Post-Uri Attack: Coordination Between India, Iran And Afghanistan Needed To Cut Pakistan To Size – OpEd


By Lt Gen P. C. Katoch

The slanging match at UN General Assembly (UNGA) is already underway. Pakistan has already accused India of stage managing the terrorist attack in Uri to divert attention from Kashmir. And this is not the first time Pakistan has displayed such brazenness. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif will go hyper to talk about Indian atrocities in Kashmir and need for plebiscite in accordance with the 1948 UN Resolution on Kashmir. The world is perhaps unaware that: one, the state of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) was legally ceded to India in 1947; two, the said UN resolution marked Pakistan as aggressor and that is why Pakistan was required to withdraw its forces from Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK); three, issue of plebiscite is dead because Pakistan has deliberately changed the demography of PoK and the 1972 India-Pakistan Shimla Agreement made the UN resolution redundant; four, result of the first ever poll on both sides of the Line of Control (LoC ) in J&K conducted by Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House), UK in conjunction with King’s College during 2009-2010 brought out that 98% of people in J&K do not wish to be part of Pakistan and 50% of people in PoK do not wish to remain with Pakistan; five, Pakistan has been waging a proxy war in J&K and inducing Wahabism but only 15% population on 7% territory of J&K is affected, and; six, pellet gun casualties in J&K are nothing compared to the aerial and artillery bombardment and genocide that Pakistan has been doing in Baluchistan, Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and Gilgit-Baltistan.

The Uri terrorist attack was masterminded by Pakistan through Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) terrorists surprising the army in the early hours of the morning, lobbing incendiary grenades and then spraying bullets, some of the grenades setting the diesel dump on fire. 19 soldiers are already reported dead and some 30 injured. 13 of those reportedly killed were in two tents that caught fire. The four terrorists, all foreigners, were eventually gunned down. All four were carrying items with Pakistani markings including map, GPS, explosives (RDX and TNT), a matrix sheet of codes and notes in Pashto besides AK 47 rifles and under-barrel grenade launchers. This is not the first time that Pakistan has used JeM to attack India.

The terrorist attack on the Indian Air Force (IAF) base at Pathankot in January this year too was the handiwork of JeM, as also terror attacks in Gurdaspur and Pampore. JeM and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) are also operating with impunity in Afghanistan as clearly brought out in the report release this July by the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) headed by Tadamichi Yamamoto.

Sure there is plenty condemnation of the terrorist attack in Uri by world leaders, with the exception of China, and the best perhaps from Russia, which has cancelled its joint tactical exercise with Pakistan scheduled from September 24 to October 7 to be held in Pakistan in areas of Rattu and Cherat and has also ruled out possibility of any Su-35 and Su-37 deal with Pakistan. But overall response from the global community to the crucible of terror (Pakistan) is too soft to say the least and Pakistan remains defiant not only because of the close support of China but continuing support by the US, at least in the near term.

Significantly, it is UNAMA, not US intelligence that has pointed out JeM and LeT operating in Afghanistan. It is the Head of UNAMA, Tadamichi Yamamoto, who labeled the July 23, 2016 terrorist attack on Hazaras in Kabul that killed 80 and wounded 231, a “war crime”. The ISIS may have claimed responsibility for the Kabul attack, but the dead Pakistani terrorist clearly indicated Pakistani involvement. Yet, there is dithering in labeling Pakistan a ‘terrorist state’, not even putting it under economic sanctions by the world.

A US Senate panel has accused Pakistan of playing a double game and that Pakistani proxies killing US soldiers especially in Afghanistan. US and NATO Generals in Afghanistan had been pointing this out for years, pointing to the need to attack the hatcheries of terrorists in Pakistan. Yet the US administration deflected the issue by saying Pakistan is a big state, as if Pakistan was any smaller and not nuclear when Hillary Clinton, as Secretary of State, threatened Pakistan to join the Global War on Terror (GWOT) or be prepared to get “bombed into Stone Age”.

Isolated predator attacks are hardly the solution to a rogue state like Pakistan but then why can’t the US administration threaten Pakistan to stop generation of terror the way Hillary Clinton did? The nuclear bluff of Pakistan needs to be called, at least bring it to the state of penury like North Korea and let China expend its energies to keep this nuclear talon also alive, in addition to North Korea. Former US President George Bush was pretty vocal about the “Axis of Evil” and had already planned in 2001 to take out Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran, as disclosed in 2011 by General Wesley Clark, former Supreme Allied Commander, NATO, but what about the China-Pakistan-North Korea axis?

James B. Comey, Director FBI, went public on July 27, 2016 saying, “the eventual victory against the Islamic State could well lead to an uptick of terrorist attacks in the west, not a reduction in them … hundreds of really dangerous people, and they are going to flow primarily to Western Europe, but some could well end up in the United States”. So what is the message; why go for the so called “eventual victory” which is unachievable anyway, but then preventing reverse exodus into the US and Western Europe can best be achieved by diverting the caboodle elsewhere – and what better way than the Af-Pak region.

The Pakistan army has never won a conventional war and has won the distinction of being perhaps the only army in the world to have lost half the country (East Pakistan), surrendering 93,000 of its rank and file headed by a Lieutenant General as prisoners of war. What better than letting the Pakistan army be consumed by sub-conventional forces that would not ripple- effect mainland China? This should be possible with Wikileaks recently disclosing that during Obama’s second term as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton authorized the shipment of American-made arms to Al Qaeda and ISIS through Qatar; “1,700 emails contained in the Clinton cache directly connect Hillary to Libya to Syria, and directly to Al Qaeda and ISIS”.

The countries that are directly affected by Pakistani terror are India and Afghanistan and, to some extent, Iran. Pakistan is confident, though shakily, that India will not attack and that is why it keeps wagging its nuclear tail every now and then. But Pakistan is more confident that India will not bomb and attack the small-numbered radicalized population of J&K as Pakistan is doing in Balochistan and FATA or Sri Lanka did to LTTE, nor would India engage in reverse ethnic cleansing like Pakistan orchestrated for Kashmiri Pundits from Kashmir Valley. But the bottom line is that while Pakistan may not be affected much through diplomatic isolation, it is enveloped by India, Afghanistan and Iran. It is these three countries that must conjointly plan to deal with Pakistan diplomatically, economically, militarily including sub-conventionally and through information operations – in conjunction with friendly countries that genuinely want Pakistan cut to size.

*Lt Gen P. C. Katoch is veteran Special Forces of Indian Army. Comments and suggestions on this article can be sent on: [email protected]

South Asia Monitor

To create a more credible and empathetic knowledge bank on the South Asian region, SPS curates the South Asia Monitor (, an independent web journal and online resource dealing with strategic, political, security, cultural and economic issues about, pertaining to and of consequence to South Asia and the Indo-Pacific region. Developed for South Asia watchers across the globe or those looking for in-depth knowledge, reliable resource and documentation on this region, the site features exclusive commentaries, insightful analyses, interviews and reviews contributed by strategic experts, diplomats, journalists, analysts, researchers and students from not only this region but all over the world. It also aggregates news, views commentary content related to the region and the extended neighbourhood.

4 thoughts on “Post-Uri Attack: Coordination Between India, Iran And Afghanistan Needed To Cut Pakistan To Size – OpEd

  • September 22, 2016 at 5:59 am

    The authors rant is a fantasy all Indian military personnel have had for the last 50 plus years. To cut anyone to size you need to have the capacity and capability to carry out the threat. However, considering Indian forces inability and demonstrated incompetence to proactively neutralize or handle terrorist incursions, it doesn’t bode well for any transgression agaisnt a combat hardened military like Pakistan that has more field experience than PT drills under its belt. Also Considering the issues the similarly incompetent, corrupt and divided Afghan NUG is having in Afghanistan, this article comes across as an amusing fiction piece.

  • September 24, 2016 at 3:56 pm

    India feels week enough to coordinate with Iran and Afghanistan to cut Pakistan to the size but not bold enough to seek merit based solution of Kashmir and save over 20 % population of the world from ever increasing agony. While Afghan-Iran is not likely to yield desired dividends, merit based solution will bring peace and stability to the region. So please get free of jingoism and think for realistic solutions.

  • September 24, 2016 at 6:32 pm

    A nation tbat uses terrorists as non-state actors doesn’t need an army. It only indicates that army’s dismal confidence and competence level.

  • September 24, 2016 at 8:18 pm

    A frank Army-man’s assessment of the monster Pakistan has become following years of strategic neglect from successive Indian governments.

    This monster is only going to grow bigger and dangerous if nothing is done soon. To prevent that from happening, India must first grow out of its obsession with the ‘goodie two shoes’ image it strenuously nurtures; it might have helped India at one time, but is presently self-defeating with two warmongers breathing down her neck in its neighbourhood.

    Geopolitical observers espouse various measures that India could take short of a full-blown war to discourage Pakistan from pursuing its policy of sponsoring terrorism. But I believe there could be nothing more effective than an instant, highly visible, and targeted Indian retaliation after each terror attack. If nothing else; it’ll retain the morale of its people and forces. Only when India does this consistently and efficiently will it earn the respect and trust of countries that the author recommends India should work with. No one wants to back a permanently embarrassed loser, and I hope the decision makers in India register that fact, shed those vainglorious trappings from a bygone age, and ‘mean business’ for its own survival.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *