Pixels of an Emerging Picture: Understanding Operation Sindoor (Part – 3)

 

A Dissection

 

The terrorist incident and India’s response, in time, will become statistics, like the previous ones. However, the objectives of the operation and the modus operandi adopted will become the subject of intense scrutiny by the militaries of the world. When two militaries come face to face, the optics of the hardware array and application strategy can be captivating. The social media, print and visual media are sizzling with conspiracy theories, propaganda in favour of one and against the other, depending on who is initiating it. But beyond the brute force, chest thumping, media carnage and the fleeting exuberance of public euphoria fanned by politicians, exists the reality of strategic victory. It is worthwhile to analyse the entire event to understand the long-term impact it has on each country.  

Pakistan's army has led Pakistan to comprehensive defeats against India in all the confrontations between the two countries. No country, however irrational, initiates an adverse action against another without political reasons. Therefore, it is logical to believe that the Pakistan army must have drawn up some objectives while strategising the attack. What could those have been? How successful were they in achieving them? While time will tell us the truth, we can make some intelligent assumptions, with as much objectivity as possible.

Pak Objectives and Evaluation of Success

Win or Lose – Regain Relevance.

Pakistan was created using the Two-Nation theory, which identifies, differentiates, and discriminates against human beings based on religion. General Asim Munir’s speech leaves no room for doubt about the deep divide that Pakistan holds about other religions. It is well established that anti-India sentiments not only unite Pakistanis but also help drive the country. The Pakistan army runs that country. However, if the recent developments within the country were any indication, the stock of Pakistan’s armed forces had plummeted. They needed something worthwhile to shore up their image. Clear prospects of a military defeat notwithstanding, there is nothing better than a direct military confrontation with India to come out as Pakistan’s saviour once again.

Victory and defeat in battle can be debated. Despite the irrefutable military losses suffered by them this time again, Pakistan's social media peddles the myth that Pakistan has decimated India. The domestic audience seems to believe that their army saved them from India. Believe or dispute anything you want to, but there can be no disputing the fact that the Pak Army has once again succeeded in positioning itself as the saviours of Pakistan. Pakistan Army has regained relevance despite an irrefutable military loss. Immediate objective achieved!

Resumption of Dialogue with India.

When two countries go into conflict, only a dialogue between the two can conclude or halt the conflict. Since 2016, India has refused Pakistan an opportunity for any formal dialogue. Whether bilaterally agreed or through a third-party mediation, India agreeing to a talk between two government functionaries, this time the respective DGMOs, has essentially obtained for Pakistan what India had been denying it all this while. The outcome of the discussion might be anything, but Pakistan has wrested from India what India had been steadfastly denying Pakistan.

Immediate objective achieved! 

Indo-Pak Hyphenation.

It was common practice for the world at large to hyphenate Pakistan with India. However, growing economic disparity, vastly different internal security situations, ease of doing business, and safety of foreign investments have, over the years, reduced the instances of the Western world hyphenating the two adversaries. With Ms Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State, explicitly articulating the de-hyphenation policy in 2005, and an aggressive strategy followed by the BJP Government since 2014, India had achieved a great degree of de-hyphenation. However, with this one terrorist attack, Pakistan has succeeded in slowing the process and, to an extent, re-hyphenating the two adversaries despite India’s overwhelming response.

Short-term objective achieved! 

Kashmir to Fore again.

Pakistan had been attempting to internationalise the Kashmir issue in every possible forum and whenever possible. India had been successful in thwarting their attempts almost every time. However, the armed conflict and the likelihood of a military flare-up between two nuclear neighbours have brought Kashmir to the fore again, raising a new challenge to Indian Diplomacy.

Immediate objective achieved! 

Deepen Religious Divide in India. 

India has been going through some amount of inter-religious turmoil.  The selective targeting of Hindu males immediately sent a deeply disturbing and provocative message across the country. It could easily have spiralled out of control, deepening the divide and sowing the seeds of civil unrest. While there were some untoward incidents of targeted attack against the minority community, the country, by and large, remained peaceful and united.  The local population of Kashmir displayed a brilliant example of National Unity, coming out in large numbers against the terrorists.

The objective was not achieved.

Spinoffs 

Terrorism as an Instrument of Foreign Policy.

The terrorist attack and the funeral of known terrorists attended by senior civil and military functionaries have once again confirmed that Pakistan considers terrorists an extension of its military and pursues terrorism as an instrument of foreign policy. Not only has the attack confirmed the efficacy of its strategy, it succeeded in garnering the requisite traction in its favour. As the cradle and fountainhead of terrorism, the attack in Pahalgam also serves as a message to the other countries in the world about Pakistan’s capability to wage this mode of warfare anywhere. Distances may be a source of comfort for many, but it does serve one well to remember that plague spreads. 

