A June 22, 2015 Op Ed in The Hindu by M.K.Narayanan, former National Security Adviser (NSA) and the former governor of West Bengal, suggests that the Indian Army's recent operations against insurgents in the NE could backfire!. It's a bizarre suggestion and the former National Security Adviser's politically tainted erudition makes disconcerting reading.

I would like to start by pointing out a blatant error in the Op Ed. Narayanan says, "The theory underlying 'special operations' is to retain a degree of 'plausible deniability'." Not true! 'Plausible deniability' is intrinsic to covert ops, not special ops. Let's now dwell on the points that the former NSA makes.

According to Narayanan, Indian forces have been crossing the border in the past but the scale of operations has always been more limited, and the border transgressions have never been officially acknowledged. Like any seasoned diplomat, Narayan doesn't categorical state what he faults about the recent Indian Army operation. Is he suggesting that the Indian response should have been feeble? Feebler than the provocation? Or is he unhappy that India officially acknowledged the operation?

If it's the former, Narayanan needs to understand that the pusillanimity of the UPA in the face of border violations was one of the reasons why the nation voted the government out. He also needs to be reminded that for there to be change, there must be a change! It makes sense to tweak the intensity of our response to cross border terrorism, while continuing to keep it carefully calibrated, and that is precisely what the present government has done. As to India's official acknowledgement of the cross border operation, Narayanan needs to read the official Indian statement again - It does not acknowledge that Indian forces crossed the international border!

Narayanan is trying to project press statements made by government officials on the operation as official statements, knowing very well that there is a difference. Unofficial interaction with the press can be plausibly denied! We are all aware of statements such as "I was misquoted," or "I am being quoted out of context," or simply "that is not what I meant!" Indeed, there was a "covert" trans-border phase to the special operation conducted by the Indian Army, and that phase the government doesn't officially acknowledge. That is out-of-the-box thinking, Mr. Narayanan!

Hot Pursuit

Mr. Narayanan pedantically faults the government for ordering “hot pursuit” after five days. The "hot pursuit" culminated after 5 days. It started immediately!  A pursuit is hot, if the trail is hot. Without a hot trail there can be no pursuit. And as long as there is a hot trail there is hot pursuit. What matters is that the perpetrators got their due.

Intelligence Failure

Narayanan points to the lack of public discourse on the "the massive failure of military intelligence in this instance," claiming that the ambush resulted from "Indian Army’s failure to anticipate an attack." Seriously, Mr. Narayanan? Is there any intelligence network in the world that is fool proof? Historically there has been no impregnable defense, nor an impregnable intelligence network. Even more seriously, Mr. Narayanan, how many public discourses of intelligence failures did you supervise over as NSA?

Nuclear Funk

The most disturbing aspect of Narayanan's article is his allusion that any trans-border operations by Indian forces across the LoC could lead to a nuclear attack by Pakistan. It is fear mongering at its worst! The former NSA is allowing funk to cloud his logical thinking.

Often the retired Pakistani generals who appear on Indian TV (Musharraf comes immediately to mind!)  come across as being delusional. There is also a lot of evidence that many serving Pakistan Army generals are corrupt and greedy, and some are professionally reckless! But there is no evidence what-so-ever that serving Pakistani generals are collectively suicidal! Indeed there is no historical evidence of a nation committing suicide when faced with a trans-border incursion.

Despite some radicalization, the Pakistani army remains professional. The fact that it doesn't want peace with India for self-serving reasons is a different matter. Narayanan refers to Pakistan's military doctrine, knowing fully well that doctrines are part of psychological warfare - written as much for adversaries as for reference by own staff. Nuclear deterrence is a subject that is extensively studied by think tanks in India and abroad. Preemptive and suicidal use of nuclear weapons is not a known deterrence strategy.

By Vijainder K Thakur