 |
|
The article details India's diplomatic efforts following Operation Sindoor, a series of strikes within Pakistan targeting terror infrastructure. The operation, which involved attacks on locations associated with Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Muhammad, and Hizbul Mujahideen, has raised concerns about potential escalation and retaliation from Pakistan. In response, India has initiated a widespread diplomatic outreach to key global powers, including the United States, China, Russia, France, and countries in the Middle East, aiming to manage the fallout and prevent further conflict. Prime Minister Narendra Modi's decision to cancel his planned trip to Norway, Netherlands, and Croatia underscores the gravity of the situation and the need for immediate attention to diplomatic efforts. National Security Advisor Ajit Doval, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, and Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri have been actively involved in communicating India's position to their counterparts and foreign envoys, emphasizing that India does not intend to escalate tensions but is prepared to respond decisively if Pakistan takes escalatory actions. The article highlights the crucial role of Pakistan Army Chief Gen Asim Munir in shaping the next steps. How Rawalpindi, the headquarters of the Pakistan Army, perceives the strikes and whether it chooses to retaliate will significantly influence the trajectory of the situation. The locations targeted in Operation Sindoor, particularly Muridke, Bahawalpur, and Sialkot, are considered sensitive due to their association with prominent terrorist groups. An attack on these sites could be interpreted as a direct challenge to the Pakistan establishment's 'strategic assets,' increasing the likelihood of a military response. The article notes that Operation Sindoor represents a 'new normal' in India's approach to cross-border terrorism, following the Balakot aerial strike in 2019. Delhi is actively engaging with the P-5 countries (the permanent members of the UN Security Council) and countries with influence over the Pakistani military, such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar. The United States is also closely monitoring the situation, with President Donald Trump expressing hope for a quick resolution and offering assistance if needed. Trump's remarks acknowledge the long-standing conflict between India and Pakistan and highlight the importance of de-escalation. As part of the global outreach, NSA Ajit Doval has engaged in extensive discussions with his counterparts from the US, China, Russia, the UK, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Japan. He has emphasized that India's actions were measured, non-escalatory, and restrained, reiterating India's commitment to avoiding further escalation but underscoring its readiness to retaliate resolutely if necessary. This message has been communicated directly to Islamabad, particularly through China, Pakistan's 'all-weather friend.' China's response, as conveyed by Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian, expresses regret over India's military operation and calls for restraint from both sides. China acknowledges the ongoing situation and emphasizes the importance of peace and stability in the region, offering to play a constructive role in de-escalation efforts. External Affairs Minister Jaishankar has also been actively involved in diplomatic efforts, engaging with his counterparts from France, Germany, Japan, Spain, and Qatar. He has briefed them about India's actions against cross-border terrorist infrastructure and emphasized the importance of zero tolerance for terrorism. Jaishankar's conversations with his counterparts have focused on garnering support for India's position and emphasizing the need for a united front against terrorism. Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri has briefed foreign envoys in New Delhi, including representatives from the UN Security Council members, except for Pakistan and Sierra Leone. The briefing highlighted the current escalation by the Pakistani side, Pakistan's alleged shielding of the TRF (The Resistance Front), the targeted and non-escalatory nature of India's response, and the brutality of the Pahalgam terror attack. India has refuted Pakistan's claims of escalation, asserting that its actions were a response to terrorist attacks. Regarding reports that a mosque was hit, India clarified that the complex included a terror camp. The Indian mission in the UN will continue to engage with UNSC members in New York to further explain India's position. Overall, the article paints a picture of intense diplomatic activity aimed at managing the fallout from Operation Sindoor and preventing further escalation between India and Pakistan. The success of these efforts will depend on Pakistan's response and the ability of the international community to promote de-escalation and dialogue.
The situation is further complicated by the involvement of multiple actors with varying interests and levels of influence. China's role as a close ally of Pakistan and a major global power adds another layer of complexity. While China has expressed regret over India's military operation and called for restraint, it is unclear whether it will exert significant pressure on Pakistan to de-escalate. The United States, with its strong relationships with both India and Pakistan, is also in a delicate position. While President Trump has offered assistance, the extent to which the US will actively intervene remains to be seen. The involvement of countries such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar, which have close ties with the Pakistani military, could also play a crucial role in promoting de-escalation. These countries may be able to use their influence to encourage Pakistan to exercise restraint and engage in dialogue. The potential for miscalculation and unintended escalation is significant. The emotional and political stakes are high on both sides, and any further incidents could easily trigger a wider conflict. The international community must act decisively to prevent such a scenario from unfolding. The key to de-escalation lies in effective communication and transparency. Both India and Pakistan need to clearly communicate their intentions to each other and to the international community. They must also be willing to address each other's concerns and engage in constructive dialogue. The role of third-party mediators could also be crucial in facilitating communication and building trust. The United Nations, the United States, or other countries with strong relationships with both India and Pakistan could play a mediating role. Ultimately, the responsibility for de-escalation rests with India and Pakistan themselves. They must prioritize peace and stability in the region and avoid any actions that could further escalate tensions. The consequences of a wider conflict would be devastating for both countries and for the entire region. The international community must do everything in its power to prevent such a catastrophe from occurring. The situation underscores the importance of addressing the root causes of the conflict between India and Pakistan, including the issue of cross-border terrorism. A comprehensive approach that addresses both the immediate crisis and the underlying issues is needed to achieve lasting peace and stability in the region. The article also highlights the challenges of managing public opinion in the age of social media. In both India and Pakistan, there is a strong public sentiment in favor of retaliation. This can put pressure on governments to take escalatory actions, even if they believe that de-escalation is in the best interests of their countries. The governments of India and Pakistan need to be mindful of public opinion, but they must also prioritize the long-term interests of their countries. They must be willing to take unpopular decisions if necessary to prevent a wider conflict. The situation is a reminder of the fragility of peace in the region and the importance of continued efforts to promote dialogue and understanding between India and Pakistan.
