Interview: ‘Pahalgam shows Balakot did not create deterrence'

Welcome to The India Fix by Shoaib Daniyal, a newsletter on Indian politics.
As always, if you've been sent this newsletter and like it, to get it in your inbox every week, sign up here (click on ' follow ').
A horrific attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir, in which 26 people were killed, has left South Asia on edge as India has blamed Pakistan and its support for cross-border terrorism. Delhi has said that it would hold the Indus Waters Treaty 'in abeyance' and Modi promised that India would soon 'raze whatever is left of the terror haven', a thinly-veiled reference to Pakistan.
To understand Delhi's military options at this time, how the Modi government overstated its claims that 'normalcy' has returned to Kashmir and the risky business of de-escalating conflict between two nuclear powers, I spoke to former military officer Sushant Singh, a lecturer at Yale University and one of India's foremost security experts.
Do you think India can do another Balakot [striking across the border as it did in the wake of the Pulwama attack of 2019]?
It depends on what you mean by Balakot. The question is what did Balakot achieve? As this particular incident has shown, Balakot did not create deterrence which stopped militants or Pakistan from undertaking another terror attack in Kashmir. That's one thing.
Secondly, Balakot, as I wrote in The Caravan, was not a military success. It was a political success because it happened just before elections, and it worked for them [the Bharatiya Janata Party]. Thirdly, Balakot did escalate up to a point. As you know, [Mike] Pompeo, who was [United States] Secretary of State at that time, in his memo mentioned the nuclear escalation between India and Pakistan.
So, I really don't know what we mean by another Balakot. If the idea is that India would do a kinetic operation against Pakistan, yes, that possibility definitely exists, particularly going by the rhetoric we're seeing from the government.
I want to go to your reporting on Balakot, especially your piece in The Caravan. You've taken a view which is at variance with much of the Indian mainstream media. You say Balakot was actually not a military success. Do you think that will inform what is happening now? Will it reduce India's options?
Let me put it this way. The political leadership in India would want to do something that would assuage the heightened emotions of their supporters at least, if not the Indian people. They have already set a bar because of what they claim to have done in 2016 with the surgical strikes across the LoC [Line of Control] and then in 2019 with Balakot. Once you've done that, you can't do anything lesser than that. If you claim that you achieved so much, then you need to do something bigger. That's one big constraint.
The second constraint, of course, is the military failure of doing Balakot and the escalation that happened. Balakot is not just about what the Indian Air Force tried to do in Balakot; it's also what happened thereafter – when [Indian Air Force pilot] Abhinandan [Varthaman] was captured, when the Indian MiG-21 was brought down, the threat of missile launches from both sides. That, too, is part of the Balakot episode.
The question isn't what India can do, it's how do you de-escalate from there. Anyone can order a ground-based missile, an airborne strike or a drone swarm attack. The point is, will Pakistan retaliate? Yes. After Pakistan retaliates, what do you do? Do you take it lying down? Do you say, 'thank you, 1-1' and go back home? Or do you escalate further? How do you de-escalate?
The political leadership has to answer how it intends to prevent serious escalation between two nuclear weapon states and how to de-escalate after you have taken the first step. The military leadership must answer what their constraints are, whether they can honestly tell the political leadership that they are operating within limitations: shortage of soldiers, deployment at the China border, modern equipment shortages and so on. These two considerations – political of de-escalation and military – will come into play.
I want to go back to the horrific terrorist attack in Pahalgam. Do you think there was a security lapse there?
Definitely. There were two CRPF [Central Reserve Police Force] battalions until a year or two ago. One of them was moved out. Armed men fired for more than 20-30 minutes, and no security forces came. The family of one of the dead naval officers said no help came for 90 minutes and her husband died. Clearly, there was a security lapse.
There was also an intelligence failure. You have militants in the area, roaming around with weapons, clearly embedded in the area with local support. It's not like the militant came that morning itself and suddenly did this. The intelligence failure is that you didn't have any idea of all this happening.
Security failed on two levels. First, you left the place completely unguarded – probably believing that tourists wouldn't like to see soldiers and that would belie claims of normalcy. There was also the belief that militants wouldn't do anything to attack tourism, which is the lifeline of the Kashmiri economy – so therefore we can leave it unguarded. Second, the response during the attack was very poor. Unless you are buying your own Kool Aid of normalcy having returned, there was no reason to have no forces present in that spot.
There were three failures: intelligence, and two levels of security – before and during the incident.
Let's dig a bit deeper on your Kool Aid point. What does this incident say about the Modi government's claim that Kashmir is now normal and militancy has ended after the abrogation of Article 370 in 2019?
This incident shows that these claims are untrue. In fact, even earlier, incidents in Poonch and Rajouri already disproved that claim.
