Harsha Kakar
Even before the dust of the recently concluded Indo Pak BSF and Ranger talks died down, Pakistan opened fire with mortars along the Jammu border targeting civilians and security posts. Firing continues almost daily along the IB and the LOC with casualties on both sides. The Ranger – BSF talks conducted over a period of four days, had suggested a slew of confidence building measures along the entire front. These are planned to be implemented shortly. Most of these confidence building measures, including joint patrolling are proposed for implementation along the border from Gujarat to Punjab; however the Jammu sector will also likely to see changes which could enhance peace and tranquillity.
The IB in the Jammu sector is manned by the BSF and the Rangers. It may be termed as the ‘working boundary’ by Pakistan, but it is clearly the IB and hence makes it akin to the border from Kutch to Punjab. There are fairly large villages located close to the border on both sides. The population residing here has always been impacted by the daily firing. However, the recently concluded meeting did come out with some very logical proposals including no firing of mortars, delay of an hour in responding to firing with the aim of de-escalating etc.
While most proposed measures including providing of numbers and means of contact would be implemented shortly, the impact would alsosoon be seen. It is essential that in the areas controlled by the BSF and the Rangers, both sides show restraint and build an environment of trust and hope. The plains sector should therefore nowsee peace and tranquillity.
Pakistan and its military have always claimed Kashmir to be an unfinished agenda from partition. The fact is that it is an unfinished agenda for both countries, and hence would never have an easily acceptable solution. Thus for the most part, the border in J and K; termed as the Line of Control (LOC) is active and controlled by the army. Therefore since the talks were Ranger and BSF intensive, there would be no direct impact on the areas controlled by the army. During the interaction of the Pakistan Ranger Chief with the Indian Home Minister, he clearly stated that stopping of infiltration was not in his purview. Therefore peace and tranquillity along the LOC is still way away.
If the existing strategy of Pakistan of attempting to push in terroriststhrough the LOC to try and ignite the valley and target security forces continues, then the intensity of firing would also continue and villages would continue to be targeted. The first Brigadier level flag meeting between the two countries of the year, was held this week; however the impact of the same and improvement in the ground situation, if any, would only be seen in the days ahead.
The meeting between the DGMO’s, to deal with increasing tensions along the LOC which is the responsibility of the respective armies is yet to be held. The dates for the same have neither been proposed nor even discussed. There is hope in the air that these talks, if and when held,could ensure reduced tensions along the LOC. In my opinion, these would be held towards the end of this year, post the setting in of winters and sealing of the passes.
There is a complete contrast in the strategy being employed by both countries, when it comes to firing along the LOC. The Indian army claims to adhere to the cease fire agreement of 2003 and hence does not commence firing nor does it target civilians on the other side. They claim to only respond to Pakistan’s provocation. However, Pakistan continues to find an easy target in Indian villages. For them this is a low cost option of projecting a disputed border. Every time the villages are struck, the government faces the brunt of negative media coverage. The debate is, whether we need to stick to our brinkmanship of not targeting civilians and only responding to their firing. If this action does not reduce tension, then there is a need to consider changing our strategy and go for enhanced application of force and widen the nature of targets.
The ceasefire agreement of 2003, which we continue to support, came into effect in Nov of that year, basically to create an environment for the successful conduct of the SAARC summit in Pakistan in Jan 2004.The ceasefire was proposed after the intensity of firing along the borders built up to a crescendo and normal life was severely affected. The true intention of the agreement was to build partial bridges between the two countries prior to the SAARC summit, thus showcasing the event and Pakistan globally. It thus had its roots for a specific and selfish cause from their end.
The next SAARC summit is due in 2016, and the Prime Minister of India has already confirmed this in principle agreement to attend the same during the meeting of the two Prime Ministers’ at Ufa. Therefore, if we are to assess past precedence, then a similar action like the 2003 cease fire is possibly expected over the next few months. Therefore logically, even if we are to enhance the level of firing and targeting, there could be a similar aim from their side to create a semblance of peace and tranquillity prior to the summit. The dates of the summit have yet to be finalized and hence the next meeting of the DGMO’s and proposed cease fire is still some distance away. Till then, the army needs to decide what strategy should be adopted to ensure minimum effect on our villages.
(The author is a retired Major General of the Indian Army)
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel