So the US is back in action, with a mediation offer India didn’t ask for. You heard Vice-President JD Vance, the tough negotiator with a much-touted Indian connection, saying the US had “no business” in the India-Pakistan war. That’s a sea change from the past, when the White House would summon the Pakistanis to Washington and give them a dressing down. In fact, the Pope’s funeral got more coverage than a war that had multiple actors in the shadows. But no one is interested. Hardly surprising, given that conflicts, wars, and casualties in their thousands are now part of everyday life. Think Gaza, Ukraine, Yemen, Myanmar, and yes, Pakistan itself.
There are new actors backing old agendas this time. In sum, Operation Sindoor’s backdrop is vastly different from anything India and Pakistan have been involved in in the past. Our future strategies need to take that into account.
The Two Tracks To The US Position
It’s curious. On April 24, US President Donald Trump strongly condemned the terrorist attack in Pahalgam to say that the US stood with India. On May 8, the State Department did the same. But the tone changed after India launched strikes against Pakistan, with the President calling it a ‘shame’; the state spokesperson said that Secretary Rubio had spoken to Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and had condoled the ‘loss of civilian lives’. In short, there was no recognition thereafter of a terrorist role.
On May 9, Vance made his remarks, that “We [the US] are not going to get involved in the middle of a war that’s fundamentally none of our business and has nothing to do with America’s ability to counter it”. Also, on May 9, Rubio, now the most powerful member of the executive with an additional post of US National Security Advisor, called Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister, Ishaq Dar, a day after he had spoken with India’s Foreign Secretary, S. Jaishankar. The read-out of that conversation indicates identical terse messages, quite different from the tone of another read-out just a day before that, which “reaffirmed the United States’ commitment to work with India in the fight against terrorism”. Now, the latest read-out of the “ceasefire” – which India calls a ceasing of firing and military action – congratulates both India and Pakistan and puts both countries on the same page.
America Keeps Its Hands-Off
In short, there are two schools operating. One is focused on ‘America first’, and another wants engagement, but only up to a point. Note that the US has washed its hands of mediation on Ukraine, a matter that should normally have been a core area in its foreign policy. This has to be configured in our posture. Quite unlike the previous administration, the current US dispensation seems to have no idea at all of the India-Pakistan history, or the fact that each target that India bombed is described, down to the address, in the US list of designated terrorist organisations.
Also, even as the May 9 meeting of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) – where the US is the largest shareholder – announced a disbursal of $2.4 billion to Pakistan, the Pakistani Prime Minister called a meeting of the National Command Authority, something that was seen as a clear threat of escalation. Having sent that message, it thanked everybody and welcomed mediation. Pakistan has been trying to do this for at least three decades now. In Islamabad’s eyes, this conflict has been an unqualified diplomatic success, even if their military has been battered.
What The IMF Has To Say About Its Loan
Worse, the IMF’s basis for another loan to Pakistan was that the “authorities have demonstrated strong program implementation”. The objective of the body, set up after World War II, was to ensure economic stabilisation; it rests on the principal objective of “orderly underlying conditions that are necessary for financial and economic stability”. A country that is determinedly engaged in fuelling war should hardly be in that category.
Past Is Not A Precedent
Consider the past precedents, when Pakistan rattled its nuclear weapons. It is now clearly documented how, in 1999, India’s escalation due to the use of air power led the then Pakistani Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif, to rush to Washington to appeal for help in ending a war he had been largely unaware of. Not just President Bill Clinton, but also Tony Blair – and Russia – were involved in bringing about an end to that conflict. The read-out back then had said, “President Clinton and Prime Minister Sharif share the view that the current fighting in the Kargil region of Kashmir is dangerous and contains the seeds of a wider conflict. They also agreed…that the line of control in Kashmir be respected by both parties in accordance with the 1972 Simla Accord”. There was no nonsense about mediation or US resolutions.