Reaffirmation of International Support.

China and Turkey came out in open support of Pakistan; so did Bangladesh. India received support from some, but couched in diplomatic semantics and nuances. It is impossible that Pakistan planned this operation without the intelligence services of the developed countries getting wind of it. While no accusations are being made against any agencies for having given tacit support or approval to the Pakistani plan, the failure of those intelligence agencies to alert Indian Agencies, which anyway did not get even a whiff of it, does not augur well for India. 

Milking Geographical Advantage

Pakistan has its borders with Iran, Afghanistan, and China, making it a springboard for those with close ties with it. Despite its double game and terrible ways, Pakistan is still sought after by the Western world and China because of its strategic location. They all need Pakistan’s real estate for their strategic purpose. Therefore, the world does not want to see a failed state descending into disintegration. That is one reason, no major Western power openly came in support of India. 

Indian Objectives

The Indian response to the terrorist attack, prima facie, had one political objective: “message Pakistan and all the terrorist organisations within Pakistan and POJK, that India will not hesitate to reach any place in Pakistan to get them.” The military aims, therefore, were in pursuance of this political diktat. This message has amply been driven home unambiguously to Pakistan and to the whole world.

Objective achieved.

Spinoffs

Redefining the response threshold. Now on, India does not differentiate between acts of terrorism and military action against it. It has bracketed nonstate actors, state, and terror proponents, all into one. The threshold for retaliation has been redefined, at least for now. We also demonstrated our willingness to use our military across the IB and LoC and accept the risks involved.

Unity in diversity. With the country facing adversity, all political parties buried their differences and supported the ruling party. Unity is possible even against odds.

Make-in India Competency. The response gave India the room to war-test its homegrown armoury and technology, and prove the efficacy of its AD shield. It proved to the world that the Indian arsenal is world-class. Considering the accuracy and extent of damage inflicted on targets by the Indian missiles, it is reliably learned that many countries are seeking to purchase ‘Made in India” weapons, especially missiles.

Digital shaping the battlefield. The conflict had a huge segment of digital warfare that both sides used to shape the battlefield in their own favour. Over the 48 hours since 7 May, India had gradually gained dominance and held sway over the adversary.

Joint Manship. The three services gave an exemplary demonstration of jointness through the seamless interoperability of various platforms. Planners can now sit to refine them.

Nuclear bluff. Exposing the Nuclear bluff, Operation Sindoor created a space to conventionally tackle a nuclear Pakistan and yet keep it under the nuclear threshold. It will be irrational to expect Pakistan to adhere to reason. One can never rule out a desperate Pakistan resorting to a nuclear launch. The planners will do well to strategise how that threat can be managed.

AD Resources. In the 48 hours of military engagement, India successfully laid to waste most of the launching pads and the air defence resources of Pakistan. Though all that will be repaired and made usable, it will cost Pakistan a lot. It will also force Pakistan to commit more resources to them. One school of thought says that India had destroyed Pakistan’s war-waging capability.

Forcing the enemy to move troops. With troops being diverted to the Indian front, the western part of Pakistan became more vulnerable.  This indirectly helped the Baloch freedom fighters to exploit the gaps in Pakistani defences. This has helped India militarily. 

Days Ahead 

One of the most repeatedly asked questions is, “Will the ceasefire hold? How long will it last?”

It is one of the easiest sets of questions to answer. History will repeat itself, and Pakistan cannot help but violate our borders. The only question left to answer is, when would that be? The objectives that they had in mind when they started the terrorist attack remain relevant and current. It will force Pakistan to strike again.

In the meantime, it will do well for India to publicly define which terrorist activity would be considered an act of war. It would also serve the country well if the required responses were well defined, tasked, and resources kept ready for instant retribution. This becomes very important because we have already progressively ratcheted up our responses.

Now, if Pakistan does something, they would have already prepared themselves for the Indian responses. Our retribution will have to be few screws tighter and yet keep the region safe.

The situation that has evolved from the combat situation presents a fresh set of challenges to the strategists. But isn’t it easier to follow the time-tested saying, “prevention is better than cure?” The sudden call to action must have also thrown up many challenges. Planners must have taken note of it, too. Without getting blown away by the euphoria of success, it may serve India well if all the lessons are faithfully and truthfully recorded, studied and remedials determined.

Operation Sindoor has not officially been concluded.