Op Sindoor - What's Next?

Despite a somewhat confusing turn of events leading to India readily accepting a ceasefire request from Pakistan, the actions taken by India as part of Operation Sindoor may have far-reaching effects on the future of conflict with Pakistan. 

1) Counter Intelligence - For the last two Islamic terrorist attacks, India responded in different ways. For the first one, India sent special forces into Pakistan-occupied Kashmir to eliminate the perpetrators. And the second time, India dropped precision bombs on terrorist camps, removing scores of Islamic terrorists in one go. So, the response to barbaric killings of Hindus in Pahalgam had to be not just different but severely more punishing. And the punishment rained from the sky. Indian armed forces hit multiple locations simultaneously, showcasing superior air power and Israel-level ground intelligence. The armed forces knew where to attack and what they were targeting, allowing them to select precise ammunition. These two advantages show that Indian intelligence has an excellent network of deeply embedded assets within Pakistan and Islamic terrorist organizations. Now, Pakistan not only has to worry about its completely exposed defense and defensive infrastructure, but it will have a tough time trusting anyone within its carefully built Islamic terrorist asset network. 

2) "I will look for you, I will find you, and I will kill you" is a famous line from the action movie "Taken." The Indian attack strategy, in response to the Pahalgam attack, embodies the spirit of this dialogue. Indian political establishment finally crossed the mental barrier of 'jaane do' and decided to go for the kill. From now on, India's response to any Islamic terrorist attack from Pakistan will be unleashing violence. There will not be any equivocation in response. For the first time since the start of Islamic terrorism in India, i.e., since 1989 onwards, India has decided not only to respond but respond with a decidedly higher proportion. The operations will no longer be covert and time-bound. Instead, the response will be like an escalation matrix. The counter-response from Pakistan will be dealt with at a step higher intensity. The only way out for Pakistan will be a total defeat or a quick surrender. 

3) The Indus Water Treaty weapon - India has finally invoked this weapon after more than 60 years. India always played the role of a big brother and allowed water to flow unabated into Pakistan. India did not even take its share of water as per the agreement and even allowed that water to flow into Pakistan. I don't know why we tried to be so magnanimous. Pakistan wants to occupy not just Kashmir but also kill Hindus in India. Their state policies and strategic goal of Pakistan, especially since Zia-ul-Haq's reign in the 1980s, has been to destroy or dismantle India, come what may. Pakistan sees itself as a soldier of Islam and considers attacking Hindu India as its sacred duty. How do you deal with such delusion? Certainly not through any sensible dialogue or through any rational understanding. The message, then, must be delivered from a position of strength and might. And among many options, leveraging Indust water is essential. Almost 90% of Pakistan's agricultural land relies on the life-giving waters of the Indus River for irrigation. This vital water source is the backbone of the country's farming industry, nurturing the fields that feed the nation. When a river runs dry or overflows its banks, the consequences are immediate and far-reaching, affecting the lives of tens of millions of people. The ripple effects of such events can transform communities overnight, leaving people struggling to adapt to a new reality. The Pakistani junta immediately labeled India's suspension of the Indus Water Treaty as an 'act of war,' and rightfully so. And just like the conventional war they lost in 48 hours, the Pakitan quickly realized they could not win the 'water' war either. Perhaps thirst and hunger will bring some sense to them. Or maybe not! 

The consistent message from Indian political leaders and the Indian army is that they have established a red line. If Pakistan crosses that line, it will face severe consequences, including the destruction of its military resources and widespread starvation for millions. However, Pakistan will not stop its provocative behavior. They may remain quiet for a while until the situation calms down, but they are likely to revert to their old tactics soon enough. And when that happens, the real question is whether the Indian government and military will uphold the sanctity of the red line they have drawn.

Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?

Was the recent brief conflict between India and Pakistan a lost opportunity for India to inflict lasting damage on Pakistan? The dust has not yet settled in Pakistan from all the body-blow bombings Pakistan received from the Indian Air Force. So, to assess the war's outcome is a bit of a dicey proposition. The Indian armed forces and the Government of India (GoI) have also clarified that any adventure, either militarily or through proxy actors, will be considered an act of war. In short, the military hostilities may resume at any moment. 