Let's be clear: the violence isn't at the level of the early '90s or just after Kargil. But violence had already come down when Omar Abdullah was chief minister [2009-2015]. In 2011-2012, there were a lot of street protests, a lot of stone pelting, but militancy was already down.
Then PDP [People's Democratic Party] formed the government with BJP [in 2016], and young Kashmiri men began joining the militancy. Violence was artificially suppressed, but the anger against the Indian state and the lack of political redress remains, creating fertile ground for militancy – even if you take Pakistan away from the equation.
One of the claims for abrogating Article 370 was better security, which you're saying has not come through. Do you think India's security apparatus is actually now weaker because local Kashmiri parties have been destroyed and Kashmir is now ruled directly from Delhi?
Absolutely. Remember, during demonetisation [in 2016], it was claimed that the terrorism's back has been broken in Kashmir. The same was said after surgical strikes and after abrogating Article 370. In all cases, security has not improved.
We've lost even the limited support we had among Kashmiris. You could generate local intelligence, you had sympathisers. All that has been broken down by the kind of politics pursued in the rest of India and by Delhi in Kashmir: hardcore Hindutva politics, demonising Muslims and Kashmiris, TV debates running horribly anti-Kashmir content nightly. You can't expect sympathy when you've done what was done after August 2019: shutting everything down, taking away the internet. It is a very oppressive environment in Kashmir.
Even tourism, though economically vital, has become a tool of humiliation and oppression.
Could you expand on that? What do you mean by tourism being a tool of humiliation?
Many tourists from the mainland, influenced by the current Islamophobic political climate, behave in obnoxious ways – sometimes unknowingly, sometimes knowingly – acting as if they sustain Kashmir. Even non-Kashmiri friends have observed this when they travel to Kashmir and have felt embarrassed.
The way tourism is conducted doesn't foster healthy ties between Kashmir and the rest of India. It's often perceived as an extension of the politics India has seen since 2014.
Let's zoom out to geopolitical security. If India launches any kinetic operation now, what are Pakistan's options?
It depends on whether India launches a covert or overt operation. A covert operation can be denied by Pakistan, and meanwhile India, using its godi media channels, can run a propaganda campaign. That's easier – since there is no escalation.
If India does something visible that Pakistan cannot deny, Pakistan will have to retaliate. General Khalid Kidwai, a key figure in Pakistan's nuclear policy, lays out a very clear line: QPQ+. If India does something, Pakistan will have to do quid pro quo plus. Something additional will have to be done when Pakistan retaliates. Because the Pakistan military can't afford to lose face. If they acknowledge India's action, they must retaliate.
Then the question becomes, what does India do? Retaliate again? Escalate? Step back? Does a third party – Americans, Saudis, UAE, China – intervene and say, 'guys, this is enough'? Or do intelligence agencies start talking like after Balakot and find a way to de-escalate? The political leadership in India must think through this before taking any step.
You said the Pakistani army must retaliate. Last week, Pakistan Army chief Asim Munir gave a provocative speech saying Kashmir is Pakistan's jugular vein. Do you think there's any connection between that and what happened in Pahalgam?
It's hard to say. Asim Munir is not the first to use such rhetoric. Ayub, Zia, Kayani – many have said similar things.This is a long-standing belief in a large section of the Pakistani military. There is nothing new in this.
Whether there's a direct link between Munir's speech and Pahalgam is hard to say. My sense, not based on any input, is that it was a soft target which was left unprotected. The attackers saw it as easy to hit and escape. Militants, unless they're fidayeen, want to hit and get out. They don't want to be caught up in a pitched battle. My gut feeling is that it doesn't seem directly connected to Munir's speech, but it's hard to say for sure.
Your own writing has shown that Modi actually managed domestic perception really well after Balakot, no matter the military assessment. Do you think something similar will happen or do you think that there will be some hard questions asked of the security lapses in Pahalgam?
I don't think that India's corporate-owned media, the television channels, and newspapers, where a lot of our friends work, are going to ask any tough questions whatsoever of Mr Modi or Mr Shah. They didn't ask those questions after Manipur.
They didn't even ask those questions even when the then governor of Jammu and Kashmir, Satyapal Malik, went public about everything that happened in Pulwama during the suicide bombing of the CRPF convoy. Those questions were not asked then. I doubt that the people who call themselves journalists and editors have the courage or even the capability to ask those questions.
It will be incumbent upon some analysts, some commentators, and independent platforms like Scroll, Caravan, Wire, Newsminute, Newslaundry to ask those questions.
Yes, and I think that really leaves the country weaker as these incidents show. If you do not ask questions of the government, then the government performs worse.
Absolutely. I'll say only one more thing before I end. Demanding accountability is extremely important if you want to fix things for the future. If you don't demand accountability in a democratic setup, then you are sowing seeds for future disasters.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Hindustan Times

