Operation Sindoor has unchanged the rules of engagement between India and Pakistan for cross-border terror. As Prime Minister Narendra Modi said, it has “established a new parameter and a new normal”.
Proof of evidence
First of all, the international community has always placed Ons on India to prove in every case, that not only the terrorists came from Pakistan, but they were also sponsored by the Pakistani establishment. Such questions were raised even when India faced a series of terrorist attacks from Pakistan, including attacks in Mumbai in 2008, where one of the criminals, Ajmal Kasab was caught and the direct complexity of Pakistan was revealed. It is irony that when non-state actors such as Hizbullah in Lebanon or Hauthis Israel in Yemen, Iran is later and the US targeted country Iran, as default estimates that these groups are its proxy. Whereas here, even though there is a neighboring training in India and terrorists have been sponsored to cross India through a shared physical border, the world refused to make that estimate and continued to ask India for evidence.
This was the same story when the Pahalgam terror attack took place in April this year. The international community kept seeking evidence from India and refused to demand accountability or action against Pakistan against its terrorists. They went one step ahead and asked the two countries to “de-skeletes”, as if India had extended the situation. Even the fact that Pakistani army officials attended the funeral to terrorists killed by Indian strikes on terrorist camps were not the cause of a wave in the international community. They ignored it as if it had never happened.
Operation Sindoor has called all this bluff and has completely put on the Pakistan to prove that they have not carried out a terrorist attack. Any terrorist attack will now be specially sponsored by the Pakistani Army and Inter -Requests Intelligence (ISI). As the Prime Minister said, India will not distinguish between the government that sponsors the mastermind of terrorism and terrorism “. India has not left any scope for denying them. This is the first new normal.
Shifting responsibility for Pakistan
Secondly, by estimating Pakistan, India has also given the responsibility of preventing hormones, training, sponsorship and commission of cross-border terror acts. It is not only India that is responsible for fighting terror on its soil – it is equally comfortable on Pakistan to see that its soil is not used to export terror. When ice melts, it is not an option for Pakistan without serious consequences and costs. It will be held accountable.
zero tolerance
Third, a strong military reaction is new common. Any terrorist attack will be determined by Pakistan and will meet with a strong military reaction. As the Prime Minister warned, “Operation is India’s policy against vermilion terrorism.” It is equally important that Operation Sindoor has only been “stopped”, which shows India’s readiness to maintain war on terror. The military reaction is now a default mode – a zero – a clear indication of a zero -malaise policy for terror.
However, we have to be careful that terrorist groups published by equally irrational and radical elements in the Pakistani establishment do not take advantage of this default currency of India and staging another terrorist attack mainly with Pakistan to incite another military conflict. They can make it under the wrong estimate that they will put the so -called “Kashmir” issue on a boil and internationalize it, especially now that they are in the United Nations Security Council. The world has no hunger for internationalization of this issue, and Pakistan’s cost of any such misconception will be huge.
A comprehensive preventive strategy
Fourth, so far, India has always struggled to implement a strong preventive against Pakistan-provided terror, given our firm but episodic approach to terrorist attacks. This time, meditation has been on the installation of a comprehensive preventive, including both military and non-monitor measures. Pakistan’s “reliable and irreversible Abjures” has been one such stand in the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) prosecution till terrorism. Widely in India, especially in Jammu and Kashmir, as an uneven sharing of water, only 30% of them were allocated for India-Hollen Efforts, which has failed every effort to re-interact the treaty. Now, holding it in abyance and saying that “water and blood cannot flow together”, India has given a notice to Pakistan, and in fact the international community, that it may not agree to the status quo on IWT or on border terrorist. It has implications for the future of Pakistan.
Focus on curbing the religiousophobia
Fifth, unlike what the terrorists tried to achieve, which was to target Hindu tourists and create a communal division in Jammu and Kashmir and even in other parts of India, they achieved the exact contrast. The Indians who cut in religions and regions came together in solidarity with the victims of terror, all of whom were Hindus, except a Muslim who sacrificed his life to save the tourists. As a permanent representative of India to the United Nations, I launched a campaign to ensure the first time at the United Nations General Assembly in March 2022, stating that the issue of religiousophobia was raised against non-anti-persons including Hindu-Anti-Sikh and Buddhist disgusting crimes. Sikhs and Buddhists are accepted and fought.
In addition, India has decisively called Pakistan’s “Nuclear Bluff”, which the world regularly parked. At a time when the West was heavy to Ukraine to take a “atom” Russia, they were calling nuclear India and nuclear Pakistan to preserve de-size and regional stability. As mentioned by the Prime Minister, Pakistan was developing a “terrorist hide” under the cover of Pakistan nuclear blackmail. India has shed itself the huts of the nuclear bogie, and it is a very big game changer.
Victims and criminals: a false equivalence
It is clear that the international community was not uneven in his support for India on the Pahgam terror attack. Neither did he call Pakistan out to reduce the attack. Even if some played a previous door role to suppress Pakistan, their public currency focused on perfectly to ensure that the situation was not out of control. This will remain the default currency of major powers. But their false equality between the victim India and the criminal Pakistan has been exposed to India’s decisive strike in terrorist camps and later, in the Pakistani domestic military property, showing that India itself is able to handle terrorist attacks decisively. Hopefully, it should have an impressive impact on the international community.
A lot of wrongly as US President Donald Trump wants to portray the ceasefire as an American-medium, perhaps Pakistan got figs of figs, which they were looking to get out. Like the first President Clinton, the United States has a history of pressurizing Pakistan to step into steps with India. This is usually done to give Pakistan a “respectable” way. India has shown restraint not to over-react to Trump’s explosion and has factually established its stance in public domains: does not agree to any arbitration proposals and is treating issues bilaterally.
Once the establishment of Pakistan understands the importance of being transpired during Operation Sindoor, the country is bound to have internal churning. In the coming months how it will be interesting to get out, especially with a government that is widely seen as a lack of validity.
Operation Sindor has once again outlined the importance of security and geopolitics along with economic development and development. And, India needs to play a large geopolitical role globally. This will only strengthen our strategic autonomy, will not reduce it. This will only help in our economic development, not to reduce it. This will prevent the international community from trying to boxing us in South Asia. It will also be in line with a large global role, which we are already calling to play.
(The author was India’s permanent representative in the United Nations, New York from 2020 to 2022)
Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author
