^^ Re: Amitabh's posts:
I disagree on several of your points, I will try and put across my view. Sorry if it sounds like a ramble..
The fact is that there is a political and military background to this action, not least of which is a 2010 agreement between India and Myanmar to facilitate crossborder strikes by Indian forces over and above previous joint military operations (as occurred in 2006). These facts complicate the current government's preferred narrative (which more generally is to claim take credit for many things done by others - more so than any of its predecessors), but they cannot be wished away.
Indian forces have crossed the Myanmar (and Bhutan) border on several occasions in the past, only not announced it to the world via an "eloquent" Rajyavardhan Rathore!
* The agreement says the both militaries can pursue militants across borders *after* obtaining consent. This has been stated by several news outlets too. There was no waiting for consent this time. Even if a blanket consent was obtained prior to the op, it takes guts to give the go ahead without actually letting the neighboring country know. The Myanmar authorities were informed well after the operation had commenced. Has this happened before? I don't think so. I also am happy that the Myanmar higher ups have sung along the same lines as the Indian statement, this points to heavy back channel activities to sooth any ruffled feathers. In the end their echandee also remains intact. This is the first time an Indian government has responded with speed and decisiveness. Super quick planning and decisions from the top. No waiting around for the Burmese to acknowledge and eventually end up leaking the info to the militants.
Also, AFAIK none of the past joint operations had the Indian forces unilaterally taking down enemy combatants (other posters can correct me here if im wrong). The past joint ops involved longer planning and co-ordination in some cases the govt had developed cold-e-feetitis and backed out of the cross border action. In the clipping you had posted some pages back (TOI) I don't read a single instance where the Indian Forces were in action alone. It was always a secular joint op, Myanmar even managed to thumb their noses at us cause they were upset at Suu Kyi gettin the piss award. It is indeed joyful to see an Indian govt ruthlessly protect India's honor and Interests.
Hats off to SF, but if you think there is any message for the western border you must be smoking strong stuff.
* Pawkis have received several messages from the Indian leadership in the recent past, this will not go unnoticed. The pawkis are crying themselves hoarse to any foreign govt diplomat willing to listen that the Indian def min has openly admitted to funding terrorists in Pak. In public they would act as if nothing is wrong, in private there is a massive shalwar browning ceremony happening for sure. Expect multiple multiple articles from ISI hacks in pawki rags claiming India will pay a steep price if it tries something similar. If you remember after Op Neptune Spear, which had no Indian hand, the pawkis went nuts and started warning India: "Don't try anything similar, we are a nookilar powah!" Do you think this would go unnoticed?
* A lot of cross-border action has happened in the past on the western front (as pointed out by many posters here) the scope was limited and also the Govt never went public with it, neither did the pawkis due to the sheer loss to their echandee it would cause. So saying that a similar cross border assault on the pawkis is impossible is inaccurate. This is the first time in decades, Im hearing a PM of India openly calling Pakis a Nuisance. When has that happened before? MMS was all "Strong and stable pak is good for Sooth asia".. AKA was all "Terrorists along with People in PAK army uniforms..." No one had the stones to call a spade a spade. Now the PM himself has taken the lead. If taken along with similar tones from the NSA and RM, one can be sure that ruling out similar (Overt or covert) ops in the western theater will be immature.
About the low casualities during a ceasefire
(What a disaster for people who enjoy conflict).
* I believe no one here likes a conflict just for the sake of the bloodshed. This one gets eyeballs and attention just for the unprecedented forcefulness of the operation and the clear-headedness from the govt actors and the public display of the success. A ceasefire where anti-national forces dont take any steps to reconcile, in my opinion is utterly useless. Re-grouping under a ceasefire is classic militant tactic, which eventually ends in bloodshed. All the peace and quiet in the past years were abused by the ultras and it directly led to this escalation. In the future, when there is a ceasefire, we will hopefully have ultras with the sense to use the time of peace for something good.