POK). It was necessary because government’s action was based on the people’s demand. Prime Minister Narendra Modi already proclaimed in the National Executive Meeting’s speech at Kozhikode (Kerala) that “those behind the attack will not go unpunished” But in my sense that it was not necessary we have already starts diplomatic actions against Pakistan. It starts when we boycott SAARC meeting in Pakistan and after that our neighbours also boycott it. No doubt Indian politicians, along with many independent security experts and analysts, have long believed that Pakistan provides considerable backing for the Islamic militants who attack India with regularity. Not only India but also SAARC nations are affected by terrorism which is sponsored by Pakistan like Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan and Sri Lanka feel Pakistan is a migraine for the region.
But we should keep in mind that this type of Surgical Strike action might actually increase the risk of terrorism. Recently Handwara attack it was a Fidayeen attack on 30 Rashtriya Rifles camp in Langate and all terrorists came in army combat dress. If we go back to the history India helped create Bangladesh in 1971, and in turn, Pakistan starts proxy warfare, in Punjab and Kashmir. Regaining some territory, causing more Pakistani casualties than Indian ones, or any such measure of success is unlikely to make Pakistan give up its use of terrorism. Modi is certain that Pakistan is behind the attacks, but he knows well that escalating the violence will only court more risks. India knows that Pakistan is the weaker of the two countries militarily, and that an Indian attack could force Islamabad to make good on its threat to employ its nuclear weapons to even the score. He is also aware that Pakistan is a fragile state and a confrontation could undermine the government there, bringing an even more militant administration to power or, worse, creating chaos that might imperil the command and control of nuclear weapons or materials. Surgical strike especially against Pakistan sponsored terrorist’s organization definitely give “cool shower to our heart” but this way we can’t teach lesson to Pakistan. Supposed in surgical strike Pakistan retaliates then this surgical strikes convert into full fledge war. We would open more fronts obviously we have bigger army. Pakistan can’t then Pakistan starts nuclear threat and deploys some missiles into the border areas. Consequently, America interfere and try to start negotiate between India and Pakistan but till then we lose many things because we have many things to lose but Pakistan don’t have. So it would be better we take diplomatically actions against Pakistan. Indian External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj told the United Nations General Assembly: “We need to forget our prejudices and join hands together to script an effective strategy against terror. And if any nation refuses to join this global strategy, then we must isolate it.” We should not forget North Korea much irritates America, Japan and South Korea but they did not take any militarily actions against North Korea. So we have to find out more diplomatically, economically actions against Pakistan. Fortunately these days India has become good friend of America. We can use our influence over America to stop economic aid to Pakistan. No doubt war is always bad for the economy, for both sides but effect more. In this case, India has a lot more to lose. The Indian economy is way ahead of Pakistan, so the damage will be greater for India. The uncertainties of war drive away potential investors, cause inflation and shortages. In fact, votaries of strategic restraint argue that success is the best revenge: India's economic rise is the best answer to a Pakistan whose image is that of a terrorism-sponsoring state.
Views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of FORE INDIA.
