Balakot Air Strike: Let’s not slip up on the ladder of escalation

In conflict, the ladder of escalation tends to be slippery — only, each slip pushes both climbers up the ladder towards further escalation.

India and Pakistan are locked in the awful embrace of conflict — and the possibility of casualties on Wednesday morning has increased the slip-factor on the ladder of escalation.

This is not good.

The fact that India is the stronger power means that it has that much more to lose.

Particularly to those who disparage Pakistan, it should be obvious that it is in the interest of the better-off power to avoid the ravages of war. Indeed, a war might not seem like that bad an idea to a failed state that has, like a brattish bully, made a habit of getting its way in the world by pushing the envelope regarding violence.

Avoidable hysteria

The worst aspect of the prospect of war at this stage is the role that social media and visuals — many morphed or otherwise falsified — will have. Nationalistic content on some television channels has already pumped up public emotions in both countries.

Masood Azhar was released under emotional pressure. A bad decision which came back to bite. (Source: Reuters)

One has only to remember that Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) was set up by one of the three terrorists who were released under high-voltage emotional pressure from the relatives of passengers on the hijacked Indian Airlines plane in the last week of 1999.

Taking decisions of state — under the pressure of emotional crowds — is a bad idea.

Such decisions have a way of coming back to bite — as the decision to release Maulana Masood Azhar, the Jaish founder, has so awfully done.

National interest is paramount

It is, of course, natural to be swayed by waves of anger and emotional outbursts after an attack as dastardly as the one at Pulwama's Lethpora, on 14 February, 2019.

But a sensible way ahead needs to be charted on the basis of hard-nosed calculations that take into consideration the national interest. Now, national interest must not be defined as images of some sort of patriotic victory parade that brings a tear to the eye. It is the economic and social development of the country’s citizens and the promotion of the country’s geopolitical weight in the world.

Advantage China

It is worth quickly taking a step back and considering that conflict between India and Pakistan will only strengthen China. 

A devastated Pakistan would most likely turn more desperately to China for help and succour — after a war, of course, but even during one.

Can India afford to let China take over Pakistan? Not at all. (Source: Reuters)

This would make it even easier for China to take over Pakistan. Already, the 51 China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)-related agreements the two countries have signed give China overwhelming control over Pakistan’s water resources, its energy production, its highways and other connectivity, communication, entertainment and internal security systems, and some control over its agriculture, industry, and military installations.

This sort of takeover of India’s largest neighbour by India’s most potent threat is not in India’s long-term interest. Not at all.

Increased vulnerability

An escalated conflict would also make India more vulnerable to China’s pressure to accept the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, and the Belt and Road Initiative, of which CPEC is a key part. China has already overtaken India by leaps and bounds over the past couple of decades. It would be in a position to leverage far greater advantage for itself if India were to be weakened by war on the western front.

The other leading world power — the US — is unlikely to come to any country’s aid unless it sees a benefit for itself. This is far truer under the incumbent President Donald Trump than it would otherwise have been.

India has much more to lose than Pakistan in case of a full-blown conflict. It's wise to remember our much higher stakes. (Source: Reuters)

Diplomatic support

On the other hand, India has a wealth of diplomatic backing and support across the world in its complaint that Pakistan is exporting terror to Kashmir. No country criticised India for having bombed a Jaish-e-Mohammed training camp at Balakot on Tuesday morning. Rather, a number of countries backed India’s move. There was also widespread condemnation of the suicide attack that killed more than 40 CRPF soldiers on 14 February 2019 in Pulwama — the method of attack by the Jaish-e-Mohammed activist paralleled the sorts of attacks that many European and Southeast Asian countries have experienced and identify with Islamic State radicals.

This similarity made many governments, and ordinary people in countries across the globe, sympathise with the trauma and anger the terror attack had caused in India.

It's wise to leverage this, and not be swayed by rage.

Also read: Escalations likely after Balakot attacks. The question is when?