26 minutes ago

• Hindustan Times

‘Action was so swift that we cannot express gratitude in words': Indian evacuee from Iran after Delhi touchdown

A fresh batch of Indian nationals evacuated from Iran landed safely in Delhi on Saturday under Operation Sindhu, as part of the Government of India's ongoing efforts to bring back its citizens from conflict-hit regions. Indian students returning from Iran via Armenia, under an evacuation operation facilitated by the Government of India, react while exiting from the Indira Gandhi International Airport, in New Delhi.(PTI) The Indian Embassy in Tehran coordinated the safe movement of students, while the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) ensured their safe return. An Indian national who was evacuated from Iran, Zaffar Abbas Naqvi, recounted how he and his family stayed indoors initially after hearing about the attack on Iran. They later moved to Mashhad, which also came under attack, prompting them to contact the Indian government. Naqvi praised the swift action taken by the government and thanked Prime Minister Modi and UP CM Yogi Adityanath for their support. "Everything was going fine, but one day we heard that Iran had been attacked. We stayed indoors for some time. We then moved to Mashhad. Soon Mashhad came under attack. We then contacted the Indian government. The action was so swift that we cannot express our gratitude in words. I want to thank Modi ji and Yogi ji who made all the arrangements for us...," said Naqvi. Kulsum, an Indian national evacuated from Iran, expressed relief at being back home safely, saying the situation in Iran was worrisome and the government's help was invaluable Speaking to ANI, Kulsum said, "The situation in Iran is not good. We were very worried. The government helped us a lot and brought us back home safely." Another Indian national who was evacuated from Mashhad, Mohammad Ali Qazim expressed gratitude towards the Indian government for their help in crossing the border and returning home safely. He mentioned that the situation in Iran, especially in Tehran, was not good. "I am coming from Mashhad. It feels very good to return home... We had gone on a religious journey. The situation there is not good, especially in Tehran... Indian government helped us a lot in crossing the border and bringing us to India. The UP government is also helping us a lot by taking us back home..." he said. The operation continues to bring relief to families across India, with coordinated efforts from both the Central and State governments ensuring the safe return of citizens amid the ongoing tensions in the region. Earlier, chants of 'Bharat Mata Ki Jai' and 'Hindustan Zindabad' echoed through Delhi Airport late Friday night as a special flight carrying 290 Indian nationals evacuated from Iran under Operation Sindhu touched down. Emotional returnees, including students and religious pilgrims, expressed heartfelt gratitude to the Indian government for ensuring their safe return amid the escalating Israel-Iran conflict. The special flight landed at Delhi's Indira Gandhi International Airport at 11:30 PM IST on Friday night and was received by Secretary (CPV & OIA) Arun Kumar Chatterjee. Randhir Jaiswal, a spokesperson with the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), said in a post on X, "Operation Sindhu flight brings citizens home. Evacuated 290 Indian nationals from Iran, including students and religious pilgrims, by a charter flight. The flight arrived in New Delhi at 2330 hrs on 20 June and was received by Secretary (CPV & OIA) Arun Chatterjee." He added, "The Government of India is grateful to the Government of Iran for the facilitation of the evacuation process." (ANI)

