India and Pakistan still close to war

India and Pakistan toned down the rhetoric yesterday in the bitter Kashmir dispute that has fuelled international fears of the world's first nuclear war.

But the Indian Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee, continued to reject proposals for a direct meeting with the Pakistani President, Pervez Musharraf, to defuse the crisis, despite the presence of both leaders at a regional summit in central Asia.

Mr Vajpayee ruled out face- to-face talks with General Musharraf until India obtained proof that Pakistan had stopped incursions into the Indian-controlled portion of the disputed territory of Kashmir.

The two leaders have been under international pressure to back away from a conflict which, if it became nuclear, could cost 12 million lives, according to Pentagon estimates. Russia's President, Vladimir Putin, will be the latest leader to try to persuade the two men – in separate talks on the sidelines of the summit in Kazakhstan's capital, Almaty – to find a peaceful solution.

The West's co-ordinated decision to advise nationals to leave India and Pakistan appears to be part of the pressure applied on the two governments to underscore how seriously they should be taking the crisis.

Several hundred Britons are understood to have returned home since the Foreign Office issued its warning on Friday, and evacuation plans to airlift up to 20,000 UK nationals out of India and Pakistan in case of conflict are being prepared.

General Musharraf, speaking on his way to the Almaty summit, said: "Pakistan will not start a war. We support solving the conflict through peaceful means."

On Saturday, he began playing down the risk of nuclear war, saying that no sane person would contemplate such a prospect. India's Defence Minister, George Fernandes, responded by saying he was "very happy that he [Mr Musharraf] has realised that only the insane would go for a bomb".

But Mr Fernandes also sought to minimise the risk of nuclear conflict with Pakistan. "India will not be impulsive," he said. "Neither will we waver in our determination for the simple reason that what we have been fighting and will continue to fight is the war against terrorism – the same terrorism which hit the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon".

Mr Fernandes said India would respect its pledge not to be the first to use nuclear arms.

Prospects of an early resolution of the crisis appeared remote, even though Mr Musharraf was offering to meet Mr Vajpayee "anywhere and at any level".

The parties have been kicking a lot of dirt on each other recently. Trying to provoke the other, or prove their bonifides for their constituents back home. The Hindis are leaning forward, the Pakis seem to be doing doing their best (e.g., launchers, missles) to dare India to cross the line.

The leftist paradigm allows the weaker Pakis to attack India via proxy without penalty, while India must show "restraint". India appears well past restraint at this stage. Massive buildups along the LoC by India are a logical step to slow militant infiltrations. Now add to that the muslim 'humiliation' issue, so that the Pakis feel obligated to respond to the Indian build-up. If Pakistan (or the terrorists) engage in some provocation too far, India responds by attacking conventionally. Pakistan responds conventionally, but is soon overwhelmed in the air and at sea. Some Paki field commander, fearing the worst or about to be over-run, resorts to tactical nukes (Paki nuke protocols are reportedly very bad - Musharraf claims he has no control, doesn't know the location of Paki nukes. If they're in the field as reported, even if under "loyal" commanders, their security is significantly at risk). India responds in kind, heavily. Total flight time: 3-5 minutes. The World's Shortest and Deadliest War.

If the Pakis simply backed away from the border and put away their toys, world pressure on India to do likewise would be impossible to ignore. However, that would be 'humiliating' to the Pakis ( It's a Muslim Thing, You Wouldn't Understand^© ), so it doesn't seem likely. The US could put its troops in harm's way. That would stop the Hindis, but perversely it would motivate the Paki terrorists. If India pulls back, the Paki fundamentalists would see that as a sign of victory and redouble their efforts. A "Mexican Standoff" of sorts.

Jihadis in Kashmir are the wildcard. Conversations between Washington, New Delhi and Islamabad are meaningless if the terrorists cannot be contained. Paki military middle-management seems reluctant to shut them down. India is unlikely to be 100% successful in stopping infiltrations. Further attacks in Indian-controlled Kashmir and elsewhere are therefore likely to occur. If sufficiently provocative, they could push New Delhi to act -- either low-intensity (targeting militant camps along the LoC) or high-intensity (targeting Paki nukes, command structures, Paki high ground, etc).

The grim conclusion: apparently the Pakis, a textbook failure of a society, immersed in grinding poverty, swimming in a soup of self-pity, self-righteousness, and self-hatred, infected with jihad fevers, sees martyrdom as an 'honorable' out. They'll welcome war -- and risk everything -- because they have nothing to lose. A societal death wish.

An alternative (and more hopeful) spin on events to date is that Mush is ratcheting up the rhetoric (and here) to cover for the crackdown on the jihadis. Mush is whipping the Pakis into a near-frenzy over the nuke option. Meanwhile, he is cracking down on the bad players. India eventually sees that LoC activities have dropped significantly, so they can pull back. Mush can then claim that India withdrew because they feared Paki nukes. Dangerous posturing, but better than the alternative. The sudden surge in (apparently coordinated) evac orders (e.g., UK, US, UN, Israel, Australia, France, Canada, and New Zealand) suggests that this scenario is low probability (the great powers are firing a diplomatic warning shot). However, (or as a result) Mush has been saying more conciliatory things (and here and here and here) in the last 48 hours. While India is responding in kind (and here), they may not be able to rely on even private US reassurances regarding Paki intentions given Mush's history. So the area rests on a hair trigger.

I think Mush is trying to clamp down on the jihadis, with an order to stop infiltrations (and here and here), but he does't have complete cooperation. Hopefully he'll convince the ISI troops to cool it for the 2 weeks that India demands. We'll see. Are there any wild-eyed fanatics beyond ISI control out there? Probably. If the jihadis, or even key segments of the Paki military, spin out of control, all bets are off.

The most disconcerting issue is the question of Paki control over their own nukes. There are multiple reports on loose management of Paki nukes. The sources quoted above are not all considered highly reliable, but some (U.S.) seem to be reasonably reliable. And they do paint a consistent picture. Does Musharraf have control? One hopes so, but given the level of sophistication in that part of the world, it is easy to imagine that fail-safe and C&C procedures are weak, especially with tactical nukes. I find it difficult to imagine that Pakistan has multiple, secure, nuclear-storage facilities, for example. The religious, political, and personal ambitions of the key Paki players makes it an interesting brew.

Finally, there is the hope of a deus ex machina scenario that isn't public knowledge. Does the US have assets on the ground or in the sky to help pinpoint the location of Paki nukes in real-time? One fervently hopes.

Freegards,

MI

As for Pakistan, Pakistan's economy is being destroyed by the mobilization, so their situation is different, and Pakistan can't afford a big war. >> this is what Reagan did to America and India is doing to Pakistan. India can keep troops mobilised in frontline FOREVER - Pakistan will go broke in a year ( i.e. if it is not already ). But there is a delicious irony somewhere - Pakistan tried to emulate the American model in tackling Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. US armed the Islamic insurgents and Soviet withdrew after facing unacceptable caualties. The same bunch of Islamist US supported came back after 10 years to destroy WTC and damage Pentagon.

Pakistan has tried to do the same experiment with Kashmir - arming and supporting Islamic millitants. The difference is that the Indian Army is a voluntary force itching to kill the enemy while the Soviet force was that of 18 year old conscripts crying for Mommy. And economically India is 10X of Pakistan unlike the US - Russia equation where the power supporting the millitants ( Afghan Mujaheddin ) was stronger . I predict the Jehadis that Pakistan has cultivated and then ditched will come back to do a September 11 on Pakistan in the next 5 years.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.


The India-Pakistani Conflict... some background information-