Low Intensity Conflicts:
The new war in South Asia

Contributing Editor Dr SHIREEN M MAZARI examines the modern concept of limited warfare as applied to South Asia

That is one reason why India, despite being bled for over a decade in Occupied Kashmir cannot contemplate all-out war with Pakistan. But this has not prevented India from increasing the intensity of its military action there. Thus, it is increasingly apparent that low intensity conflicts (LICs) linked to subversion, are now going to define the antagonistic Pakistan-India relationship - especially in Kashmir. And what happens in Kashmir is directly linked to acts of terror and subversion that take place in Pakistan - that is, every time India is struck a blow by the Kashmiri freedom fighters, a random bomb blast takes place in some part of Pakistan - the latest being in Daska.

Subvert - as Chambers English Dictionary defines the word, means 'to overthrow; to overturn; to pervert'. Subversion means 'overthrow; ruin'. Since in a conflictual relationship between hostile actors the aim of each is to ruin the other, so subversion becomes a natural strategy for each. More so because of the changing nature of warfare today. Gone are the days when a conventional war for territorial conquest defined hostile state relations. Today, war has become more indirect - covering a broader spectrum ranging from political, economic and psychological arenas to the ultimate total war - the latter in fact becoming anti-war in that such a war loses all political goals in the face of annihilation. In other words, in many ways the Clausewitzian dictum of war being a continuation of politics has been stood on its head now with politics becoming a continuation of war by other means.

Given the decreasing relevance and acceptability of conventional warfare, states in conflictual relationships opt for indirect interventions in enemy territory in order to destabilise and weaken the polity. As such then, low intensity conflicts become a more viable option.

LIC & Kashmir

The present increase in the intensity of the military struggle in Indian-held Kashmir has presented India with a number of military setbacks. But the question is why did this intensity occur at this time? To begin with, India had been giving out to the world that it had managed to contain and effectively undermine the freedom struggle in Indian-held Kashmir. Following the nuclear tests and the 'Bus Diplomacy', India had even begun opening up access into Occupied Kashmir for selected foreign media and other groups.

Unfortunately, Pakistan's political government's detente overtures to India also created a misperception within the Indian decision-makers that they could have a free hand in Kashmir and Pakistan would look the other way - especially with the intensified cultural and business interaction that suddenly seemed to be taking place. This led the Indian military into launching a new offensive against the Kashmiri freedom fighters and that is where they miscalculated on a number of fronts and have now ended by being militarily stalemated - and, in fact, have lost critical ground to the Kashmiri freedom fighters. A serious miscalculation was reading a slight lull in the military struggle of the freedom fighters as a sign of weakening of this struggle. What was happening was a classic case of regrouping and replenishment on the part of the freedom fighters. Since the struggle is totally indigenous, with no material help from any external power, it takes time for the freedom fighters to regroup and revitalise themselves. But the problems of discipline and morale within the Indian occupying forces in Kashmir, along with their total isolation from the Kashmiris, has undermined their intelligence-gathering abilities.

Misreading both the situation on the ground of the freedom fighters and Pakistan's ability and will to respond in kind, India launched its latest military adventure along the Line of Control as a major offensive with which it hoped to end the military struggle of the Kashmiris through the use of force. Instead, India was surprised not only by the strength of the freedom fighters, who have taken and held on to the high ground in Kargil, but also by the prompt and concise respond of the Pakistan military. Of course, the Pakistan government failed to respond swiftly on the political and diplomatic fronts - which was probably the only correct calculation on the part of the Indians.

In many ways, the clash between the Indian and Pakistani forces along the LoC was also an attempt by India to test the military waters in relation to Pakistan. And Pakistan's response should make it clear to the Indians that Pakistan is also aware of the new relevance of LIC within a nuclear framework. However, as the present situation reveals, at the end of the day, even a LIC requires a final political settlement. What the LIC does is allow you to position yourself favourably for an eventual settlement.

Interestingly enough, the Indians have come out strong on the international media front even as they have been checkmated militarily. Already, not only are the Indians painting the Kashmiri freedom fighters as Pakistanis and other Muslim mercenaries aided and abetted by Pakistan, but it is once again playing up the 'fundamentalist' phobia of the West. On the media front India is making capital out of defeat while Pakistan for some strange reason continues to be shell-shocked almost!

Yet, it should be Pakistan that should have taken the media offensive and exposed India's repression of the Kashmiris and their aggressive designs. Instead of the few belated mutterings about increasing UN observers along the LoC, Pakistan should have immediately taken the propaganda offensive and highlighted the fact that while Pakistan has consistently suggested to India to increase the international observers along the LoC, the Indians have sought to have no UN observers at all in that area. Just this alone should prove who seeks aggression and a military solution to the Kashmir conflict.