Hans India

28 minutes ago

• Hans India

Modi slams RJD for 'insulting' Ambedkar

Siwan (Bihar): Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday slammed the RJD for allegedly insulting Babasaheb Bhim Rao Ambedkar and asserted that the people of Bihar would not tolerate any disrespect to the Dalit icon. At a rally in Siwan district, which marked his fifth visit this year to the state and second in less than a month, Modi hailed the "big role" played by Bihar in India's emergence as the "third largest economy" of the world. In a nearly 45-minute-long speech that followed the launch of projects worth more than Rs 5,900 crore and the flagging off of a Vande Bharat train, the Prime Minister cautioned the people against "attempts to recapture economic resources of Bihar" by the RJD-led opposition in the assembly polls due later this year. "Ambedkar was against dynasty rule. But they (RJD and its allies) do not like it. So, they have his portrait placed at their feet. On my way, I saw posters demanding an apology for this insult to Babasaheb," said Modi. "But there has been no apology. This is because they hold Dalits in contempt. In contrast, Modi has Babasaheb in his heart and would like to keep his portrait close to his chest," he added. Modi, who did not mention RJD chief Lalu Prasad by name, referred to the instance of a portrait of Ambedkar being placed close to the feet of the ailing septuagenarian, for which he (Prasad) has been drawing flak from the BJP-led NDA. "The reason is that the RJD-Congress people have little respect for people belonging to the deprived castes, the Dalits, the OBCs and the EBCs. They consider themselves above Babasaheb Ambedkar. But they must remember that the disrespect to Babasaheb Ambedkar will not be forgiven by the people of Bihar," the PM said. Modi also asserted that the world was greatly impressed with India's progress and underscored Bihar's big role in the country's emergence as the world's "third largest economy". "You all know I have returned from abroad only yesterday. During my tour, I met many leaders of the developed world. They all were greatly impressed with the rate of progress in India. They are watching India becoming the third-largest economy in the world.

Time of India

29 minutes ago

• Time of India

'I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for stopping the war between India and Pakistan': Trump does it again

US President Donald Trump on Sunday repeated his claim that he helped stop a war between India and Pakistan but said he will never receive a Nobel Peace Prize for it. In a post on Truth Social, Trump listed a series of diplomatic efforts he claims credit for, while criticising the Nobel committee for ignoring them. 'I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for this, I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for stopping the war between India and Pakistan,' Trump wrote, referencing recent tensions between the two countries following the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Skal I på bilferie til sommer? Scandlines Læs mere Undo India had carried out targeted strikes on terror camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir in the early hours of May 7. In response, Pakistan launched attempted strikes on Indian military positions on May 8, 9, and 10. The exchange ended on May 10 following a understanding reached after direct military-level talks between the two sides. Live Events Despite India's official stance and PM Modi's confrontation with him that the ceasefire was the outcome of Director General of Military Operations (DGMO)-level dialogue, Trump claimed the de-escalation followed American diplomatic engagement. He has repeated the claim several times, stating the U.S. urged both sides to end hostilities and promised enhanced trade ties in return. The US President claimed that he will never be awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, even as he he arranged a peace treaty between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Republic of Rwanda like he did for othere nations. I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for stopping the War between Serbia and Kosovo, I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for keeping Peace between Egypt and Ethiopia (A massive Ethiopian built dam, stupidly financed by the United States of America, substantially reduces the water flowing into The Nile River)," Trump said. Trump also referenced his previous diplomatic push in the Middle East. 'I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for doing the Abraham Accords in the Middle East which, if all goes well, will be loaded to the brim with additional Countries signing on, and will unify the Middle East for the first time in 'The Ages!'' he said. 'No, I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize no matter what I do, including Russia/Ukraine, and Israel/Iran, whatever those outcomes may be, but the people know, and that's all that matters to me!' Trump concluded. Meanwhile, the Pakistan government issued a statement announcing that it would formally recommend Trump for the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize. A statement said, 'President Trump demonstrated great strategic foresight and stellar statesmanship… ultimately securing a ceasefire and averting a broader conflict.' It also praised Trump's past 'offers' on the Kashmir issue and called his role 'pivotal.' Earlier this week, President Trump hosted Pakistan's Chief of Army Staff General Asim Munir at the White House. Speaking afterward, he said, 'Reason I had him here, I want to thank him for not going into the war... ending the war.' Trump added that trade talks were underway with both India and Pakistan.