The Background:

After the brutal killings of innocent Hindu tourists in Kashmir, the GoI and Indian armed forces did not fall for a knee-jerk reaction. Instead, the armed forces and the government machinery started working in sync in shaping the response to the latest Islamic terrorist attack. The foreign ministry assiduously worked on foreign relations, while the armed forces must have put finishing touches on the plans to punish Pakistan. Not a single soul in India or abroad thought that these dastardly terrorist attacks would go unpunished. The buzz surrounding India's potential response sparked intense speculation: how robust would their retaliation be, and what goals would be accomplished through their attack? I feel the latter part of the question, where the wheels may have come off. 

The Response: 

Wow! The Indian armed forces unleashed a breathtaking display of power from the skies, a sight that left the Pakistanis in awe like never before! All three arms of the defence came together and unleashed the punishment. The technology was advanced, and so were the strategies. The escalatory steps were measured and precise. Initially, only the Islamic terrorist camps in Pakistani-occupied Kashmir and mainland Pakistan, spread across hundreds of kilometers, were hit virtually simultaneously with deadly precision by Indian firepower. Though Pakistanis will never confirm the exact number of deaths, hundreds of people, including some of the most dreaded terrorists, met their final fate before even knowing what hit them. The response from Pakistan was rather meek. They tried to increase the theater of war across the entire India-Pakistan border, but they did that by launching hundreds of drones. The strategy was futuristic, but it had two fatal flaws. First, they underestimated the defensive prowess of India, and second, they vastly overestimated the offensive prowess of the Chinese imports they had deployed. The counter response from the Indian forces was indeed a game changer, where an assortment of missiles from all three branches of the armed forces targeted a variety of Pakistani armed infrastructure across the length and breadth of their country. The airbases, seaports, and even Pakistan's nuclear fuel base were bombed with very high accuracy by Indian missiles. Bombings by the advanced Brahmos missile was the punch that brought sense to the Pakistan army brass. They immediately dialled world powers and unfurled the white flag. Pakistan called for a ceasefire, and to everyone's astonishment, India swiftly agreed! 

And just like that, India again let go of Pakistan without Pakistan facing consequences for its actions. Pakistan can quickly build the airbases, ports, or runways of strategic importance. And Pakistanis will replace the dead terrorist with fresh recruits in no time. India did not even extract a minimal price from Pakistan for agreeing on the ceasefire. India could have asked them to hand over Hafiz Saeed in return for a truce? Maybe India could have asked for Dawood Ibrahim? Forget about these old-timer Islamic jihadi terrorists, India did not even ask Pakistan to hand over the master handlers of the Pehelgam attack! 

What were India's real gains from all of this?

The Expectations: 

Going into this conflict, India had strong international support, immense support from the Indians, and strong support from all political parties. The Indian economy is growing robustly, and the forex reserve is at a record high. In short, all the winds required to sail were present. And yet, India did not go for the Pakistani 'jugular'. The PoK was never physically attacked, and the Indian army never crossed the international border. Indian forces did not harm Pakistani civilians despite Pakistanis repeatedly attempting to kill Indian civilians. There were no threats to support Balochistan independence. Can we not have at least levelled the Karachi port? The armed forces and our honorable Prime Minister repeatedly discuss teaching Pakistan a lesson. I'm curious about the lesson that was meant to resonate with Pakistan. There was jargon like 'deterrants', or 'defensive offence',  liberally thrown around, but it means nothing. Pakistan lost few jet planes, some radars, some airstrips but Pakistani will to create a Islamist Jihadi state, hell bent on destroying India and kill Hindus in India, is intact. The means may change, but their objective remains the same. I don't think they are even frightened of anything. If they can make India back down so quickly, what is there to be afraid of? 

People will point towards India suspending the Indus Water Treaty. The step was pending for a long time. But India cannot logistically stop the Indus water right away. The infrastructure to halt or divert water enough to impact Pakistani agriculture adversely will take years, if not decades, to build. If only this is to be treated as the win for India, then we could have done that without any attacks. Launching BrahMos is meaningless if we are not following that with something of such a proportion that Pakistan will not even think about doing anything stupid ever again! 

The Aftermath:

India's sheer military power was on display during this short war, and inversely, Pakistan's sheer lack of it was also displayed. However, India's military might not have changed the status quo. The Pakistani army and jihadis in Pakistan will regroup. They will take their time gaining strength, and they will bide their time for the right opportunity, and then they will again unleash Islamic terrorism on India. 

The Modi government may have had legitimate reasons to withdraw entirely from the war. But for now, it feels like a huge letdown and a missed opportunity. 

Pahalgam and The War Frontier!

The recent Pahalgam attack was a shock to the system. The barbaric nature of it is not new to Kashmir since the Kashmiri Islamists have done a lot worse during the ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Hindus in 1989. There have been attacks on Hindu pilgrims in the early 2000s, where scores were gunned down. All those attacks perpetrated by Islamic terrorists are only towards Hindus and for them being Hindus. All the stories from Kashmir of the local population being very helpful towards the tourists during this time confuse me. The "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" nature of local Kashmiri is hard to fathom. The local Kashmiri will be the first one to pay a hefty price for this dastardly act. Most have nothing to do with the attack, yet tourism will take a massive hit. All the 'shikaras,' restaurants, and hotels will be empty for some time. I hope the economic catastrophe will be short-term. 

The second party to face the music, and rightfully so, will be Pakistan. The country is virtually broke. Hence, they continue to trudge along after throwing themselves in the bed of whoever loans them money. First, it was the US, a combination of Saudis and UAE. However, the US has pulled back, and Saudi/UAE has put filters on their money supply. So, Pakistan decided to change the beds with China. That 'relationship' is not going well, and it is a matter of time before Pakistan looks for a new 'partner.' But this time, there may not be any suitable prospects. 

The state of Pakistan has been in a terminal decline for decades now. Despite ample resources regarding the fertile land of Indus (home of the oldest civilization in the world), trading ports, and mineral wealth of Balochistan, the economy is less than the economy of Mumbai. The population of Pakistan is 250 million, while the population of Mumbai is 15 million! The economy of Pakistan has been shrinking for the last few years. The hand loans from Arab friends have been drying, the fake money racket they successfully ran for decades came to a halt after demonetization in India a few years ago, and Chinese funds did not add much value to Pakistan's economy. A country can survive political instability, insurrection, coup, or rebellion, but enduring economic instability for a sustained period is almost impossible. People have to eat, so they have to work; if either does not happen for an extended period, the state or the society will fail. Pakistan is close to that point. The question is, why do these bloody shenanigans in India? Why not pay attention internally? And Build a road or two!

Two reasons- first, the old habits die hard, and second, no one in Pakistan knows how to govern their country anymore. The geopolitical events that Pakistan has expertly leveraged to its advantage in the past do not consider Pakistan valid. The 'West' was done with the Cold War more than 35 years ago, while the 'new world order' of post-9/11 happened more than 20 years ago. Pakistan, which is central to these events, has not gotten over it, though. Pakistani Army leveraged these events to milk billions of dollars from the West to fill their pockets and also to continually finger India for no apparent gains. The world has since moved from these events. India has grown into an economic powerhouse, and India's military forces, as recently as four years ago, gave a bloody nose to China. Yet, Pakistan continues to see the world through the lens of India (and Hindus!) Pakistan army and uneducated masses still dream of destroying Hindu India. In this delusion of theirs, Pakistan is the forebearer of Islamic invaders and marauders from medieval times, where they are the only 'true' soldiers of Islam. Pakistan, unfortunately, could never develop any other identity beyond religious zealotry. Any identity or ideology that is not progressive is on the road to perdition. 

The tragedy is these religious dimwits will drag the innocents as well.

How will India and India's political leadership react to this? The initial signals are measured and mixed. There was no immediate military action at the border. However, a far more ominous step that India took was to announce their desire to block Indus water into Pakistan. Stopping Indus water will not be easy and will not be a quick leverage. The infrastructure and logistics will take some time. But when this happens, the majority of Pakistan will die of thirst, and whoever is left will starve. Asymmetric warfare is a new frontier in India-Pak conflict that does not bode well for Pakistan.   

None of these are good signs for Pakistan. Worse, none of the key world powers said anything against India's initial steps. Even the usual suspects like the United Kingdom and China have kept mum. There is very likely to be military action. The Indian public is essentially expecting and demanding it. The last such wanton terrorist act was met with precise military actions deep within Pakistan's boundary. Something more significant than the last one is likely to happen. 