Moreover, the dynamics within Pakistan itself are critical to understanding potential responses. The power balance between the civilian government and the military establishment, particularly the Army Chief, will heavily influence decision-making. If Gen Asim Munir perceives Operation Sindoor as a direct challenge to the military's authority or a significant blow to Pakistan's strategic interests, he may feel compelled to retaliate, even if it risks a wider conflict. Conversely, a more cautious approach might prioritize de-escalation and diplomacy, especially given Pakistan's existing economic challenges and its reliance on international support. The potential for internal divisions within the Pakistani establishment also exists, with different factions potentially holding conflicting views on how to respond to the situation. These internal dynamics add another layer of uncertainty to the equation. India's diplomatic outreach also aims to preempt potential criticism or condemnation from the international community. By proactively engaging with major powers and explaining its actions, India seeks to shape the narrative and justify its response as a necessary measure to combat cross-border terrorism. The emphasis on the 'non-escalatory' and 'restrained' nature of Operation Sindoor is designed to reassure international actors that India is not seeking a wider conflict and is committed to de-escalation. However, the effectiveness of this strategy will depend on how the international community perceives the situation and whether it accepts India's justification for its actions. Some countries may be more sympathetic to India's concerns about cross-border terrorism, while others may be more concerned about the risk of escalation and the potential for a wider conflict. The article also implicitly raises questions about the long-term implications of Operation Sindoor for India-Pakistan relations. The strikes have undoubtedly heightened tensions and eroded trust between the two countries. It remains to be seen whether they will lead to a further deterioration in relations or whether they can serve as a catalyst for a renewed effort to address the underlying issues that fuel the conflict. The situation underscores the urgent need for a comprehensive approach to addressing the issue of cross-border terrorism. This requires not only military action but also diplomatic efforts, intelligence sharing, and cooperation on law enforcement. It also requires addressing the root causes of terrorism, such as poverty, inequality, and lack of opportunity. Ultimately, lasting peace and stability in the region will require a fundamental shift in the relationship between India and Pakistan. This requires building trust, promoting dialogue, and addressing the underlying issues that divide the two countries. It also requires a commitment from both sides to refrain from using violence and to resolve their disputes peacefully.
Finally, the role of regional organizations such as the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) remains conspicuously absent from the narrative. Despite its potential as a platform for dialogue and conflict resolution, SAARC has been largely ineffective in addressing the long-standing tensions between India and Pakistan. The lack of a strong regional framework for managing disputes further exacerbates the risk of escalation. The article also highlights the challenges of ensuring accountability for terrorist groups operating within Pakistan. While India has repeatedly accused Pakistan of supporting and harboring these groups, Pakistan has consistently denied these allegations. The lack of transparency and independent verification mechanisms makes it difficult to assess the truth of these claims and to hold those responsible for terrorism accountable. The article also touches upon the issue of information warfare and propaganda. Both India and Pakistan have been accused of using propaganda to shape public opinion and to demonize the other side. This can further inflame tensions and make it more difficult to find common ground. The media in both countries also plays a significant role in shaping public perception of the conflict. Sensationalist reporting and the spread of misinformation can further exacerbate tensions and make it more difficult to promote dialogue and understanding. The situation underscores the importance of responsible journalism and fact-checking. The international community also has a role to play in countering propaganda and misinformation. The United Nations, international organizations, and independent media outlets can help to provide accurate and objective information about the conflict. The article also implicitly raises questions about the role of non-state actors in the conflict. Terrorist groups and other non-state actors can play a significant role in escalating tensions and undermining peace efforts. It is important to address the root causes that allow these actors to thrive and to prevent them from carrying out attacks. The situation is a complex and multifaceted one, with no easy solutions. It requires a concerted effort from all stakeholders to promote dialogue, de-escalation, and lasting peace. The long-term consequences of the conflict will depend on the choices that India and Pakistan make in the coming days and weeks. It is essential that both countries prioritize peace and stability and refrain from any actions that could further escalate tensions. The international community must also do everything in its power to support these efforts and to prevent a wider conflict from erupting.
Source: Delhi does diplomatic outreach amid questions over Pak’s steps ‘day after’