A_Gupta wrote:RajeshA, suppose one replied to a war of a thousand cuts with a decapitation - would the number of punches matter?
Number of punches are counted by the victim only if he intends
"Number of Punches" brings in a lot of political maths. Let's say that we do believe in the principle of "sau sunaar ki to ek lauhar ki"
(Single hit by a blacksmith is equivalent to a hundred hits by a goldsmith)! How does that function in reality?
There is a lobby in India which does not want war between India and Pakistan, be it because of concerns relating to business environment, or relating to inter-communal relations inside India, or relating to some personal interests, or genuine fear of war and its toll on human life, or ideological reasons, etc.
There can be a lobby which holds an opposite view. These would be the Indian nationalists who would opt for a retaliation for the terror acts. Then there can be politicians, who could genuinely benefit from anti-Pakistani mood in India. Thirdly it is the military-industrial complex of a country which is eager to have war. For some reason or another, I don't see Indian politicians trying to milk a post-terror anti-Pakistan mood in India to make political hay. It is as if the anesthesia is strong enough for Indians to not feel too much discomfort even if India's teeth are broken through repeated punching. So politicians don't make much of an issue out of it. Neither does India have an entrenched MIC. It is all public sector. As far as Indian nationalists are concerned the Internet offers some respite and one can vent out one's frustration and anger, without much changing the status quo.
Under such circumstances, the 'Peace Lobby' is far stronger, and can ultimately fashion India's response.
Now we come to the number game, and some questions arise!
- How many terror acts from Pakistan are needed before the Lauhar goes and gets his hammer?
- Who would count Pakistan's terror acts?
- So even as Pakistan adds to its list of terror acts against India, wouldn't the 'Peace Lobby' try to use a rubber at the other end, and start wiping off those terror acts from Indian public's memory,
- By overemphasizing how the city and community is getting back on its feet
- By directing the anger inwards towards the failure of own intelligence and security forces in the various marches, rather than at the perpetrator.
- By keeping the survivors and families of the victims as faceless
- By not commemorating the anniversaries
- through TV programs on the terror act
- by revisiting the survivors and the families of victims and their anguish
- by not making it an issue of how the government has delivered on justice for some terror act
- by not having country-wide 2 minute silence
- by not making the history of terror against the country a part of the education curriculum
- by instead bringing out "Aman ki Asha" campaigns instead
- Many would dispute that some terror acts were even from Pakistan, and hence cannot be 'counted'.
The system is hardwired not to respond to the many acts of terror against the country. There is no guarantee that at the end there would be an Indian response. So even if there are a thousand or two thousand cuts, it will never add to a sufficient number to declare war against Pakistan or to do a decapitation
. It is not as if a new terror attack adds to a preexisting anger among us. The old anger has been sufficiently cooled in the meantime before the next terror attack takes place.
Secondly 'decapitation' sounds good only in theory. Jihadism is a multi-headed monster. It is somewhat incredulous to think that a single reprisal would bring us the total 'decapitation'.
All that counts is that the Terrorist can space its attacks appropriately; can keep the threshold of its last attack below a certain level, behind the red line; and can manipulate Indian politics directly or indirectly to not retaliate. This game the terrorist can play indefinitely, as no counting of terror attacks take place.
The only solution is to respond to each and every terror act individually. If one does that properly, there is not going to be a thousand cuts. The lesson would reach home. The retaliation should be limited in duration - say 2-3 days, it should be surgical and it should be comprehensive on the terrorist's person, his family, his organization, his community, his country and his ideology. The retaliation should be granular. It should be the Michael Corleone way - synchronous, and thus granular! In the intervening period we collect intelligence for the next retaliation.
Such a pattern of retaliation is important, because we don't want to be in a state of constant war, only in a state of constant preparation for war. Constant war only helps India's enemies to consolidate their position within their communities and ideology.
RajeshA wrote:Everybody needs to be told why somebody was punished.
Why? To make us feel better? Will the other rage boys be suitably chastised after that? On the other hand, what if Saeed was punished by someone even more pious?
This "to make us feel better" is getting boring! It is piskologising ourselves to a paralysis!
I am in favor of painting the Pakistan's Breakup Painting using broad brushes of such strategies - letting more pious carve up the less pious. But this should not go too far.
When Hafiz Saeed masterminded Mumbai 26/11, he branded his ass with "India"! His ass belongs to us! It would be a folly to let him die in any other way than by India's hand! In fact we should kill anybody else who takes him down before we get the chance to do so! He belongs to us
Now the piskological brigade would start jumping up and down, telling me that that is only because I want to feel better. But that is not the whole story. That is kshatriya dharma, as I see it, and we have to do that dharma justice. Sure a hyena can wait till the lion has made his kill, get some of the leftovers and lick its tongue in contentment. But that is not how we want to be seen - as a hyena. A world power needs to be seen as a lion! We have to make our own kill.
Now of course GoI can say, they didn't have anything to do with the retaliation, as far as assassinations go or collective punishment goes, but there should be sufficient rumor in the mills to point out in our direction without there being conclusive proof.