How does Pakistan react to it? I don't know, but their reaction will decide their fate. If they react violently, it will lead to further escalation from the Indian armed forces, even leading to the independence of Balochistan. 

"He tells it like it is"

 

 (The cartoon is original from The New Yorker. The cartoonist is Paul Noth. All rights belong to Mr. Noth and to The New Yorker.) 

The Trump Presidency is living up to its billing and more. He did promise 'change,' didn't he? Despite Trump's Presidency 1.0 experience, people still are not ready to believe in what he is capable of. There is no way an American President will side with a Russian dictator! There is no way an American President would dump its Western ally in a war and change sides on a dime! There is no way an American President so openly asks the embittered country to sign their valuable minerals away, and that too, to the businesses associated with the President himself! And there is no way an American President openly threatens DEI initiatives, and voila! the DEI initiatives of corporate America just vanish! 

And all this happened in the first two months of the Trump administration! 

President Trump's maverick style of functioning has left commentators and pundits dizzy. The chutzpah of his Presidency was not entirely unexpected; it is still breathtaking nonetheless. For the last few decades, especially during the Reagan era, the American Presidency has devolved into a mixture of backroom dealings and front-end PR marketing/management. This approach was successful to an extent as well. The American President is portrayed not just the leader of his own country but of the entire world. He (and it has to be a 'he'!) is a leader of a 'Free world,' whatever that means. And he is the only one who can save the non-free world from being non-free! There is a huge difference between a 'world power' and a 'world leader'. In this increasingly multi-polar world, it is quite tough and in fact, counter-productive, to be a world leader. But I guess the PR campaign of being a 'world leader' was too good for its own good. The American President drank their own cool-aid too much. For example, President Obama, who was given the Nobel Peace Prize within a month of assuming his Presidency, started lecturing the rest of the world as if he was talking to kindergarten kids. If you notice his tone and his way of interactions as he progressed into his second term, President Obama became increasingly patronizing in his manners. Both Republicans and Democrats are the culprits of riding on a high horse, but Democrats always came out haughty, especially when dealing with non-Western and non-Muslim nations. Perhaps, while playing the role of a 'world leader', these Presidents lost touch with their own countrymen? Democrats undoubtedly did lose the sight and were caught completely flat-footed in the last election against the onslaught of Trump's campaign. 

President Trump upended the Presidential campaign customs by doing away with various campaign tactics and ushering the petty strategies like name calling and relying on theatrics. This maverick approach has worked for him two out of three times. He is now employing the same tactics in dealing with international geopolitics. For example, he straightaway asked Hamas to come to the table and release the hostages or face his wrath. And Hamas promptly obliged. Now, an argument can be made  that truce negotiations were already in play from the time of the Biden administration. Still, the reality is that during the Biden administration, the war continued to rage, while, a truce was signed even before the ink dried on Trump's Inauguration invite cards. As if this sort of bravado was not enough, he doubled down and proposed a completely radical and rediculous 'solution' to the Gaza issue. The proposal is indeed laughable. But it's hard to know when Trump is bluffing. In any case, that laughable proposal put enough pressure on Hamas not to re-engage in stupidities. 

A similar situation is unfolding on the Ukraine front. The war has been raging for years already. During this time, no one ever talked about peace or a truce. The shenanigans at the White House that Trump and his deputy, Vance, unleashed may shockingly lead to peace on the Ukraine front. That does not mean the deal will benefit Ukraine. There are very few positive options for Ukraine in this situation. And despite not being an aggressor against Russia, they are likely to lose part of their country. Especially given the Trump administration  swiftly changing the course of action. From the Trump administration's perspective, they will not militarily support and fund the war on behalf of the EU. It could be a wise decision for US, at least in the short run. Not a great outcome for Ukraine but an outstanding result for Russia. 

