Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government has displayed unusual restraint towards Pakistan in the wake of the terrorist attack at the Pathankot air force base, which started on Saturday and ended on Tuesday evening. The Indian security establishment is certain that the attack was sponsored by Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Muhammad (JeM). But no one from the government or from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the ruling party, had named Pakistan or the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) of the Pakistan army as the masterminds of the attack. Pakistan on its part had unequivocally condemned the terror attack. As the Indian security forces killed all the six militants on Tuesday, Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, who was in Colombo, spoke to Prime Minister Narendra Modi and conveyed his condolences for the dead and his concern over the problem of terrorism. The offices of Modi and Sharif had issued separate press statements about the telephone call. The Pakistan press statement does not mention the Indian version which says that Sharif had promised to take action against the culprits. Quibbling over such minor differences is not necessary. What is significant is the fact that the two prime ministers have communicated and discussed the subject between themselves.
There has been apprehension that the attack would jeopardise foreign secretary level talks between the two countries. It seems the Modi government is not willing to call off the talks. Even more interesting is that the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) Sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat voicing support for the talks between the two countries post-Pathankot attack. With the endorsement of the BJP’s ideological mentor, Modi is in a stronger position to pursue the longer-term objective of continuing to engage with Pakistan. Critics of Prime Minister Modi and of the BJP will point out that had they been in the opposition they would have demanded that the talks be called off. But now that they are in power, they have struck a mature stance. The Congress, the main opposition party, is now demanding a tougher government position to deal with Pakistan; a stand that, coming from the Congress party, is ineffective and unconvincing.
While it is right that the government would want to discuss with Pakistan the danger posed by the Pakistan-based jihadi groups, there is need for a nuanced policy to deal with Islamabad. That policy should not mean either closing the door on talks with Pakistan or continuing to talk in spite of the provocative acts of the jihadis from across the border. It does appear that the government is mulling a layered approach — taking a tough stance against terrorism while also continuing to engage in talks with Pakistan government. The two sides will have to talk about the challenge posed by the terrorist groups, and they should be able to find ways to tackle it together.
Clearly, a change of attitude — within the government and civil society – is visible in Pakistan, which is refusing to ignore the presence of the terror groups on its soil. The view emerging from some of the established English language newspapers in Pakistan is that given that there is evidence of the involvement of the jihadi groups in the Pathankot attack, the Pakistan government should punish them. Neither the government nor the media in Pakistan are arguing that the terror problem is linked to the Kashmir dispute. By any reckoning, that is a positive development. There seems to be some sort of poetic justice at work with the RSS/BJP on the one hand, and the conservative Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) on the other, each situated at the opposite ends of the ideological spectrum, but willing to talk to each other.
