Asymmetric War

With the reported gunning down of Pulwama attack mastermind Abdul Rasheed Ghazi alias Kamran in an army operation on Sunday night, the first phase of Indian retaliation is unfolding. Known to have crossed the LoC in December last, Ghazi fits the mould of Pakistani irregulars with experience in Afghanistan and Middle East being sent to the Kashmir theatre. Not only did this Jaish commander train local bomber Aadil Ahmad Dar, the success with which he motivated the latter to carry out the suicide attack has opened a new dimension in Islamabad’s asymmetric war in the valley.

So far, all fidayeen attackers had been from across the border, with Kashmiri locals used for logistical and other support. There has been talk of security breach, particularly over how an explosive-laden SUV was allowed onto the Jammu-Srinagar highway when the CRPF convoy was passing. While standard operating procedures (SOPs) of security forces will doubtless be reviewed, the significant kills of top jehadis that they have been notching up in recent months must also be appreciated. And even when security forces achieve area dominance, terrorists need to succeed just occasionally to remain in the deadly game, more so in civilian spaces. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has sounded a clear warning that the responsibility has been given to the Indian army to mount a fitting riposte at a time and place of its choosing.

Considering the surgical strikes across LoC in the Uri attack aftermath in 2016, speculation is rife that India may opt for a sub-conventional approach. Having developed tactical nuclear weapons to counter India’s conventional military might, Islamabad had played that card far too often before the surgical strikes happened. However, the Pulwama car bombing has shown that Pakistani handlers are seeking Kashmiri youths for suicide attacks after radicalising them thoroughly, and thereby put New Delhi more on the defensive with a ‘homegrown’ terrorism. Though the Indian political establishment has put up a collective front this time around (unlike the derisive response to the surgical strikes by some parties), it is in the interests of the country that this unity holds up.

The nature of Indian democracy is such that in the last three decades vis-a-vis Kashmir, New Delhi has adopted a variety of soft, hard and status-quoist approaches. In contrast, the ‘Deep State’ within Pakistan — its military-industrial and intelligence arms hand-in-glove with jehadi groups — has ensured a consistently ruthless focus on Kashmir whichever party holds the reins in Islamabad. With all-weather ally China’s backing and huge investment in PoK, Pakistan has of late been emboldened by Donald Trump’s decision to take out US forces from Afghanistan.

As part of its avowed policy ‘to bleed India with a thousand cuts’, Islamabad has tellingly used its proxies to tie Indian forces down with asymmetric warfare; this has been ratcheted up to a ‘hybrid war’ by employing cyber warriors, stone pelters, school burners, human shields (during army operations), hawala operators, currency counterfeiters, psy-op manipulators and propaganda experts. The outcome has been an array of disruptive activities in Kashmir, with the ever-present threat of replication elsewhere in the country.

To deal with Pakistan’s nuclear blackmail and hybrid war will require comprehensive strategy drawn up at the highest level. New Delhi has begun a diplomatic offensive and has withdrawn the ‘most favoured nation’ status accorded to Pakistan in trade, but making these moves pay will require firmly staying the course over the long term. This should not foreclose seeking political solutions and good governance in J&K, because an obsessively law-and-order approach can deliver only so much. Unrealistic expectations, complacency, obduracy — these and other bad habits must be shed if the Indian leadership is to turn the tide in Kashmir.

Venezuela Crisis

The US may well be turning isolationist under Donald Trump, but Washington is not likely to give up bullying its backyard in South America anytime soon. It is the turn of Venezuela now to be the victim of US meddling, with the Trump administration propping up Juan Guaido, a little-known lawmaker, as a challenger to Nicolas Maduro’s government. Political successor to late socialist strongman Hugo Chavez, President Maduro has been battling oil price shocks, hyperinflation, crippling debt, food and medicine shortage buffeting Venezuela. But a full-blown political crisis erupted last month when the National Assembly, where the Opposition has a slim majority, declared Maduro’s re-election last year as invalid and installed Guido as interim President. While the US and several Western and Latin American countries are backing Guido, Russia and China have taken the lead against interference in Venezuela’s internal affairs. India too has refused to accord recognition to Guido, but the immediate challenge for New Delhi is Trump’s sanction on Venezuelan oil. Washington has already warned that countries buying Venezuelan oil “will not be forgotten”, ostensibly for allowing the Maduro regime to engage in “theft” by selling the country’s oil! It so happens that Venezuela is the third biggest supplier of oil to India presently; what is more, the Maduro regime is willing to be paid in rupees, so that it can buy food and medicine from India. Such transaction would be a win-win situation for New Delhi, if only it did not have to contend with US sanctions on Iranian oil as well. While India has been granted a temporary waiver by the Trump administration, oil imports from Iran must eventually stop. If Washington also forces a squeeze on Venezuelan oil supplies, the Indian economy could be sharply impacted with fuel prices going through the roof. How New Delhi stands up to this pressure will bear watching in the coming days.