 

On the tariff front, Trump is keeping his word. Overall, the tariffs do not help anyone. Having said that, the reality is, most of the middle-American populace did not benefit from the currently structured international trade. Manufacturing jobs have essentially vanished from the US, literally stolen by Chinese government by indirectly subsidizing manufacturing in China. The Americans are left with being consumers, funding Chinese economy and emboldening Chinese military aggression. In such situation, a pushback was but natural. The so-called left-liberals of Democrats did not effectively address this issue with the populace. Moreover, the earlier establishment did not even attempt to hold China accountable for its actions. The Trump administration seems to radically change this situation by imposing a very high tariff against China and effectively positioning China as the country's numero-uno adversary. 

I am not arguing that all the steps taken by the Trump administration are logical. A good number of those decisions and steps sound crazy, and some of those decisions are certainly going to backfire spectacularly. The administration is still in the post-poll honeymoon period to worry too much about any sort of repercussions. The electoral pushback will happen in subsequent local elections. However, the alacrity with which the Trump administration is trying to fulfill the electoral promises assures that the world order will be rearranged. 

But the veneer of the American President being a cigar-chewing alien-fighting fighter pilot has taken a hit. The image of an over-the-top, unhinged, rambling, side-shifting President changing world order will stick around for a while. Good for us, Obama was just too nauseating. 

End Of The Road For Kejariwal?

 

The Delhi assembly elections concluded a couple of days ago, and the exit polls released yesterday indicated a stunning defeat for the Aam Aadmi Party. In recent years, exit polls have frequently provided inaccurate predictions. A notable example is the last Lok Sabha general elections, where it was widely assumed that the BJP would secure at least 320 seats, but the party ended up with only 240 seats, which was a significant disappointment. It is possible that the exit polls are also mispredicting the results of the Delhi assembly elections. Perhaps the exit polls are also mispredicting Delhi assembly results. 

As we keep a close eye on the election canvassing, we see some intriguing developments that could pose challenges for AAP. It’s important to note that both the party and Arvind Kejriwal have had a compelling rise, largely thanks to media coverage that painted them as champions of the common man. Kejriwal emerged as a figure of hope for many, a refreshing change in a political landscape often marred by corruption. He skillfully navigated the complexities of politics, gaining significant popularity along the way.

However, it seems Kejriwal may have misjudged the voters' perceptions. People are sharp and can see beyond the surface—many have sensed a shift from the idealism that once defined him to a more conventional, power-driven approach. Nonetheless, voters still showed their support during the assembly elections for several reasons. The Congress party’s tarnished reputation created a yearning for change, and the BJP wasn’t able to present a strong contender to challenge Kejriwal's position.

This situation opened a door for new possibilities. Voters were eager to embrace an innovative force, hoping for improvement. Unfortunately, rather than truly reading the room, Kejriwal may have let the adulation cloud his vision. While he certainly gained skills in political maneuvering, it’s crucial to remain grounded and connected to the people to sustain that trust and support. 

The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has consistently struggled to gain support beyond voters in Delhi and Punjab. While the party had a remarkable victory in Punjab, successfully taking the state from the Congress party, this was the peak of its achievements. Since then, the AAP has suffered defeats in three consecutive Lok Sabha elections and has not won a single Lok Sabha seat in Delhi, since its inception. This lack of success indicates a growing maturity and perceptiveness among voters. 

The cantankerous nature of the party and of Kejriwal may have finally become tiresome for the voters. His current incredulous promises likely sound hollow, and the circus shows he orchestrated during his arrest for corruption may have turned voters against him. It could also simply be a case of anti-incumbency. Regardless of the reason, it is evident that Kejriwal is not receiving the responses he was once accustomed to. This has made him desperate for new antics, such as accusing the Haryana government of poisoning the water supply. However, even that allegation has failed to generate any significant controversy. It seems that even his supporters in the media have abandoned him. Although the BJP has struggled to establish a coherent strategy in its Delhi unit over the past decade, they are likely to gain more seats simply because Kejriwal's dramatic antics are losing their charm.

Losing power in Delhi is simply not an option for Kejriwal. Without control over Delhi, he would feel like a fish out of water. Losing this position would immediately strip him of the media platform he currently wields. Moreover, if he loses Delhi, funding will dwindle. It's important to note that Kejriwal has already faced significant challenges, having spent months in jail despite being the Chief Minister. If he were to lose his position now, his situation would be even more precarious. As AAP navigates the political landscape with virtually no foothold in the Lok Sabha and solely in control of Punjab, it finds itself at a crucial crossroads that could define its very existence. Will they rise to the occasion, or is an existential crisis on the horizon?

