Viswanathan K's Thoughts

On Operation Sindoor and what it set off, there has been endless news, fake news, wishful news and “what one hoped was true” all jostling for attention and belief. Even now, the dust has not settled and both sides claim victory.   It is in this context that I found Pranay Kotasthane’s post refreshing. He says India’s action was significant on 3 fronts: (1) It struck terror hubs not just in PoK but also deep inside Pakistan “proper”; (2) There was no element of surprise; the build up wasn’t hidden though Pakistan didn’t know what exactly would happen. Or where . Or when exactly; (3) It was proportionate and limited to hit only elements Pakistan pretends it has nothing to do with.   Either the Pakistanis are brazen and/or they can’t fully control certain terrorists came out when: “The photos of a US-designated terrorist leading the funeral function of terrorists’ coffins draped in Pakistani flags, with Pakistani military officials in the background, further reduc...

I found Pranay Kotasthane’s view on what should be India’s policy towards Pakistan interesting. He cites the common argument that trying to improve ties is a waste of time because the Pakistani military-jihadi combo will scuttle any such attempts anyway.   Kotasthane argues India should continue its current policy of “treating Pakistan as a distraction rather than a prime focus area ”. He says: “India benefits far more from having China—and not Pakistan—as its main rival.” Why/how? “Focusing on a larger, richer, and more advanced adversary makes Indian policymakers think of “levelling up” rather than “punching down”. Countering China as a mission statement makes India focus on national power across all its dimensions — technological, economic, and military. In contrast, a focus on Pakistan makes Indian policymakers narrowly focus on counter-terrorism and conventional military power. ”   But he adds a caveat – don’t be dismissive of Pakistan either. Take Israel, ...

The Pulwama attack is back in the news again, thanks to a (current) opposition party leader and ex-Speaker in Pakistan, Sardar Ayaz Sadiq. He claimed in Pakistan’s Parliament that the reason for releasing captured Indian Air Force Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman was fear of a bigger Indian attack.   This blog, though, isn’t about the reasons why the pilot was released. Rather, it’s about something this news reminded me of, from that book of assorted assessments on China I had read some time back ( China Ascendant ). It’s a question many ask: despite being Pakistan’s so called “all-weather friend”, why didn’t China say, threaten or do anything during that episode (and other such similar incidents)?   Part of the answer is that China’s investments and support for Pakistan isn’t “altruistic” (obviously). It is about China’s strategic, bigger picture interests: (1) Part of its Silk Road/OBOR connectivity project needs to run through Pakistan, culminating in the Gwadar ...

The Osama killing is very curious. I find two aspects of it that seem irreconcilable no matter what theory is advocated: 1) Osama being found so deep in Pakistan, so close to Islamabad, so close to an army town. 2) The “Why didn’t the dog bark?” question: since Pakistan was harbouring Osama, why didn’t they try and protect him? Or at least, to shoot down the Americans once the firefight started? No matter which theory you consider, they can’t seem to explain both of the above facts. Consider these theories: a) Pakistan sold Osama out: If they did that, surely they would have been smart enough to make sure Osama was found on the border. Which violates #1 above. b) Pakistan had no idea that the Americans were coming in: Even if the Americans entered undetected (either due to massive incompetence of the Pakistani army and/or stealth technology that evaded the radars), wouldn’t Pakistan have sent soldiers once the firefight had started in Abbottabad to see what was going on? After all, the...

When the Pakistani cricket team’s spot-fixing scandal broke, one of my friends said he was just waiting to see how long it would take the Pakistanis to blame it on…who else?…India. Well, it took the twisted Pakistani mind a few days to invent the India connection but they got there. First they accused the bookie, Mazhar Majeed, of being a RAW agent. Today, I saw reports that they claim that Majeed was an agent of the players. C’mon guys, make up your mind: Is Majeed a RAW agent or your players’ agent? Or maybe he is a double agent? Now wouldn’t the twisted Pakistani mind love that theory. John le Carré should be taking tips from the Pakistanis for his plots! Next, they say the whole sting operation was a conspiracy launched by the ICC since it is headed by an Indian, Sharad Pawar. But wasn’t it a British tabloid that ran the sting and broke the story? Isn’t it Scotland Yard that’s launched an investigation into this? Or are they too “controlled” by India? Me, I am just waitin...