India wins battle of narratives on terrorism

Pakistan’s double-speak on terror has been exposed internationally; its version of “Indian excesses” doesn’t have many takers

There is no question of ‘whodunnit’ when it comes to breeding terror infrastructure and motivations in Pakistan. The State is complicit directly or indirectly, and therefore the finger has to point sharply at the Pakistani State. However, the components of the ‘State’ in the Pakistani narrative can change with time, with the varying degrees of leverage afforded to the broad troika of the Pakistani ‘establishment’ (read Military), civilian politicians, and the revisionist forces of the clergy. These institutions jostle or align with each other to protect their respective relevance in the national imagination.

However, when it comes to ‘enemising’ India – each of this troika is fully aligned and lends its respective wherewithal to sully the dark agenda. The entire edifice of the overentitled Pakistani military is predicated on ‘defending’ Pakistan from the ‘enemy number 1’ i.e., India (with the shame of Bangladesh in 1971 still haunting the Pakistani military). Civilian politicians have inherited a moth-eaten and regressive (even contradictory) sovereign underpinning as the only nation to be created in the name of religion – leading to a no-holds-barred one-upmanship vis-à-vis a secular India. Whereas the clergy seeks solace in Choudhry Rahmat Ali’s inherent puritanism whilst birthing the idea of the ‘land of the pure’ or Pakistan. The coalescing of all three on the common agenda of India has resulted in each of these three working in tandem or even in silos to contribute to the India-facing terror infrastructure.

Terror organisations like Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) have all received material, financial, ideological, logistical, and operational help from the troika of the Pakistani establishment, politicians, and clergy. The mutative nature of these organisations to survive despite so many red flags can be exemplified in the case of LeT with its infamous founder, Hafiz Saeed (amongst the seed financiers was Osama Bin Laden!). This terror organisation was behind the 2008 Mumbai attack, amongst many others, and that led to international outrage and for it to change the nomenclature to Jamaat-ud-Dawa. It was window-dressing at best, and it openly continued proselytising and supporting terror activities in India. Its intermeshing with the Pakistani State was described by Stephen Tankel: “the Pakistani army and its powerful Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI) have long considered LeT to be the country’s most reliable proxy against India and the group still provides utility in this regard as well as the potential for leverage at the negotiating table”.

However, following the shame of an entry in the ‘Grey List’ of countries that sponsor terrorism as confirmed by a global watchdog agency, FATF (Financial Action Task Force), Islamabad did sheepishly ban LeT. But the worst-kept secret was that it was a complete eyewash with its nefarious operations and planning continuing unabated.

Today, yet another proxy front of LeT i.e., The Resistance Front (TRF), has emerged as the principal accused behind the horrific Pahalgam terror attack. The leader of this outfit is Sheikh Sajjad Gul, an old ISI handle who was accused of involvement in terrorist activities in Kashmir – today, this extremist is believed to be holed up in Rawalpindi under the direct protection of the LeT and the indirect patronage of the ISI. To believe that the antecedents and whereabouts of this established terrorist were not known to the civilian Pakistani politicians, Military top brass, or the elements of Pakistani clergy, is to live under a rock.

A narrative of deception

It is this duplicitous and layered track on terrorism – of running with the hare and hunting with the hound as perfected by the Pakistani State – that got embarrassingly punctured by India’s targeted counterattack on four sites in Pakistan and five in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK). The metastasised link between the Pakistani establishment, civilian politicians, and clergy is so obvious and interdependent that calling the Pahalgam terror incident a ‘False Flag Operation’ was not even acknowledged. India did well to not succumb to deflections, whatabouteries, and outright denials, as it hit the Pakistani terror camps with resolve and clear purpose.

Pakistani double-speak on terror is so well established internationally that even its usually voluble allies in the Arab Sheikdoms chose to be mealy-mouthed and neutral as India struck. Only Turkey under the desperate and illiberal rule of Recep Erdogan chose to support Pakistan, singularly.

Currently, Pakistan finds itself boxed in a corner as it does not have too many takers for its version of the supposed “Indian excesses” in the counterattack. The situation for Islamabad is exacerbated by the fact that any new terror act (in line with its patent “bleed with a thousand cuts”) on Indian soil will further erode the credibility of the Pakistani State. Lastly, for Pakistan to appeal to other friendly powers like China will also have limited efficacy, as China has enough on its plate with the ensuing trade wars with the USA to engage and get itself mired in a regional conflict with India, at this stage.

Basically, by initiating (or allowing) a Pahalgam-like terror attack on India, Pakistan has bitten more than it can chew. Given its economically cash-strapped status and survival on doles and aid, its ability to offend multilateral agencies like the United Nations simply does not exist. Perhaps its best bet was if India did not react following the Pahalgam attack and instead let the old-fashioned blame game to persist – but Delhi did well to build a strong case and hit hard. Pakistan and its troika of power centres will lick their wounds for now, and bide their time to get back, but for now, India has won this battle of narratives.

(The writer is a former Lt Governor of Andaman & Nicobar Islands and Puducherry)