I still expect the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) to win the elections with a clear majority, despite the exit polls. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) will also secure a substantial number of seats. As a result, the Delhi assembly will finally have a significant opposition presence. I feel positive about this outcome. It is about time that one of the most dishonest politicians and his disreputable party are shown their place. 

Mr. Manmohan Singh - Tale Of a 'Footnote'!

Recently, former Prime Minister of India, Shri Manmohan Singh, died of old age. Tributes poured in, hailing him as one of India's most extraordinary Prime Ministers. Albeit lower in the ranking than the Gandhi dynasty PMs! Mr. Singh, a Finance Minister in PM P.V. Narasimha Rao's government, is primarily credited for liberalizing India's economy in 1991. Fast forward a decade or so, and Mr. Singh was selected to be the Prime Minister of India in 2004 by his party's chief, Sonia Gandhi. Mr. Singh played that role for 10 years, presiding over some of the biggest scandals in post-independent India. Mr. Singh was not known to be loquacious, but he virtually turned mute in his second term. He refused to speak with the Press and forgot that it was his constitutional expectation to have a dialogue with his fellow citizens. Mr. Singh didn't even take the chance to call out his inept and corrupt ministers for their glaring incompetence and dishonesty. 

The country's economy stalled, and constant controversies completely paralyzed the decision-making in the government. It is hard to know why Mr. Singh did not take any steps to stop the scandals, fire the corrupt ministers, or attempt to make critical decisions. While his reputation as a noncorrupt PM remained unblemished, his reputation as a PM nose-dived. Mr. Singh's political masters refused to acknowledge the impact of Mr. Singh's meek leadership on India or the subsequent general election. The party got drubbing of historic proportion, and much of that blame lay at Mr. Singh's feet. After losing power, instead of graciously retiring, Mr. Singh remained an upper house member. Unsurprisingly, he continued to assail the next government on the key issues he would have championed in his days. 

Mr. Singh's political career is a story of prioritizing serving the Gandhi family above the country and presiding over some of the biggest scandals since India's independence. Back in 1991, a period when he did not directly serve Gandhi, he opened the Indian economy to the world. How much credit should we credit Mr. Singh for liberalization? Close reading of decision-making at that time will tell a different story. Mr. Singh did not want to or even championed liberalizing the economy. Multiple bad decisions successive Congress governments made in the past two decades finally caught up. India was about to face the harsh reality of economic pain and depredation. To stave off that scenario, Mr. Singh and his finance ministry decided to open up the Indian economy. It is worth noting that by design or sheer happenstance, Mr. Singh's tenure as a finance minister also saw some of the biggest financial scandals of those days. Presiding over scandals while continuing to showcase how he is the Saint of Uncorrupt is the game Mr. mastered during his term as the Prime Minister. We can argue that, during his period as PM of India, his absolute and utmost deference to Sonia Gandhi borders slave mentality. 

Mr. Singh did not understand that he expected to govern and serve the people of India. Instead, he thought that his priority was to serve Sonia Gandhi. At least by one account, he always said that 'there cannot be two power centers.' He was correct, but being PM meant he was to be the power center and not Sonia Gandhi. As his premiership descended into chaos, his legacy lurched from one scandal into another. But then, what else can be expected from a person who is 'selected' to be the PM? The people of India did not elect him; why would he worry about serving them? One glaring example that encapsulates his governance is his meekly surrendering his constitutional authority and responsibility to NAC -  National Advisory Committee- a non-elected, non-governmental, and non-constitutional authority run by Sonia Gandhi that essentially took decisions on behalf of the government. This sort of set-up was not only an affront to Indian democracy, but it was unconstitutional. Yet. Mr. Singh remained quiet. Maybe his sole hope lay in receiving a grand state farewell as he embarked on his next journey: something that eluded his former boss and our former PM, Mr. Narasimha Rao. 

Not many people get the opportunity to lead a country. Mr. Singh had that opportunity not once but twice. Instead of using his intelligence to improve the nation and benefit his fellow citizens, he leaves behind no meaningful legacy. History will not need to be kind to him; he will merely be a footnote!