Caution and firmness

India's case on Kargil has found additional support in the Clinton administration's publicly stated view that the crisis can only be reso...

India8217;s case on Kargil has found additional support in the Clinton administration8217;s publicly stated view that the crisis can only be resolved when Pakistan pulls back its forces. Although it is too soon to count this and other evidence of Pakistan8217;s international isolation on the issue as a triumph of Indian diplomacy, it certainly underscores its success in getting across an accurate picture.

It remains to be seen whether this recognition of the facts in Kargil will lead to an explicit call, which is now necessary, to Islamabad to end its aggression. G-8 foreign ministers issued a statement early in June expressing concern and urging restraint.

The time has come for G-8 leaders to go further when they meet in Cologne at the end of the week. Strong condemnation of Pakistan should logically follow given not only that the provocation for the conflict is now well established but also bearing in mind that India has no option but to continue military operations to retake positions occupied by heavily armedinfiltrators.

Cautious heads may, however, urge at this stage that the G-8 stop short of steps that would push Nawaz Sharif to the wall and seek other means instead of pressuring Islamabad. The assumption behind calibrated application of pressure, that the civilian authority in Pakistan is everyone8217;s best bet in winding down the conflict and should be given more time to assert itself over the military establishment, may or may not be correct.

But in whatever way they choose to make the point, G-8 leaders can no longer afford to leave Islamabad in any doubt that it bears full responsibility for ending the conflict and any escalation in tension.

The restraint observed by India in its military operations, keeping to its own side of the LoC, has played a crucial part in the positive international response it has received. The endorsement of India8217;s careful handling of a delicate situation, by President Clinton, among others, is also intended subtly to convey the message that military operations shouldcontinue to be restricted to its own side of the LoC. This is easier said than done in the present kind of engagement.

As Indian troops successfully retake one position after another, the action is moving closer to the LoC and army briefings indicate, artillery has hit targets, probably supply lines, on the other side. At this critical stage in operations, it is pointless to shy away from the reality. This is a harsh battleground; Indian troops fighting their way uphill are taking many casualties.

Story continues below this ad

It is important to make clear to the adversary and to the world what kind of military measures may be essential for India to take and to reiterate that they change nothing as far as Indian objectives are concerned. Those objectives are limited to removing the aggressor from Indian territory and restoring the LoC to its original alignment. There are no grounds whatsoever for construing the Indian effort to minimise its troop casualties as an escalation or widening of the conflict. All the necessary precautionsmust be taken against misperceptions, deliberate or otherwise. Timely briefings in world capitals should ensure there are no misunderstandings on this score. Caution, yes, but firmness and clarity of mind too.