Behind restraint

March 05, 2019 12:02 am | Updated 12:02 am IST

 

The writer (Editorial page, “Lines being crossed”, March 4) says that all countries including the U.S. have been reluctant to cross the Rubicon and enter into an open confrontation with Russia. But the fact is the U.S. did cross into Pakistan by air to get Osama bin Laden. That was not construed as an act of war. Our government too did not cross the Rubicon and tried diplomatic means to get Pakistan to wipe out terrorism on its soil. That didn’t work. Hence we crossed into Pakistan to kill the terrorists who have been targeting our citizens in Jammu and Kashmir. Why is this any different? Let the people in power today do their jobs as they deem fit. The media should also recognise this.

Suresh Gopalakrishnan,

Hyderabad

The writer seems to make a virtue of India’s decade- long restraint after the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack. When a nation signals ambiguity about its threshold of tolerance the adversary can always misinterpret it as a sign of passivity. No nation would like to seen as possessing an unlimited capacity to bleed under unprovoked attacks. It is strange that India should abide by the rules that govern conventional war between nation states when it is a fighting an unconventional war unleashed by Pakistan through its non-state proxies. The big powers have no moral right to pontificate to India about the need to exercise restraint because they don’t practise what they preach. For instance, America will go to any extent to hunt down its enemies. Russia has no qualms in invading other countries in pursuit of who it perceives as terrorists. China is following a zero-tolerance policy towards terrorists in its Xinjiang province which involves massive crackdowns on the civilian population.

Of what use is the so-called moral capital when it does not prevent terrorists from attacking us? Why can’t India call a spade a spade and tell the world that peace will remain elusive so long as Pakistan continues to raise a proxy army of terrorists to hit India? What the world needs to understand is that if Pakistan dismantles the terror infrastructure on its soil there is no reason why India should launch attacks inside Pakistani territory. India has to move beyond its failed strategy of “asking Pakistan to take action” because it implies that the terrorists are acting independently. India’s exaggerated concern for world opinion has let Pakistan escape being called out as a ‘sponsor of terror’.

V.N. Mukundarajan,

Thiruvananthapuram

With due respect to former and top officials under the United Progressive Alliance, I have to say this. During their innings they did their best to counter Pakistan. But, unfortunately, it was not effective as Pakistan still continues with its successful policy of bleeding India. Times are changing and we also have to change our tactics. Earlier methods are past their expiry date.

M.S. Mani,

Chennai

The writer’s justification for inaction post the 26/11 attacks is most unconvincing. The attacks struck at the vitals of our national interest. Yet the writer appears concerned over the inappropriateness of crossing international boundaries even when the U.S., Russia, Israel and Turkey have done so with impunity when their national interests were threatened and challenged. The government was duty bound to protect its citizens, which it failed to do, despite international approval.

To say that “India’s finest years were during the period 2009-2012” is strange. This was a period when governance began unravelling with corruption, inflation and a deteriorating situation in Kashmir.

P. Vaidyanathan,

Chennai

Perhaps this is the best opportunity for India continue its relentless pursuit in blacklisting the JeM and stepping up diplomatic pressure. India is fortunate that its aerial bombing in Pakistani territory did not attract much criticism with the major world powers expressed their solidarity. At the same time, backchannel diplomacy needs to be maintained. Pakistan must be dealt firmly and till such time as it softens its aggressive stance and offers a meaningful dialogue.

A.M.N. Pandian,

Tirunelveli, Tamil Nadu

The incident of an Indian pilot being captured and later released may have postponed war between the sworn enemies. But it will be naive to think that this air strike will deter Pakistan from carrying out anti-India activity. The only plausible remedy is to co-opt the local populace in Kashmir; otherwise India will be fighting a war not only with Pakistan but also with its own citizens.

Deepak Singhal

Noida

 

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.