The recent Pahalgam attack has sparked widespread debate and strong reactions—much of it emotionally charged and not always substantive. While social media doesn't determine strategic decisions, it does offer a clear sense of public sentiment, which is currently one of grief, anger, and a call for retribution. So, while the public has the liberty to be so, those in positions of power and responsibility must respond with measured judgment and careful consideration.
In management terms, a strategy refers to a long-term, well-thought-out approach—far from a quick-fix solution. It must be deliberate, timely, and impactful. Unfortunately, past Congress governments often failed to adopt this mindset, relying instead on the assumption that public outrage would soon fade. Under the current administration, there has been a noticeable shift. Whether this shift qualifies as strategic in the truest sense of the word—the answer is a resounding “No”.
The Government of India failed to effectively manage even the relatively minor political upheaval in Nepal, particularly in preserving the stability of the historically dependable monarchy. With a significant portion of its time consumed by frequent elections across different states—and a persistent scarcity of cohesive leadership due to internal mistrust among political peers—national security often takes a back seat to political exigencies.
Our Air Force remains severely underpowered, with alarming regularity of crashes involving aging fighter jets during routine sorties. This raises serious concerns about their operational readiness in times of actual conflict. The induction of the indigenous Tejas aircraft continues to face delays, prolonging reliance on outdated platforms. Meanwhile, Pakistan has fielded superior fighter aircraft equipped with longer-range Beyond Visual Range (BVR) missiles. During the Balakot episode, the Indian response lacked coherence; our Mirages and Sukhois failed to deliver a decisive blow, laying bare our operational shortcomings and the absence of strategic preparedness. Ironically, as reported in mainstream media, it was the outdated MiGs that played a critical role in salvaging the situation.
What is urgently required is not a reactive, populist move to appease public sentiment, but a comprehensive, long-term strategic doctrine—one that is meticulously planned and executed. The inevitability of conflict with our adversary demands not delay, but proactive preparation. If a confrontation is destined, it is wiser to be ready today than to regret tomorrow.
One of the gravest strategic missteps India has made is its passive stance toward Pakistan’s persistent adherence to the two-nation theory. While our neighbor actively nurtures ideological hostility, we have often chosen wilful blindness. It is vital to remember that successive generations in Pakistan are raised on a steady diet of revisionist history and anti-India propaganda, often underpinned by religious absolutism. Confronting such a mindset militarily requires more than superior firepower—it demands psychological and ideological engagement.
In my view, the following are critical areas of action:
1. Ideological Reclamation: Launch sustained public diplomacy efforts targeting Pakistani civil society, emphasizing shared South Asian roots and countering narratives of Arab ancestry and religious absolutism.
2. Internal Distraction: Keep Pakistan strategically preoccupied with its own internal challenges, reducing its bandwidth for external adventurism. The Pak army must bear the onslaught for its misadventures & voyeurism, not the perpetrators pawns alone.
3. Water Leverage: Expedite the development of dams and canals to gradually curtail water flow under the Indus Waters Treaty within a five-year timeframe, applying pressure without overt aggression.
4. Kashmir Strategy: Continue a twin-track approach—development outreach paired with firm administrative control. Transforming the Valley's mindset is a generational project, not an electoral one.
5. Political Restraint: National leaders must rise above inflammatory rhetoric. Statesmanship, not sloganeering, should define our political discourse on security matters.
And finally, let's not fragment the society. Our neighbour wants us to be divided.
You can contact Kamaljit at kamaljitmedhi1975@gmail.com
