Hit Where It Hurts

The beheading of our soldiers by a Pakistani Border Action Team comprising comman-dos from the Special Service Group and India-centric terrorist groups on May 1 has once again whipped up national ire.

- Gen Bikram Singh

Despite the assurance from the defence minister on the ‘sacrifice not going in vain’ and the Army’s pledge on an ‘appropriate action’ at an opportune moment, the call for a decisive punitive action against Pakistan has been getting louder. The Uri incident of September 18 last year had breached the government’s threshold of tolerance, resulting in the launching of politically backed trans-Line of Control surgical strikes. This time around, an outraged nation is expecting something far more meaningful to teach Pakistan a lesson.

While the Army had declared an appropriate retributive action, the political endorsement by the defence minister has certainly enhanced its scope in term of ‘ends, ways and means’. The retribution could now take place anywhere on targets even beyond the tactical depth of 20 to 30 kilometres. While comprehensive plans exist for all possible options, the selection of the targets would finally be contingent on the political will and the political end state being sought through the use of force. Since the surgical strikes post the Uri attack carried a strategic message of our transformed decisive and aggressive intent, it would be logical to assume that the impending punitive actions would certainly be far more ferocious and decisive. However, it needs to be noted that, like last year’s surgical strikes, punitive actions in isolation will only help placate public sentiments. They will fail to coerce the Pakistan army and its Punjabi terrorist groups to stop bleeding India.