DEALING WITH KAYANI's PAKISTAN--HOW?

------Briefing foreign newsmen on February 3, 2010, in Rawalpindi, General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, Chief of Staff of Pakistan Army, stated that in the "Strategic Paradigm" of Pakistan, India remained a natural long term threat (read enemy). There you are, then! What military in Pakistan thinks of India, Pakistan thinks. There should be no doubts that Pakistan military was the real bulwark of power and authority in Pakistan. Those who think otherwise live in a fool’s paradise. Politicians in Pakistan dance to military's tunes. And if a chief of Pakistan army says that India was an ‘all time’ enemy of Pakistan, so be it. Dismiss all notions of normalization of relations, harmony and ‘Aman ki Asha’ (Hope for Peace). What purpose would talks serve if such are the perceptions of people who rule Pakistan?
------Ashley J. Tellis, senior associate with Carnegie Endowment for international peace, in his testimony to United States House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs, had expressed similar sentiments when he told the committee on March 11, 2010, that impediments to a lasting peace in South Asia had not emanated from New Delhi but they were incubated in Islamabad or precisely in Rawalpindi (General HQ of Pakistan Army). He had clearly concluded that as long as the Pakistani Army and her security establishment had held a view, where-in their private interests, which had been contrived upon and conceived as national interests, were undermined by a permanent reconciliation between India and Pakistan, they would not rid themselves of the terrorist groups they had begotten and which served their purposes—irrespective of what New Delhi or Kabul or Washington might have desired.
---------It is in this context one ought to see the press briefings of February 2010 of General Kayani. In fact, a US based, South Asian security expert, Mr. Arif Rafiq, has named it as ‘Kayani Doctrine’. He has highlighted that in addition to dubbing India as enemy for all seasons, Kayani had advocated Afghanistan as Pakistan’s unquestioned area of influence, where it sought 'strategic depth'. Arif makes a very interesting point on India's isolation on Afghanistan issue in the international forums. He goes on to observe that the Pakistan Army’s behavior since 9/11 and India’s isolation from the two conferences on Afghanistan in Istanbul and London, had demonstrated that Rawalpindi, at the very least, had a veto power on the key decisions regarding Afghanistan’s future. According to him, Pakistan was not simply a nuisance or basket case, but a regional power that has the capability to leverage a superpower’s dependency on it and check the regional growth of India, a rival, neighbor, and potential superpower.
---------Right from the days of Pakistan’s inception, its military has not been comfortable with gigantic India as her eastern neighbor. In order to match this giant, Pakistan military has been pushing Pakistan into the ‘laps and traps’ of countries who use her for own selfish motives. In her overdrive for anti-India agenda, Pakistan loses sight of her genuine interests. Animosity against India is so much that it always blames India for all her tragedies, from creation of Bangla Desh in 1971 to the monstrous rise of TTP (Tehrik-E- Taliban of Pakistan) in 2009-10. Given to the military establishment of Pakistan, India must cease to exist for Pakistan to survive. This is what General Kayani, the present Chief of Pak army, is contemplating about.
--------He has set up a team of retired and serving army officers, under the banner of ‘Karachi Project’ to bleed India through his ‘strategic asset’ of ‘irregular soldiers’ called ‘Good Taliban’. And should India dare to overwhelm Pakistan with her conventional superiority, blackmail her with threats of ‘first nuclear strike’ by seeking shelter in her so called ‘strategic depth’.
--------Fears are also being expressed in strategic think tank circles in USA that Pakistan army might provide, clandestinely some low yield nuclear devices to terrorist organizations to bleed India profusely. It is immaterial whether India would be cowed down or not. May be India might react strongly because it possesses ‘second strike capability’. It has been disclosed by former President of USA, Mr. Bill Clinton, in his autobiography that in the 2001 military face -off with Pakistan, India had, at one stage, taken the decision to face ‘first nuclear strike’ by Pakistan and respond with her ‘second strike’ to engulf South Asia into a ‘nuclear mayhem’. Indian calculation was that the ‘first nuclear strike’ by Pakistan might destroy 50% India but ‘second strike’ of India would virtually wipe out Pakistan from the world’s map, with attendant consequences for other nations of the region.
----------Pakistan’s military knows this and that’s why it is looking for some semblance of survivability to protect its military and other assets from Indian countervailing nuclear attack. The nuclear blackmail of India is part of Pakistan’s military strategy to stop India from launching a sudden and a full-fledged war on Pakistan, with the explicit aim of destroying the training camps of so- called ‘strategic assets’ of Pakistan in POK. These ‘assets’ were not only bleeding India profusely but also they were undermining India’s unity and integrity. How long India can ignore this is subject to India’s ‘limit of tolerance’. Pakistan military knows that one day India might cross the threshold of ‘tolerance’ and be prepared to accept nuclear damage. Indian geography gives her this advantage to adequately survive Pakistan’s nuclear strike and then launch her own counter strike.


------There-in lies the logic of ‘strategic depth’ for Pakistan’s military in
Afghanistan.In other words, Pakistan’s military is prepared to not only make first use
of nuclear weapons but also use the leverage of ‘strategic depth’ to counter India’s
second strike-capability by acquiring a theoretical capability to launch a ‘third strike’.
The Kayani Doctrine flirts with such dangerous notions. And people talk of ‘Aman Ki
Asha’(Hope for peace)!

-------As long as Pakistan army and her Generals dominate Pakistan, there can be
no use of any talks, agreements, pacts and treaties with Pakistan. They have no
sanctity in Pakistan whether it was UN Resolution of 13 August 1948; Delhi Pact of
1950; Tashkent Declaration of January 1966; Shimla Agreement of July 1972 or

even Lahore Declaration of February 1999. If these pacts and agreements had been

implemented in full earnest, the history of South Asia would have been different.

What the sincerity of ‘talks’ desire, it might not be the ultimate product of laborious

efforts. Pakistan has always been an untrustworthy neighbor because of her army.

And Pak-army’s interests make Pakistan’s national interests. The condition is not

likely to change in the perceivable future, too.

-------------Let us see some key points of Kayani Doctrine:-

Central Theme.--In the perceptions of Pakistan military, India remains a greatest threat to the idea of Pakistan. It is a perceived conclusion of Pakistan military that it was mutually exclusive for the two nations to exist together. India must become a lost civilization of history for Pakistan to survive as a nation.
WOM (War by Other Means)-Alternative to Conventional Conflict at low Cost. Militarily Pakistan is no match to India in a conventional conflict. This had been realized by Pakistan army after having had fought three wars with India without any visible dividends. In fact, direct wars have only heaved insults and humiliation upon Pakistan army . Bangla Desh war in 1971 brought this lesson home. In order to offset this advantage, it was contrived upon that India must be engaged in an ‘unconventional military conflict’ to make her attrite and bleed internally. ‘Zarb-E-Momin’(Strike of the Pure), a biggest military exercise to date conducted by Pakistan Army in 1988 had concluded that Pakistan must adopt an aggressive posture and take the war into “enemy” territory. Conventional military strength disallows Pakistan to do so. But there are other means available to put into practice this theory. Herein lies the significance of conducting ‘War by Other Means’ (WOM). This implies:-
Fighting a low cost war on ‘enemy’ territory by using militants/ terrorists or the ‘irregular soldiers’, also called ‘strategic asset’ in the shape of ‘good Taliban’.
Exploiting internal vulnerabilities of India by supporting and fueling internal insurgencies, such as Maoists/Naxalite movement in Central, Eastern and Southern India, ULFA militancy in Assam, Nagaland separatist movement, backing Kashmir militants, so on and so forth.
Ally with China as a counterweight for India’s threatening postures as a response to militant activities.
Use of Nuclear Threat-To checkmate the Indian conventional military juggernaut, the use or the threat of use of nuclear weapons is the only answer. It has been proved effective during the Kargil-99 confrontation and also during military face-off during 2001-02. It therefore has no inhibitions to afflict intolerable damage to ‘Hindu India’ by using WMD. Use of nuclear weapons by Pakistan is not only a threat but a key feature of its defence against conventional superiority of India. The bottom line for the use of nuclear weapons could be, probably the loss of key cities along the line extending from ‘Lahore’ in the North to ‘Karachi’ in the South in a conventional conflict.
Chinks in the Nuclear ‘First Use Theory’.-There are fundamental problem areas:-
What should be the objective of ‘first use’? Can India be crippled enough to disallow her the second strike capability?
What, if India launches her countervail strike? Will Pakistan survive Indian counter strike?
What must Pakistan do to counter balance India’s second strike capability?
Creation of ‘Strategic Depth’-The answers to the questions asked above lie in the creation of ‘geographical depth’ in Afghanistan so as to not only protect the core leadership and nuclear weapons but to create a capability to launch a ‘third strike’ against India. This is why Kayani has been desperate to seek control of Afghanistan through a pliable regime. The ouster of India from Afghanistan gives her the main advantage of protecting the core of politico-military leadership in a nuclear exchange, whether it was initiated accidentally or as part of a deliberate escalation.
Inflicting a ‘la-Soviet’ on India. There is no doubt that Pakistan provides moral and material support to militants of J&K and Punjab. ISI has not only set up training camps for them and provided sanctuaries to their leaders but also extended financial aid to them. Pakistan military has also created a ‘strategic asset’ in the form of ‘good Taliban’, so as to widen the scope and capacity of WOM on India. All this is aimed at pinning down India militarily and curtail its conventional military- strength- advantage in a conventional conflict, should India desire to venture into it. Further, in order to expand the scope of a low cost war against India, ISI of Pakistan has established links with Maoists, ULFA, Naga and Manipur insurgents, besides having links with Indian underworld to create communal and religious riots. The whole purpose is to set India on fire and tire out the Indian Army to make it totally stretched and ineffective. Once Indian army is weakened and tired out, it would be easy to deliver a death- blow to the Indian polity and dissolve it into 20-30 teeny- weeny blobs on the world map. Pakistan military, in collaboration with China, hopes to do a ‘la-Soviet Union’ on India.
Manipulate USA. This is the key point in this doctrine. To placate USA, the doctrine seeks to provide USA lollipops of ‘visible co-operation’ on her war on terror in Afghanistan by arresting and handing over some low level Al-Qaeda and Afghan Taliban functionaries. Along with it, the stories of death and existence of Osama Bin Laden are also fed to US intelligence to keep her interest alive in Pakistan and ignore Pakistan’s other acts of sponsoring terrorism in Kashmir and India. Pak military has successfully done this over the last few years. Her leverage with USA provides sanctity to her nefarious designs on India.
The recent upsurge in Maoists/ Naxalite activities in India are part of the unfolding Kayani doctrine. Pak military has realized that supporting militant activities in Kashmir could prove counter productive because Kashmir was now on the international radar screen. And any such act here magnifies Pakistan’s evil intentions against India. Therefore, slow-down of terrorist activities in Kashmir might be part of a bigger design of Kayani doctrine. It is no certificate for Pakistan’s good intentions of friendly relations with India. The leadership of India ought to understand this.
To counter such evil intended designs, India must first realize that any pact/agreement with Pakistan has no surety of implementation as long as Pakistan army holds the central position. Therefore, talks for the purpose of talks were all right but to bridge the ‘trust-deficit’ was a far fetched argument. It would never be allowed by the spin doctors of Kayani’s doctrine. India would never be trusted, come what may. To Pak military, to trust India is to write the obituary for Pakistan’s existence. It is a known irony of Pakistan’s history that personal interests of Pak Military’s Generals were the national interests of Pakistan. Where is there a scope for peace with India by confidence building measures? If at all it serves any purpose it is to surprise and shock India as it happened in the aftermath of Lahore Resolution in February 1999. While India was busy dreaming peace, Pak military was planning a coup-d-grace in Kargil. So, would it do now, if India is not guarded about the evil motives of Kayani Doctrine?
It is time India pay attention to its internal security more vigorously. It is no more to be treated as law and order problem. Time has come when whole country ought to have a counter insurgency grid. The grid then be divided into sectors, sub-sectors and sub-sub sectors. A dedicated force be earmarked for each sub-sub sector. The activities of the grid be coordinated at national level through sectors and sub sectors. This is the only way to beef up our homeland security. Therefore we could coordinate all acts of counter Maoism/terrorism/ insurgency anywhere in India. The flow of intelligence would be unhindered. Depending upon situation, counter militancy forces could be switched from one sector to another with ease.
It is undoubtedly clear that to tackle such evil designs of the enemy, besides having a refurbished intelligence apparatus; we also need to have a specialized force to deal with well-trained militants/terrorists. Some of the infantry units of Indian army could make the nucleus of this force. With the nuclearised battlefield, the role of normal Infantry is drastically reduced. In order to fight ‘cross border wars’, as opposite of WOM, we need to have more of mechanized forces. Also, RMA (Revolutions in Military Affairs) has introduced the weapon systems in the combat zones with profound lethality, perfect accuracy and guidance, along with enhanced ranges. This demands all forces to possess an ability to rapidly concentrate and quickly disperse to avoid presenting a bigger target. In such a scenario, normal Infantry would be sitting duck. It is from this point of view, I assert that some percentage of normal Infantry could be diverted permanently for internal security.
In conclusion, I would only say that our leadership must not treat internal security lightly. A great Indian philosopher, Chanakya, had said that the maximum danger to a nation’s security stemmed from a threat, which emanated from inside but was aided and abetted from outside. We have such sure recipes in Maoists movement in over 240 districts of India, inflaming North East, troubled J&K and Punjab, along with rising influence of communal-bigots from Maharashtra, Gujarat to Karnatka. They are all under the evil influence of Kayani Doctrine. It is time for India and her leadership to get serious.