Why crisis-hit Pakistan won’t go the Lanka way

There are a few factors that might prevent an all-out collapse like we saw in Sri Lanka. First, Pakistan has been here before. Many times, in fact.  Pakistan has sought financial aid from the UAE, China, and the IMF in 2013, 2016 and 2018.  Second, the international community is wary about a Sri Lanka styled economic and political collapse in a nuclear armed country. The threat of rogue players gaining access to nukes often makes lenders a lot more lenient in issuance of fresh loans and repayment terms. Third, Pakistan has more generous friends. Pakistan received a loan from Saudi Arabia and recently, the UAE government has offered to acquire 10 to 12 per cent equity shares in Pakistan government-owned companies through its sovereign wealth funds.

On Trump's Offer to Mediate Between India and China

The Print’s daily roundtable TalkPoint posed a question connected to the US President Donald Trump's offer to mediate between India and China over the “raging border dispute": Does Trump help or harm India’s interests when he offers to mediate with China, Pakistan?My response:

US President Donald Trump’s offer to mediate is a needless distraction in the grand scheme of things.Assessing what the US foreign policy would be like based on Trump’s offer to mediate on Twitter is a risky exercise. Often, there is a considerable gap between the two, like in the case of Afghanistan.Officially, the White House released a report on 20 May that said in no uncertain terms that Beijing “flouts its commitments to its neighbours by engaging in provocative and coercive military and paramilitary activities in the Yellow Sea, the East and South China Seas, the Taiwan Strait, and Sino-Indian border areas.” We can only guess whether Trump’s latest offer to mediate follows as a result of this understanding.Nevertheless, India’s position on such offers has been consistent — it intends to solve such disputes bilaterally and not through third party mediation. China is not likely to accept any such offers of mediation either. Hence, it would help the Indian and American interests both, a lot more if the US and India work together to build capacity to resist Beijing’s coercive and arrogant approach to border disputes.The case with Pakistan is also similar. The border dispute there is just one issue in a consistently strained India-Pakistan relationship. In fact, the US support to the Pakistani military-jihadi complex over the years has made this problem even more difficult. Here again, it would help the Indian and the US interests a lot more if the US adopts an overall strategic stance that sees Pakistan as a part of the problem.

You can read the full conversation on ThePrint. here. 

Citizenship Law and NRC Issue can Strain India’s Ties With its Most Important Neighbour — Bangladesh

The Print’s daily roundtable TalkPoint posed a question connected to the foreign policy implications of the Citizenship Amendment Bill and the National Register of Indian Citizens: CAB, NRC, Kashmir: Is Modi govt damaging India’s diplomatic standing for domestic politics? ‘Neighbourhood first’ was supposed to be the guiding principle of Modi government’s foreign policy. But all three measures — the new citizenship law, NRC and Kashmir issue — are examples of policy actions that are likely to have adverse outcomes for India’s interests in the region.The amended citizenship law and the NRC issue will put strains on India’s relations with its most important neighbour in the Indian subcontinent — Bangladesh. In 2018, Bangladesh emerged as India’s largest export market for Indian-made two-wheelers. Bangladesh has also surpassed Pakistan in terms of GDP per capita. The 2011 census data shows that illegal migration from there is reducing — it a stock problem from the past and not a flow problem of the present. Most importantly, the Sheikh Hasina government is one of the few steadfast pro-India formations in the neighbourhood. Unfortunately, the signal being sent to other leaders in the region is that taking pro-India positions might turn out to be a loss-making proposition.In the case of Kashmir, Pakistan will try to use the Article 370 issue to drive a wedge between the US and India. From Pakistan’s standpoint, returning to the India-Pakistan hyphenation era in the eyes of the US is desirable. From India’s viewpoint, the more Pakistan features in India’s foreign policy outlook, the less energy it has for confronting the more significant global challenges.Read the entire discussion on ThePrint.in website here. 

The Battle in Pakistan’s Military-Jihadi Complex

Contrary to popular belief, Pakistan's military-jihadi complex (MJC) has not been brought to its knees by Balakot, Uri, or even FATF. India's actions in Kashmir, for example, have provided the MJC with the perfect excuse to interfere as it does best. The reason for its current quiet is internal political turmoil connected to COAS Bajwa. India can ill-afford to take it for granted.For more, read The Telegraph Online.

