Mr. Monkey,
To begin with, I would like to point out that no where in my post have I mentioned number of deaths. I have, on the contrary, referred to certain contradictory facts pertaining to specifics of the incident being furnished by the authorities at various points of time. However, I shall go beyond this little error in order to respond to the latter point you have made in your post.
Blaming Pakistan for the attacks can benefit the Indian government in two ways. One, it can assure its citizens that a threat of this magnitude is possible only from abroad and that too from a perceived historical rival. This allows the people to retain confidence in the internal stability of the country as well to some degree prevent the possibility of an communal out-lash based on internal differences. Very simply, all the murk has been swept off our shores onto another. This in my view would be the political benefit.
Two, India can use whatever diplomatic and strategic leverage it can get in order to curb militant activities against it sponsored by Pakistan. Shifting the blame of the Mumbai attacks on elements in Pakistan has no doubt brought to question Pakistan's credentials and has paved the way for international pressure to act on it. In fact, as we see right now, the tactic has only worked to our advantage with Pakistan taking significant measures to meet the demands of India, albeit with the constant support of the US and the international community. This to my mind, appears to be a significant strategic benefit India has gained by putting the blame on Pakistan.
Further, the shifting of forces in Pakistan from the Afghan border to the Indian one and the ensuing military tension is an unavoidable outcome. There would be very few circumstances under which such an action would not have been initiated. However, it is worth noting the intense emphasis by the Indian side of its rejection of a military option. This to my mind has done well to address concerns (though not to the fullest) while allowing India to pursue its political and strategic imperatives.
I must also clarify that I do not mean to suggest that India's position is completely based in fiction with the sole purpose of achieving perceived benefits. Rather, I am suggesting that while a lot of India's claims may well be based in fact, we need to be skeptical of its claims and actions. This is especially important when we see it in the context of the possible gains available to India and the discreditable manner in which it is handling the information campaign pertaining to the attacks.
To begin with, I would like to point out that no where in my post have I mentioned number of deaths. I have, on the contrary, referred to certain contradictory facts pertaining to specifics of the incident being furnished by the authorities at various points of time. However, I shall go beyond this little error in order to respond to the latter point you have made in your post.
Blaming Pakistan for the attacks can benefit the Indian government in two ways. One, it can assure its citizens that a threat of this magnitude is possible only from abroad and that too from a perceived historical rival. This allows the people to retain confidence in the internal stability of the country as well to some degree prevent the possibility of an communal out-lash based on internal differences. Very simply, all the murk has been swept off our shores onto another. This in my view would be the political benefit.
Two, India can use whatever diplomatic and strategic leverage it can get in order to curb militant activities against it sponsored by Pakistan. Shifting the blame of the Mumbai attacks on elements in Pakistan has no doubt brought to question Pakistan's credentials and has paved the way for international pressure to act on it. In fact, as we see right now, the tactic has only worked to our advantage with Pakistan taking significant measures to meet the demands of India, albeit with the constant support of the US and the international community. This to my mind, appears to be a significant strategic benefit India has gained by putting the blame on Pakistan.
Further, the shifting of forces in Pakistan from the Afghan border to the Indian one and the ensuing military tension is an unavoidable outcome. There would be very few circumstances under which such an action would not have been initiated. However, it is worth noting the intense emphasis by the Indian side of its rejection of a military option. This to my mind has done well to address concerns (though not to the fullest) while allowing India to pursue its political and strategic imperatives.
I must also clarify that I do not mean to suggest that India's position is completely based in fiction with the sole purpose of achieving perceived benefits. Rather, I am suggesting that while a lot of India's claims may well be based in fact, we need to be skeptical of its claims and actions. This is especially important when we see it in the context of the possible gains available to India and the discreditable manner in which it is handling the information campaign pertaining to the attacks.
No comments:
Post a Comment