There was also ‘Operation Parakram’, which was conducted after the Jaish-e-Mohammad attacked the Indian Parliament on December 13, 2001. Not only did Defence Secretary Rumsfeld land in Delhi, but Japan and the UK were also involved in defusing tensions. Then, during Balakot airstrikes in 2019, American involvement was apparent in the pressure on Pakistan to release the captured Indian pilot. That led to President Trump offering to mediate on Kashmir at least thrice in his earlier term. He was rebuffed politely, but firmly. And this is what’s likely to happen this time too.
New Actors In The Game
Now, a look at the new actors involved.
The first is Azerbaijan, which has supplied Pakistan with defence equipment and also expressed “strong support” for it. The country has upped its defence production, and the equipment supplies include laser weapons and the formidable Bayraktar TB-2 – which, by the way, is also produced by Turkey. That drone had made its mark in the Nagorno-Karabakh war.
Then there’s Turkey, with its military cargo aircraft spotted in Karachi on May 8. A Turkish warship was also in Karachi just days earlier. Pakistan already has Turkish drones, including the Bayraktyar Akinci, a full-fledged armed craft with a 1,500-kg payload and an operational range of 6,000 km. So far, Pakistan has reportedly used only the short 10 km range Songar, capable of firing a machine gun. It’s easily transportable and cheap, and can be bought literally ‘by the kilo’. Pakistan may have also fired one long-range Chinese missile. Turkey is also usually a ‘cat’s paw’ for China when it doesn’t want to get directly involved. That could be the case now.
Chinese Checkers
China is hardly a new partner, given its decade-long involvement in Pakistan’s missile and nuclear capabilities. Some 80% of Pakistan’s total conventional weapons inventory is now Chinese. At least one PL-15 missile was used by Pakistan and was seized virtually intact. Then there was the unconcealed joy on Chinese social media when Pakistan falsely claimed that a Rafale had been downed by its forces. Unconfirmed reports also note that a Chinese aircraft brought in missiles from its own stocks.
As of now, however, after first condemning the terrorist attack, China has since May 8 continued to call for calm and has suggested that the international community play a constructive role. Most ironically, President Xi was seen beaming affably at Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow, when the BRICS meeting of national security advisors took off on April 30. It had much to say on counter-terrorism, all of which fell flat given that none of the members made any reference to the ongoing conflict.
Russia is still in play, and is finding ways to prop up its defence industry. But it is hardly a heavyweight partner anymore. Moscow, too, has walked back on the “full support” it had initially expressed for India. Sergei Lavrov turned back to an offer of mediation, and a conversation with Pakistan’s Defence Minister. That is a complete break from the past. There is no way that Delhi can ignore this.
What We Need To Acknowledge
To sum up, India has been forced to a ‘Do It Yourself’ mode, in a world that is riven by bloody wars and where even allies are divided.
First, while the US is busy with its musical chairs in shifting or throwing out top officials, it clearly wants a hand in ‘managing’ South Asia. We’ve seen this before in the dim past. Our foreign policy mandarins may need to reevaluate not only their position on the Quad (which has India, the US, Japan and Australia), but also all bilateral commitments to the US.
Second, a Pakistan-China networked air war, with access to Chinese satellites, is a reality. We need to rethink our whole strategy in the air.
Third, while the Brahmos and S-400s were our ace cards, any further investment in Russian systems means ending the Ukraine war. A little mediation of our own may be in order anyway.
Fourth, a new bloc has emerged. India might as well start dealing with Turkey, and also assisting Armenia. The Azeris also have Israeli help. It may be time to get Israel more engaged, though this may cause some US discomfort when it comes to actual defence deals.
In other words, we are operating in a wholly new environment, where friends may have changed to enemies, though not vice versa. The bottom line is, you’re on your own. The Indian government has clearly stated that nothing is on the table other than an end to firing. Expect more trouble as Pakistan again gets its terrorist assets together. After all, the US has just de-recognised the existence of these camps in the country. We’re not finished yet.
(Tara Kartha was with the National Security Council Secretariat)
Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author