India can stop Pak terror only if it dismantles the support system

medium120615224Absence of terrorist attacks should never be mistaken for the end of terrorism. This was underscored on April 22 in Pahalgam. A lull in activity may indicate that militant groups are lying low — regrouping, rebuilding local networks, or re-establishing safe houses and arms caches. Conversely, a rise in casualties and clashes does not necessarily suggest that terrorists are gaining the upper hand.It could just as well point to improved intelligence and operational readiness on the part of security forces, enabling them to intercept infiltrators as they cross borders, or flush out militants from their hideouts. An appropriate response to the Pahalgam attack must be swift, and suspending the Indus Waters Treaty — along with a suite of other measures — has been the correct first step.Terrorism can only wither when its support systems — funding, arms and recruitment — are dismantled, or severely disrupted. To engage with Pakistan means engaging Pakistan with force, not across the table. Many would have heard Pakistan Army chief Asim Munir’s recent remarks invoking the ‘civilisational differences’ between Hindus and Muslims. Don’t expect a shift in stance. His statements reflect a deeply ingrained, Islamist and anti-Hindu ideological mindset.With Pakistan’s economy in disarray and unrest simmering in Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Rawalpindi is angling for a bailout. What better way than to stir trouble, play the victim card, and hope the US or China comes rushing in — treats in hand — to rescue their favoured poodle?Pakistan is unlikely to change course, given its deep-rooted embrace of a radical interpretation of Islam — one that considers even Shias, Bohras and Ahmadis as heretical non-Muslims. In this world view, being ruled by non-Muslims is unacceptable, making jihad not just permissible but obligatory. While some West Asian countries are gradually distancing themselves from such rigid doctrines, Pakistan clings to them — largely because this ideology forms the core of its national identity and state narrative.After the 1965 war, India’s forces captured the strategically vital Haji Pir pass in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). Yet, that hard-won advantage was relinquished at Tashkent. History shows that talks are often misread as a sign of Indian weakness under terrorist pressure. Worse, they offer Pakistan a chance to regroup, recalibrate and deceive — once again.Zulfikar Ali Bhutto arrived in Shimla in 1972, having instructed scientists to begin work on a nuclear bomb. In a moment of magnanimity, India gave away at the negotiating table what it had won on the battlefield — 93,000 prisoners of war and captured territory. It was a justifiable moment to press for a lasting resolution on Kashmir. But the opportunity was squandered. medium nocaptionhttps://pll.tgsession.com/3sw658_7hzteqpqoj/1kaAAQpOM0YYcN?2qxpm=1ou-bppFlkz8V2BROztPjyx cycle of magnanimous diplomacy continued, despite little justification. We rode to Islamabad even as Pakistanis, led by Pervez Musharraf, began their ascent up the heights of Kargil along the northern slopes. They were eventually pushed back. But, once again, at great cost.There was magnanimity again by inviting Musharraf to Agra in July 2001. He scored a major psychological victory by holding a press conference. The talks failed, as they were bound to, because Musharraf arrived in Agra posing as the victor of Kargil, and demanding the moon.The list of attacks by Pakistan-backed or Pakistani operatives is long and tragic, including the hijacking of IC-814 (1999), Chittisinghpura massacre (2000), Amarnath/Nunwan base camp massacre (2000), Mumbai train bombings (2006), and 26/11 (2008).All these terrorist attacks, including the latest one in Pahalgam, have an internal dimension that hasn’t been fully addressed. There may have been security lapses at various levels — some unintentional, others deliberate. Clearly, there’s a mechanism that gathers, correlates and transmits this information to terrorists. While an investigation will undoubtedly follow, along with lessons learnt and potential remedies, it’s important to remember that security forces can’t be omnipresent. We must all learn to be security-conscious and take precautions, making the task easier for those who protect us.Talks, whether now or in the future, will inevitably be interpreted as a sign of Indian weakness under terrorist pressure. Moreover, they offer Pakistan an opportunity to regroup and deceive once again.For any genuine progress, Pakistan must provide evidence of a change in both heart and intention. But herein lies the challenge. Pakistan’s military and civilian rulers cannot afford to demonstrate this change without risking their own survival. The country’s homegrown Islamic terrorism and its ideology are now deeply entrenched in the system. And as is the case everywhere else in the world, the voices of moderation are too quiet, too silenced to make a difference.The writer is former head, R&AW