Expert Speak Raisina Debates
Published on Mar 09, 2021
Our adversary stays the same and remains committed to propagating an alternate reality, one where they are always the victim, the duped, and somehow in this case, the winner.
Looking back: Two years since the Pulwama attack and the Balakot strikes 14 February marked the two-year anniversary of the attack in Pulwama where a Pakistan-backed terrorist killed 46 Indian soldiers. The attack sparked off a series of events, including India’s surgical strikes on a terrorist training camp in Balakot, and culminating in the capture and subsequent release of an Indian fighter pilot from Pakistani custody. Every year since, Pakistan reminds the world and its own people of this ‘benevolent gesture of peace.’ The Balakot strikes and their aftermath deserve to be revisited by analysts, partly because of Pakistan’s celebratory tone and to remind ourselves of the nature of our neighbour’s duplicity and hypocrisy. The events of February–March 2019 are an important lesson on how much perception and narrative matter. Last week, Pakistanis celebrated on social media, because they understood that they had “won” whatever they believe was being fought. Returning India’s airforce pilot was not seen as something that was supposed to be done, but rather an act of ‘extreme benevolence,’ that apparently ‘humiliated’ New Delhi. Facts seem like a choice if they do not fit the narrative of Pakistan’s grandiose actions.

The Balakot strikes and their aftermath deserve to be revisited by analysts, partly because of Pakistan’s celebratory tone and to remind ourselves of the nature of our neighbour’s duplicity and hypocrisy.

There seems to be no memory of, one, the massive international pressure on Pakistan to cause no harm to the pilot and return him immediately; two, the public admittance that General Bajwa was ‘shaking in fear’ about the potential Indian response; three, how they lost a F-16 fighter jet; four, how they did not meet their supposed objective which was to target Indian military bases in Kashmir; five, how Jaish-e-Mohammad claimed responsibility for the Pulwama attack. The only thing which was committed to memory was that the Pakistan army returned the Indian soldier. The collective amnesia that has been engrained by Pakistan’s military intelligence establishment and its media cronies into its people is what has continued to fuel the intense hatred and vitriol towards India as the apparent aggressor. While the lofty narrative of Pakistan’s benevolence is unsurprising, repetitive, and frankly a bit amusing, it is also devoid of logic and rational thinking. Just as was the case during the 2016 surgical strikes post the Uri attack, Pakistan denied that India actually bombed, attacked, or did anything at all in Balakot. After all, if Islamabad continues to deny that terrorists exist on their soil, how can they accept that India killed them? Yet, the army felt the need to respond to India’s violation of its airspace and, in hindsight, they did it only because they had an Indian pilot in their custody, saw it as a victory and retroactively called their response “Operation Swift Retort.”

If Islamabad continues to deny that terrorists exist on their soil, how can they accept that India killed them?

The reason the narrative around the events of February–March 2019 matters, is because it creates the perception of victory, and the perception matters because it creates a falsified truth that settles at the bottom of the Pakistani minds: We returned a pilot and we did nothing wrong. If India’s only chance for peace with Pakistan is hoping that its citizens realise the game that the Pakistani deep state plays with them, then the social media warriors and the bought-out media networks have destroyed any chance of that happening. It is for these reasons that the recent ceasefire declaration must be viewed with extreme caution and skepticism. While both sides have agreed to “strict observance of all agreements, understandings, and cease firing along the Line of Control and all other sectors,” it only provides India with temporary strategic relief that in all likeliness will not last. This is not a pessimistic take on the situation, rather a realistic one, given that there has been no change in Pakistan’s stance on Kashmir or in India’s stance on Pakistan-supported terrorism. Pakistan needs to show the world, particularly the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) which placed it on the grey list, and the United States that it is making peace overtures. The agreement is simply a public promise to be good while continuing to be bad in private.

For years, Pakistan has been propagating the narrative that India’s secular credentials are a farce.

India would do well to learn from Pakistan’s mistakes. While no doubt, leaders in both nations have domestic constituencies to appeal to, the narrative and agenda the political establishment sets directly affects the perception that one has about the nation. For years, Pakistan has been propagating the narrative that India’s secular credentials are a farce. While no international actor, baring a few, takes Pakistan seriously, there has been a steadily growing number of accusations against the ruling BJP government, both within the country and by the West on the growing cracks in India’s secular and democratic tapestry. This goes to show that whatever the Indian government’s narrative might be, it is harming its perception, which, in turn, is being used by Pakistan to say, ‘I told you so.’ On the two-year anniversary of the Pulwama massacre, it is important to remember that our adversary stays the same and remains committed to propagating an alternate reality, one where they are always the victim, the duped, and somehow in this case, the winner. The ceasefire agreement must be, therefore, looked at from this lens; welcomed, but with caution with our guard up and expectations low.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.

Contributor

Kriti M. Shah

Kriti M. Shah

Kriti M. Shah was Associate Fellow with the Strategic Studies Programme at ORF. Her research primarily focusses on Afghanistan and Pakistan where she studies their ...

Read More +