Explaining Op Sindoor to international community

New Delhi, July 4 The move of the Modi government to send out seven multi-party delegations to different world capitals to clarify India’s position regarding Operation Sindoor, which was launched following the terrorist attack at Pahalgam on April 22, did fulfil a strategic requirement of this country in as much as the India-Pak military confrontation provoked by Pakistan-directed terror violence and the subsequent announcement of a ‘ceasefire’ between the two countries, had to be put in the right perspective from India’s point of view.

The brief given to the delegations revolved around the basic Indian contention that the cross-border terrorism long known to be originating from Pakistan, was the trigger for the retaliatory action of India.

The delegations were to primarily warn the global community that Pakistan’s undiminished terror infrastructure had serious implications for the entire world. The delegations were expected to call the bluff of Pakistan as the latter was trying to claim that it was also a victim of terrorism. In reality, Pak ISI had harboured Islamic radical forces like Al Qaeda and Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) which shared the legacy of being anti-West, in addition to the terror outfits like Hizbul Mujahideen (HuM) and the Saudi-funded Lashkare Toiba (LeT) that were always on the right side of the West.

This had given some benefit to Pakistan because of the American policy of making a distinction between ‘good terrorists’ and ‘bad terrorists’ at one point in time- before the killing of Osama bin Laden near Abbottabad by a team of Navy SEALS, exposed the Pak duplicity on Terror.

India’s stand presented by the multi-party delegations, mostly led by the leaders of the opposition, emphasized three points India’s surgical strikes across the LOC and Indo-Pak border were made on nine terror bases identified by India’s intelligence, no military or civilian establishments were targeted and that Pakistan only proved its collusion with terrorists when it escalated the matter by launching an attack on Indian territory through Drones and missiles.

In a justifiable military response, India then attacked and damaged several Air bases in Pakistan compelling a desperate Pak army to approach the Trump Administration and plead for a ceasefire. A peace-loving India consciously chose to accept it.

India’s Foreign Secretary Vikram Mistry did well to tell the delegations during the briefing that India’s attack on the Jaishe Mohammad facility in Bahawalpur was also to be seen in the backdrop of the killing of Wall Street Journal reporter, Daniel Pearl. This adds to the India-US convergence against terrorism even as President Donald Trump had already denounced ‘Islamic Terrorism’ in no uncertain terms.

Detractors of Operation Sindoor are raising an allegation that Prime Minister Modi had gone by the diktat of Trump on the issue of ceasefire- acceptance of a pause in military confrontation in fact represented a mature response from India.

The plan of sending out multi-party delegations to 33 countries was meant to be a diplomatic blitz aimed at globally isolating Pakistan by exposing that country’s sustained sponsorship of cross-border terrorism, as established by evidence-based accounts presented before foreign legislatures, think tanks and media.

The seven delegations included 51 political leaders- mostly MPs and Ministers- apart from ex-diplomats and the countries visited included those who are members of the UN Security Council or who were going to be its members in future so that any attempts by Pakistan who were also a member of that world body- to raise ‘false narratives’ there could be countered.

The overriding theme of ‘zero tolerance against terrorism of all kinds’ was well set as no dissent on it could be expected from any quarters. The delegations would tell the world the truth about Pakistan’s policy of patronising terrorists- this was the sole reason India was compelled to take action by way of Operation Sindoor.

The idea was to present a national consensus against the threat of terrorism facing India. Meanwhile, Congress reacted strongly against Shashi Tharoor being named as the leader of a delegation visiting a key country like the US and accused the ruling party of ‘playing games’- Tharoor had not figured amongst the names given by the Congress in response to the government’s request. This stirred up domestic politics but only for a while.

The delegations were to fan out in different regions of the world to raise the heat on Pakistan for supporting cross-border terrorism against India. They would underline the need to hold Pakistan and its military establishment accountable for that. While affirming India’s resolve to combat terrorism in all its forms and highlighting India’s ‘new normal’ in tackling the threat through military strikes on terror infrastructure as was done in Operation Sindoor, the delegations would make it clear that India -undeterred by any nuclear blackmail-was set to make Pak military pay a price for any further terror attack. They would raise the point about the world’s lacklustre record in holding Pak military and ISI accountable for the 2008 Mumbai attack and the 2019 suicide bombing of the CRPF convoy at Pulwama despite the comprehensive evidence provided by India in both cases.

The delegations will certainly showcase India standing united behind the government on the issue of terrorism. The rare display of political unity projected by the composition of the delegations is expected to convey the message that on foreign policy and national security, India stood united and that the stand of zero tolerance of terrorism transcends the political divides within the country. The gains from this diplomatic outreach will be further studied and evaluated in the times ahead.

The terror attack on tourists at Pahalgam in which 28 Hindus were shot in the head after their religious identity was ascertained, was evidently a sinister plan of Pak army-ISI combine to cause internal destabilisation in India.

The Army chief of Pakistan, Gen. Syed Asim Munir had only a few days earlier spewed venom against India- warning that ‘they were not Hindus’ and thus creating an environment of heightened communal animosity. That the army in Pakistan was calling the shots was proved by the elevation of Gen. Munir to the rank of a Field Marshall amidst the tensions created by the Pahalgam incident.

Meanwhile, Pakistan’s strategic alliance with China also came into full play during the Indo-Pak military confrontation that was precipitated by Pahalgam.

A reassuring outcome following the announcement of the ‘ceasefire’ has been the enunciation of what can be described as the National Security Doctrine by PM Modi in his address to the nation on May 12 evening.

The Prime Minister stated that any future terror attack on India from the soil of Pakistan will be considered as an ‘act of war’ and responded to by our defence forces accordingly. He declared that India would not be deterred by any nuclear threat from Pakistan while taking such a retaliatory action. Finally, he announced that any talk with Pakistan would only be about cross-border terror and PoK in keeping with India’s stand that ‘talks and terror do not go together’ and that the only agenda on Kashmir was the return of POK to India.

The Prime Minister indicated that Operation Slndoor was only paused and that India had to continue keeping the Indus Water Treaty in abeyance since ‘blood and water could not flow together’. The learning is that India has to remain fully prepared for any further misadventure by Pakistan.

(The writer is a former Director Intelligence Bureau)

Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor