How Delhi kept room open for Pak to not retaliate
Sachin Parashar | TNN | Feb 27, 2019, 06:48 IST
NEW DELHI: While the government announced it had carried out air strikes at a JeM camp in Balakot deep inside Pakistan, foreign secretary Vijay Gokhale mentioned in his statement that it was a “non-military preemptive strike” and no military facility or civilians were targeted.
This was meant to not just reassure the international community that India was acting responsibly but also prevent Pakistan from giving in to any temptation of retaliating solely under domestic pressure. “India hit a terror camp. There’s no such camp in India for Pakistan to hit,” an official said.
In the past few days, several countries have called upon Pakistan to act against JeM and Delhi hopes the airstrike will underscore the need for action by Pakistan against terror groups. Going by the initial reaction of the international community, India’s repeated assertion that this was a “non-military’’ strike seemed to have served the purpose. “India has explained the strike well by saying it was targeted at a camp and not any civilian or military installation,’’ said a diplomat, expressing hope that Pakistan won’t retaliate if India kept the rhetoric down.
Another diplomat recalled how UNSC, at the US and India’s insistence, had strongly condemned terrorism and that, after the attack at the JeM camp, India needed to focus more on diplomatically cornering Pakistan for its support to terrorism.
France is currently leading efforts at the UNSC for a ban on JeM chief Masood Azhar. India has received strong support from all UNSC members except for China.
Indian officials know that at some stage they will have to heed calls for a dialogue with Pakistan. In a statement after the strikes, France significantly said the resumption of bilateral dialogue between Islamabad and New Delhi was necessary to “initiate a peaceful settlement of differences’’.
France also said it recognised India’s legitimacy to ensure its security against cross-border terrorism.
This was meant to not just reassure the international community that India was acting responsibly but also prevent Pakistan from giving in to any temptation of retaliating solely under domestic pressure. “India hit a terror camp. There’s no such camp in India for Pakistan to hit,” an official said.
In the past few days, several countries have called upon Pakistan to act against JeM and Delhi hopes the airstrike will underscore the need for action by Pakistan against terror groups. Going by the initial reaction of the international community, India’s repeated assertion that this was a “non-military’’ strike seemed to have served the purpose. “India has explained the strike well by saying it was targeted at a camp and not any civilian or military installation,’’ said a diplomat, expressing hope that Pakistan won’t retaliate if India kept the rhetoric down.
Another diplomat recalled how UNSC, at the US and India’s insistence, had strongly condemned terrorism and that, after the attack at the JeM camp, India needed to focus more on diplomatically cornering Pakistan for its support to terrorism.
France is currently leading efforts at the UNSC for a ban on JeM chief Masood Azhar. India has received strong support from all UNSC members except for China.
Indian officials know that at some stage they will have to heed calls for a dialogue with Pakistan. In a statement after the strikes, France significantly said the resumption of bilateral dialogue between Islamabad and New Delhi was necessary to “initiate a peaceful settlement of differences’’.
France also said it recognised India’s legitimacy to ensure its security against cross-border terrorism.
All Comments ()+^ Back to Top
Refrain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks, name calling or inciting hatred against any community. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines by marking them offensive. Let's work together to keep the conversation civil.
HIDE