close_game
close_game

Making deterrence on terrorism work in J&K

Jul 14, 2024 10:59 PM IST

The terror strikes in Jammu call for refining India’s Pakistan policy. Delhi now has to decide how deterrence can be achieved through a more coercive posture

On July 8, two army trucks moving on a mountain road near Badnota village in the Kathua district were ambushed by a group of terrorists. In the ensuing firefight, five soldiers were killed and five seriously injured. This was the latest in the series of attacks witnessed in the Jammu region, in areas that were, until recently, regarded as militancy-free.

The search operations come amid a spike in terror attacks across Jammu region. (File)(HT_PRINT) PREMIUM
The search operations come amid a spike in terror attacks across Jammu region. (File)(HT_PRINT)

Terror incidents, though isolated, have now taken place across the entire expanse of Jammu Division, stretching from the Poonch district adjoining Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir in the west to the Kathua district bordering Punjab and Himachal Pradesh. Most of these attacks are attributed to Pakistani terrorists who have infiltrated the Jammu region in recent months.

The attempt to reignite violence in Jammu appears to be a meticulously planned and deliberate effort. Under relentless pressure in the Kashmir Valley, terrorists have redirected their focus to areas south of the Pir Panjal Range, where the troop density is lower, the terrain more challenging for the security forces, and the intelligence network is less developed.

These attacks are aimed at countering the government’s narrative that terrorism is on its last leg and will be soon eliminated. Many are contesting the claim that normalcy is being restored in Jammu and Kashmir. When their credibility is questioned, governments often find themselves compelled to take action.

Defence Secretary Giridhar Aramane expressed his “profound grief on the loss of five Bravehearts” and said, “their sacrifice will not go unavenged”. Some actions are already visible. Additional forces have been inducted into the Jammu region, patrolling has been intensified, suspects are being questioned in large numbers, and the security grid along the international border in Jammu and Punjab is being reviewed to strengthen counter-infiltration measures. There is also a need to improve human intelligence by enhancing outreach to the local communities. A few dozen terrorists are no match for state power applied effectively. There could be costs, but ultimately, the security forces will prevail, particularly in conditions where local support is limited, as is the case in the Jammu region.

How to deal with Pakistan is the more serious question. It is fairly obvious that the planning for the activation of the new areas has been carried out in Pakistan, and the perpetrators of the recent attacks across the Jammu region are all from there. In deciding India’s response, the objective is also clear – to deter Pakistan from continuing with state-sponsored terrorism against India.

The BJP-led governments have shown resolve in dealing with terrorism and have not hesitated to use the military instrument. Improvement in bilateral ties has been made incumbent on Pakistan stopping the use of terrorists to destabilise Jammu and Kashmir, and cross-border operations have been conducted in 2016 and 2019.

However, it must also be admitted that these policies have had only a limited impact. They have served to assuage public sentiment and demonstrate the state’s decisiveness, but beyond imposing caution, have not entirely deterred Pakistan. India now has to decide how deterrence can be achieved through a more coercive posture.

The core component of traditional deterrence is the threat of punitive measures. There will be a stated penalty if Pakistan continues with actions that we do not want it to take. However, since diplomatic ties are almost non-existent and there is no economic interdependence, little pressure can be put on these areas. We could continue to call out Pakistan for its support of terrorism in international and multilateral forums, but this has yielded few concrete results.

This leaves India with the kinetic option, both covert and direct. Many recent writings suggest that India should conduct cross-border strikes and abrogate the ceasefire in place from 2021. These are decisions for the government to make after carefully considering the pros and cons. However, whatever decision is taken must be clearly communicated and should be credible.

The effectiveness of deterrence hinges critically on the credibility of the threats. There must be a consistent demonstration of our resolve and the political will to follow through if Pakistan continues to send terrorists into our territory. It must also be understood that credible threats involve an element of the risk of escalation, and this should be factored into our planning.

Since deterrence is fundamentally an effort to influence the thinking of the opponent, the other side should also see some perceived benefit of compliance. Benefits provide a positive inducement for the adversary to refrain from taking an undesirable action or to comply with specific demands. What kind of inducements India can offer Pakistan (if at all) is a politically sensitive matter that would have to be closely debated in the inner circles of the government and would depend on affirmative action by Pakistan.

It could be argued that given Pakistan’s record of duplicity, inducements have little meaning, and punishment is the only way to influence Rawalpindi’s behaviour. However, as Thomas Schilling writes in his classic Arms and Influence, “Coercion requires finding a bargain, arranging for him to be better off doing what we want – worse off not doing what we want – when he takes the threatened penalty into account.”

India has shown its resolve in dealing with terror emanating from Pakistan but with limited long-term impact. In the face of continuing intransigence from Pakistan, India must now look to refine its strategy.

While India deliberates its options, Pakistan must also deeply reflect on whether its persistent irrationality over the Kashmir issue truly serves the nation's interests or if it risks plunging the country into an even deeper crisis than it currently faces.

Lt General (retd) Deependra Singh Hooda is the co-founder of the Council for Strategic and Defence Research and a Senior Fellow at the Delhi Policy Group. The views expressed are personal

rec-icon Recommended Topics
Share this article

For evolved readers seeking more than just news

Subscribe now to unlock this article and access exclusive content to stay ahead
E-paper | Expert Analysis & Opinion | Geopolitics | Sports | Games
SHARE THIS ARTICLE ON
SHARE
Story Saved
Live Score
Saved Articles
Following
My Reads
Sign out
New Delhi 0C
Saturday, February 08, 2025
Start 14 Days Free Trial Subscribe Now
Follow Us On