Why Are Some Claims About Pakistan’s Aerial Retaliation Justified While Others Remain Doubtful?
India has recently conducted an air strike across the border, targeting suspected terrorist camps in Pakistan. While the Indian government emphasizes the strategic necessity of this action, it is crucial to analyze the underlying justifications for Pakistan's aerial retaliation. The controversy surrounding India's operation has sparked debates and questions about the reasons behind Pakistan's response.
The Flawed Argument: Pakistan’s Retaliation as a Proactive Measure
BJP members have suggested a “body count” as a justification for Indian military actions. However, this claim is debatable. The argument that Pakistan retaliated solely because the Indian Air Force (IAF) killed terrorists is problematic. This viewpoint fails to consider the broader strategic and psychological motivations underlying Pakistan's military response.
Dumb Pride of the Pakistani Army
The Pakistani Army's current stature and respect in Pakistan are largely dependent on their perceived capability to fight against India. This perception is propagated by the army and religious leaders, who portray India as a perpetual threat and the army as the protector of Pakistan. If the Pakistani Army fails to respond to a cross-border air strike by the IAF, it would undermine their image and perceived strength among the Pakistani populace. The notion that crossing borders is a call for war and that not responding would appear weak further accentuates this issue.
The irrationality of the Pakistani military, driven by a desire to protect their image, explains why they chose to respond with their own air force. While India sought to change the rules of engagement in the proxy war, Pakistan was resistant to this change. They needed to demonstrate that a terrorist attack does not warrant an immediate air strike, but rather a similar aerial response. This move aimed to assert that the rules of the proxy war remained unchanged, thereby neutralizing India's attempt to escalate the conflict.
Strategic Implications and Future Actions
The reasons for Pakistan's aerial retaliation are multifaceted and are driven by both strategic and psychological factors. The government must provide credible evidence to support these claims. The recent Reuters report and a video analysis from Times Now might offer some confirmation, but more official and verifiable evidence from the Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, would be ideal. The credibility of the Indian armed forces on the international stage is at stake, and the government must address all doubts.
Reliance on Credible Evidence and Official Confirmation
Given the ongoing political climate, the government's failure to provide credible evidence has intensified doubts. Moreover, the upcoming elections necessitate a clear and definitive stance from the government. Prime Minister Modi's word, carrying the weight of the entire government, would be crucial in addressing these concerns.
The experience with the derogatory labeling following the Uri attack serves as a cautionary tale. It is essential for the government to establish a clear and transparent narrative to prevent similar accusations in the future. Official confirmation from a credible source, such as the Prime Minister, would help mitigate these doubts and reinforce the credibility of the armed forces. The Obama address after the Abbottabad raid provides a relevant precedent, underscoring the significance of the PM's statement in validating the actions taken.