India’s No First Use is badass enough. Modi govt needn’t change it to be more muscular

A day after India’s 73rd Independence Day, the Narendra Modi government threatened Pakistan with the possibility of a nuclear attack if it scales up cross-border terrorism and militancy against India. The Modi government appears to have calculated that the fear of an Indian nuclear strike will raise Pakistan’s costs of cross-border terrorism, thus deterring its use. The biggest problem with this bold new approach is that it will work only to the extent that the Pakistanis believe India’s threats are credible.Read more

Demoting India’s engagement with Pakistan from PM level to foreign secretary-level will be a good start

A response to The Print's TalkPoint question for 20th May: With Lok Sabha elections over, how can India and Pakistan now repair fractured ties?Pakistan is not one geopolitical entity, but two. The first is a putative state; represented by civilian governments and a civilian de-facto head of state. The competing entity is a dynamic syndicate of military, militant, radical Islamist and political-economic structures. It pursues a set of domestic and foreign policies to ensure its own survival and relative dominance: the military-jihadi complex (MJC). This latter entity is an irreconcilable adversary and must be delegitimised, contained and dismantled.Any Indian action towards Pakistan is met with a response by both these entities. For example, every Indian PM has sought to make a grand gesture that will “solve” the Pakistan problem, only to be stalled by the next terrorist attack orchestrated by the MJC. So, demoting the engagement with Pakistan from the prime ministerial level to the foreign secretary and national security adviser-levels will be a good start. This will allow India to calibrate its response towards Pakistan without having to risk huge political capital. India is better off putting a grand rapprochement on the back burner, while expending available political capital to launch economic reforms and get the country on the train to prosperity.

Are Pakistan’s Battlefield Nuclear Weapons a Mirage?

In April 2011, Pakistan conducted the first test of its short-range Hatf-IX or Nasr rocket. The test was interpreted as marking a shift in Pakistan’s nuclear posture to “full-spectrum deterrence,” which envisages a complete range of “strategic, operational and tactical” nuclear weapons that would give India “no place to hide.” More specifically, Pakistan claimed the Nasr was intended to “pour cold water over Cold Start,” the name given to the Indian Army’s doctrine, which involves the rapid mobilization of division-sized integrated battle groups making shallow incursions into Pakistani territory.Read More

Ten Takeaways from the Recent India-Pakistan Escalation

As the fog of war between India and Pakistan clears, here’s an assessment of the strategic consequences that go beyond immediate tactical gains and losses.Read the full article on ThePrint.

Is Opposition justified in seeking Balakot evidence or shouldn’t politicise national security?

Pranay's reply to this question for ThePrint's #TalkPoint of 4th March 2019The opposition parties are justified in seeking evidence to the extent that the government’s spokespersons insist with their boastful claim that 250-300 terrorists were killed in the Balakot air strikes by the Indian Air Force.In the broader scheme of things, the strategic consequences of the air strikes remain the same irrespective of the casualty figure. It’s not as if the Jaish-e-Mohammed will stop terrorism just because the air strikes hit their facility and killed some of its operatives.But the Pakistani military-jihadi complex, spearheaded by the Pakistani army, will definitely remember that India struck on its sovereign territory in response to a terror attack by an outfit operating from its soil. So, the strikes are a dent on the Pakistani army – the self-proclaimed ideological and territorial defenders of Pakistan.This is the real strategic victory for India. Any physical damage to the JeM facility and its leadership is a bonus. Hence the government and the opposition both should desist from exploiting this successful operation for their own partisan propaganda. We as a society are on the wrong track if Pakistan and its terrorists become an important issue in the upcoming elections.Read more on ThePrint.

We Live in Multiple Neighbourhoods

2018 was the year when India looked beyond Pakistan and South Asia. Let 2019 be the year when India reimagines itself as an important node in several neighbourhoods.Read the full article on Pragati here.

India will stay relevant in Afghanistan, Taliban or no Taliban

The action is fast and furious. Taliban representatives have attended peace talks in Moscow for the first time. Almost simultaneously, the US special envoy has broken a taboo and opened direct talks with the Taliban office in Qatar. Pakistan has released one of the founding members of the Taliban after eight years. In Afghanistan itself, a US general has been wounded in a Taliban attack and there are daily reports of the ever-increasing numbers of Afghans getting killed by Taliban terrorists.Such is the fluid state of political affairs in Afghanistan today that these highly divergent events are all unfolding concurrently.Amidst all these fast-moving political developments, it was the Moscow round of talks that attracted the most attention in India. India has consistently maintained that it supports an Afghan-led and Afghan-owned reconciliation process. So, sending retired diplomats as observers at the Moscow round of talks naturally sparked speculation that India was reversing its policy on Afghanistan. Interestingly, some commentators have, in the past, accused India of doing exactly the opposite — blocking attempts by the Afghan government to negotiate with elements such as the Taliban.Read more here>