Neither China nor US will allow Pakistan to be declared terrorist state

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has outlined the scope of India's response to the Uri attack in his September 24 speech in Kerala, which seems limited for the present to a sustained diplomatic offensive to expose Pakistan as a hot-bed of international terror and not military action.

Whether restraint on our part despite intense provocation will help us gather enough international support for "isolating" Pakistan and changing its behaviour fundamentally remains to be seen.

Sympathy

In reality, Pakistan is now structurally incapable of normalising ties with India. Its armed forces and extremist religious organisations play a determinant role in shaping relations with us, not the civilian government.

The military profits, not suffers, from hostile policies towards India. The extremist groups have a growing base for their religious animosity towards India owing to the increasing radicalisation of Pakistani society.

The Uri attack has demonstrated once again that Pakistan's use of terrorism as an instrument of policy continues.

It is not clear what "isolation" of Pakistan would mean in reality. If it means that through a vigorous international campaign we get the world to increasingly recognise that Pakistan is using jihadi terrorism as an instrument of state policy towards us and that the so-called non-state actors operating on its soil are creatures nourished by the Pakistani agencies, then what we seek is not unachievable.

Additionally, we can puncture Pakistan's claim that it itself is a victim of terrorism and is in the forefront in combating it.

We can persuade the world that Pakistan continues to make a distinction between good and bad terrorists.

We can expose its double-dealing on terrorism and damage further its already dented credibility on the issue, especially as Pakistani footprints are seen in terrorist incidents all over the globe.

We have seen that despite the burning problem in Kashmir we can draw sympathy from important countries on Pakistani-abetted terrorist attacks against us.

A large number of them have condemned the attack in Uri, despite Pakistan unleashing a propaganda barrage on the so-called atrocities committed by our security forces in Kashmir.

Even Gulf countries like the UAE, Bahrain, Qatar and Saudi Arabia have condemned this attack, with some supporting whatever counterterrorism measures we take.

This wide support is all the more striking because the attack was on a military installation, not against a civilian target. The world still views it as a terrorist attack and not "militant action" against a military target.

If, however, isolation means that key countries begin accepting that Pakistan has to be pressured collectively to curb its jihadi links, failing which they would be ready to entertain the idea of sanctions, that objective would be unrealistic.

Pakistan is considered too important geopolitically and too consequential because of its size, Islamic weight, its role in developments in Afghanistan and Central Asia, not to mention its expanding nuclear capacity, to be "isolated".

Protection

Powerful friends such as China will protect it in the UN and other forums. China has, in fact, increased dramatically its geopolitical and economic stakes in Pakistan with the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.

The extent of Chinese unwillingness to give any advantage to India over Pakistan is demonstrated by its refusal to allow the UN Security Council to declare Masood Azhar of the Jaish-e-Mohammed as an international terrorist and its opposition to India's NSG membership without that of Pakistan.

The US too will not declare Pakistan a terrorist state or impose punitive sanctions on it to change its behaviour despite suffering at its hands in Afghanistan.

Pakistan has provided havens to the Taliban and the Haqqani group (and Osama bin Laden), without the US using its levers to bring Pakistan to its senses.

To the contrary, it has sought to buy Pakistan's cooperation through copious military and economic aid. Its recent steps to curtail some assistance are token steps that Pakistan has learnt to absorb.

US exhortations to Pakistan over several years to bring to justice those responsible for the Mumbai terror attacks in which six of its own nationals were killed has left Pakistan unmoved.

The US has now added Pathankot to the list of attacks for which Pakistan must answer, besides calling for curbs on LeT and JeM, but Pakistan ignores such calls with a sense of impunity.

Sanctions

The contrast between the draconian US sanctions on Iran as well as punitive sanctions on a powerful nuclear state like Russia and the accommodating attitude towards Pakistan towards its misdemeanours is striking.

Despite its act of killing new Taliban chief Mullah Mansour, the US sees value in Pakistan's assistance in bringing the Taliban to the negotiating table with Kabul.

If Pakistan were designated a terrorist state, the US cannot, under its laws, do business with Pakistan.

We have begun targeting Pakistan diplomatically on terrorism as never before through statements by our political leaders at the highest level, the language used by the spokesperson of the ministry of external affairs and that used to rebut Nawaz Sharif's invective against us in the UN.

The unprecedented step of highlighting Pakistan's brutalities in Balochistan and references to Sindh and Khyber-Pakhtunwa in Modi's most recent speech are significant departure from the past.

The MEA spokesperson's ambiguous language on the Indus Waters Treaty should cause Pakistan to reflect on the dangers ahead in continuing its policy of inflicting a thousand cuts on India.

(Courtesy of Mail Today.)

Also read - Pakistan by a thousand cuts