The attack by militants on the Indian military base in Uri has once again stroked public anger and vitriolic rhetoric in the political spectrum. While calls for military action and responsible restraint by India is being advocated for by different sides, this is a piece elucidating the understandings of a common man.
One, it is certain that the government has to react. Otherwise its inaction could fuel conspiracy theorists and worst of all, Pakistan's claims that this attack is a distraction from the recent unrest in Kashmir. While I don't (want) to believe in it, just words and no action from a government with absolute majority and that which had come to power chiding the previous establishment's restraint, raises questions.
Two, lets be honest that an all-out war is not in India's interest. Sure, Pakistan and the terrorist institutions within have to answer for the deaths of our soldiers but are we in a position to take home the victories even if we win the war? The war will never see the end with absolute surrender of either party. It is bound to invite third parties for mediation between the two nuclear-powered neighbours. India would have definitely put Pakistan in its place but the impact on our economic development would be huge right when India is trying to wield its influence in a multi-polar world. Also, the threat of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal falling into extremist's hands ensures the survival of the arrogant Army-ISI power play in Islamabad. It doesn't help that China has huge vested interest in Pakistan's territories now which might draw it into battle. Also, its never good to be the first one to offend for our 'responsible power' status in the global standing. Cut them at the knees and goad Pakistan to mount an offensive that bars China from stating terms to india and instead negotiate with its side-kick.
Three, war is not the only option. While special ops to take out leaders of extremist organisation is a great alternative, the feasibility of the same is beyond my understanding. Diplomatic offensive is necessary, not just to isolate Pakistan but also to try drive home the point that Pakistan is in the wrong and that India's non-military offensives (as I explain below) are justified. The latter is very much important given that India's is trying to project itself as a power centre for the 21st century. A (potential) growing superpower can't have the majority of the world thinking it is arrogant unless it has the economic and military might to continue to grow despite being aggressive - case in point China.
Four, lets start doing what is in our power instead of waiting for the opportune moment. For starters, take Pakistan out of the (one-sided) Most Favoured Nation status and end trade with the irritating western neighbour. The government must be motivated to take this step given that the traders in Punjab have offered support to such a shutoff. India shouldn't just boycott the upcoming Saarc summit in Islamabad but also get the other nation's in the 8 nation bloc to shun the meet. It helps that Pakistan has (probably) decided to skip the Saar anti-terrorist experts meet, Afghanistan has expressed interest to stand-by India to boycott the summit and Bangladesh has chipped in to the narrative by calling Islamabad out for its support to terrorist organisation. Remember how Modi was successful in chastise Pakistan in G20, ASEAN and East Asia summits recently without offering an opportunity for it to rebuke for the sheer lack of its membership in these groups. The same could not be said of the recent NAM session in Venezuela. India should leverage its geographical, economical and political advantage in its neighbours, convince them to express solidarity and ensure an absolute boycott of the Saarc summit in November. Finally, pull the straw by tearing up the Indus Water Treaty. Actually, India should have torn it off years ago just for the sake of spite & economic advantages but the current situation offers a (politically)justifiable reason.
Five, its not enough to initiate action, the real power is in sustaining these actions. While the recent incidents and the honey-moon with the US has gained us enough leverage for most of the afore-mentioned actions, it is likely China (and even US) might be pushed to persuade(force) India to stay its hand. This is where the government's actual diplomatic weight will be gaged. The narrative in point Three above and the demography & market that India offers could be the game-changers in such a stand-off with the giants. Access to the Indian market (or lack there of) could be the carrot (or stick) in these negotiations. The huge trade deficit with China is India's brahmastra. Just like we raised import duties on metal to support India's manufacturing industries in the recent past, the threat of such a raise on electronics & other commodities would send cold chills down the Chinese business spines (and the Communist Party).
There will be economic repercussions, India will not have a sweet ride on this path either. But the effect on our economy will be minimal and the pressure on Pakistan will be significantly higher teaching it a lesson and potentially solve the Kashmir issue once and for all. We should have the restraint to avoid getting into another 'Shimla Agreement' at the end of this tunnel, otherwise all would have been for nothing. Whenever I read about the 1947 war ending in India approaching the UN or 1971 war ending in the Shimla Agreement, I question the logic behind such a move, probably external pressure. Let's be clear that despite being the good boy in this duel with Pakistan we haven't been able to gain much traction to our narrative or settle the score. So, lets be the pragmatic power for once and change the focus of our history books forever.