Pakistan should also launch a political offensive to tell the world that unless the UN takes its commitment on the plebiscite seriously, Pakistan cannot simply wait and watch the Indians conduct a virtual genocide in Occupied Kashmir. Pakistan has a moral and political responsibility to aid the Kashmiris both morally and materially - and if the world is unable to persuade India to allow the Kashmiri their right of self-determination then Pakistan is also able to deal with India at the military level - given the restraints the nuclear capability has imposed on both sides. In other words, the Kashmiri freedom fighters can continue to bleed the Indian military and if the Indians choose to reject international observers along the LoC Pakistan would also be under no obligation to have them there if the freedom struggle intensified more. After all, Pakistan also has the ability to sustain a LIC and create linkages between LIC and subversion as the Indians are doing presently.

An even more ominous note in the present situation along the LoC is that India may be making one last desperate bid to settle the Kashmir issue militarily by taking on Pakistan in a conventional war before Pakistan has been able to actually deploy its nuclear weapons and operationalise its nuclear military doctrines. The Indian military has been psyched out by the defeat in the Kargil sector, especially the losing of their road link to Siachin. For them this is a desperate situation - and worse within their overall perception of being a 'great' power. In addition, their military has been having organisational problems also. So the whole India situation is unstable and prone to military adventurism by a desperate Indian military elite.

There must be a timely recognition of this Indian instability by the major powers so that they can rein in India well in time. After all, Pakistan cannot simply allow India to continue pounding it unchecked. And if India wants to premise its Pakistan policy on LIC and subversion then Pakistan has myriad opportunities it can also exploit.

LICs beyond Kashmir

The present crisis along the LoC is simply one overt manifestation of the low intensity conflicts that now threaten to dominate the Pakistan-India relationship. While the exchange of military fire along the LoC and the intensification of military action by the Indians in the region has been the focus of national and international attention, the fact is that subversion and the potential for LIC in South Asia has been prevalent for a long time in South Asian inter-state relations. And now, subversion and this potential for LIC have come into their own within the framework of the Pak-India mutual nuclear deterrence - as explained last week in this column.

With the war for territorial conquest being replaced with war for the hearts and minds of the people, subversion offers flexible options and opportunities. War has also become more indirect - covering a broader spectrum ranging from political, economic and psychological arenas to the ultimate total war - the latter in fact becoming anti-war in that such a war loses all political goals in the face of annihilation. In other words, in many ways the Clausewitzian dictum of war being a continuation of politics has been stood on its head now with politics becoming a continuation of war by other means.

Also, given the transnational linkages that sub-national groups within a state have these days, and given the reach of modern communications, the boundaries between external and internal, domestic and foreign have become increasingly blurred. for instance in the case of Pakistan, Muslim sectarian groups have linkages with external groups and governments while the various Christian churches also not only have their links with their parent churches, many of their educational and welfare institutions are funded from overseas. And ethnic linkages tie many groups with each other across Pakistan and India, and Pakistan and Afghanistan - to cite just a few major examples. Thus, in a conflictual relationship, especially where the strategic parameters are defined in nuclear terms, LIC and subversion are ideal strategies to play out zero-sum games - the intent being to give the enemy a continuous nose bleed.

Weakening the state from within and keeping it weak is the ultimate goal of subversion so that the state apparatus is unable to function effectively; and so that the government is forced into erring on the side of overkill - which will further subvert the state's functioning.

How India conducts its subversion & LIC policy

India realised the potential for subversion in South Asia very early on and the creation of RAW was for this specific purpose. Since then, within the overall framework of Indian power ambitions, subversion has become a major tool in the operationalisation of Indian policy aims in South Asia. An earlier survey of India's interventionist policies within South Asian states through its RAW (its intelligence services Research and Analysis Wing) in this column had clearly shown India's policy of subversion whereby it has isolated primarily ethnic groups within its South Asian neighbourhood. And the Indians constantly assert that Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) has been doing the same in India. However, while the case of India's subversive activities was lent credibility not only by researched books on RAW by Sri Lankan and Bangladeshi scholars [Rohan Gunaratna's Indian Intervention in Sri Lanka and Zainal Abedin's (an ex-Mukhti Bahini fighter) RAW and Bangladesh] but also by the Jain Commission report, there has yet to be any substantive publication to establish Pakistan's subversive role within India through the ISI.

Also, earlier in this column, there has been a detailed study of how sub-national conflicts in South Asia have been exacerbated as a result of external interventions (see Pulse Vol 7, No 1). Unexplained bomb explosions and random acts of terror, as well as the increasing militarism of ethnic/sectarian groups can all be understood within the heightened importance of subversion and LIC in South Asia.

However, one form of subversion being practised by India very effectively has tended to be ignored - yet it is perhaps most lethal in its long term effect. This is cultural subversion - spreading Indian/Hindu culture as the representative South Asian culture. Go anywhere in South Asia and Indian films and music are present - with their diverse lingual and cultural strains, all given the 'Indian' stamp. In fact the very use of the word 'Indian' to basically denote Bharat/Hindu interests has been one of the most successful propaganda ploys of India. One reason why India has been so effective in this area of subversion is that it has chosen to own all the multiple cultural strands that have reached the subcontinent over centuries. Wherever it has suited Bharat's interests, it has owned up to the non-Hindu art strains that evolved in the subcontinent - including the very rich literary and musical traditions of the Moghuls. India has been so effective in projecting all literary, musical and art strains that evolved in the subcontinent as part of its national development that even today no one associates Moghul cultural developments as part of Pakistan's evolution. The tragic irony is that Pakistan has also failed to acknowledge its rich and varied cultural moorings.

Anyhow, through the use of electronic media entertainment, India today is seeking to push through political messages to an unsuspecting South Asian public hungry for entertaining relief from the drudgery of their daily grinds. The message that comes through, especially for Pakistanis - in indirect ways, plugged briefly but repeatedly to wear down subconscious resistance - is that the partition was a mistake and there are too many ties binding the people of Pakistan and India. The historical reality of the caste system, of treating Muslims like the Shudras is all conveniently bypassed and an uneducated public in Pakistan laps it all up. Indian artists are used to raise money for charity in Pakistan, Indian artists are sent by India as 'peace' committees, and so on. Pakistani artists perform for Indian 'peace' programmes, and the lie gets substantiated that art and culture know no boundaries and are 'above' politics. Of course, the reality is that art and culture are the most effective political tools of subversion - if used cleverly. And so Pakistan's ruling elite continues to sacrifice national interest for short-term factional and personal interests as it falls in line with the Indian desire of multiple levels of people-to-people and cultural exchanges even as the Indian military continues to kill Kashmiris in droves.

Opportunities for Pakistan

While India has, on many fronts, perfected the art of subversion, Pakistan even now has many opportunities it needs to exploit in order to counter India's subversive activities. Pakistan needs to operate on two fronts:

One, on the military level Pakistan needs to prepare specialised units for Low Intensity operations that cannot only be sustained over a period of time but also contained within very precisely defined and limited parameters of escalation. Such preparedness would require not only special doctrines but also specialised conventional arms.

Two, on the subversion level Pakistan needs to act on all the fronts identified in the illustrated table. To begin with there are many conflicts prevailing in India - from the Sikh problems to the insurgency in the north east to any number of ethnic conflicts - that can be exploited. Pakistan also needs to develop a more cohesive policy on subversion within India.

On the ideas of war India has a tremendous head start and Pakistan first of all needs to claim and own up to the South Asian part of its cultural legacy. Only then can it fight India effectively on this front. Also, unless it can use the electronic media rationally and provide messages through gripping entertainment it will be unable to claim back its own audiences that have already been lost to Indian propaganda channels like Zee. The Muslim linkages need to be strengthened but as long as there is violent sectarian conflict in Pakistan it is hardly going to allow Muslim unity across the border. On this front, the Indians have been very effective so far.

But Pakistan has tremendous potential in terms of its literary and musical heritage if it owns up to it and popularises it. For instance, the richness of Kathak dance - which has its origins in Muslim Moghul traditions, as opposed to the Hindu moorings of Bharatnatyam - needs to be developed and popularised as does the whole range of Muslim musical traditions of the subcontinent. Additionally, we also need to develop our Central Asian and Persian cultural heritage so that we can finally evolve a rich and diverse literary and artistic tradition on which future generations can develop their evolution. Through developing these traditions we can attract audiences across the border and thereby send our own subtly couched messages through the entertainment medium. Already our TV dramas have a wide following in South Asia but we have failed to capitalise on it.

Finally, Pakistan must be wary of playing the Indian game of 'people-to-people' contacts and cultural exchanges while Kashmir continues to suffer Indian bullets. It may be wonderful to have Indian singers and film stars arriving here by the drove - and especially so if they happen to be Muslim - but it would serve us well to remember that an Indian is an Indian first and a Muslim, Parsee, etc. second, and it serves Indian policy to allow such open access to these Indian showbiz groups while India remains intransigent on Kashmir.

Also, while India has been quick to conduct random acts of terror in Pakistan every time its army suffers a bloody nose in Occupied Kashmir at the hands of the freedom fighters, the latter are very restrained in how they conduct their freedom struggle against Indian occupation. But perhaps the Kashmiri freedom fighters need to be reminded of history: That freedom struggles like the Algerian only succeeded when the freedom fighters took the war to the French homeland. And the British only compromised with the Irish once the IRA took the war to the British Isles and London. These are the cruel realities of military struggles and so the Kashmir war must be taken to the Indian mainland, especially South India to make the ordinary Indian realise the costs of his government's occupation policy in Kashmir. If freedom is to be won through the barrel of a gun then niceties cannot prevail and efficiency and effectiveness should be the primary considerations. That is what India has been doing and it is time Pakistan woke up to the realities of LIC and subversion for this is the new battleground in South Asia - the fight for the hearts and minds of the people. And it is a war that has to be waged on many fronts simultaneously.

LICs

Subversion Limited direct military exchanges

a) Militarising prevailing conflicts Ideas war

b) Exacerbating ethnic / sectarian polarisations

c) random acts of Electronic terrormedia

a) 'People-to-people' Propaganda

b) Cultural exchanges

a) Entertainment programmes

b) Discussions