Agra: Living up to their motto ‘Service before Self’, the world’s third largest army lost 85 bravehearts, who made the supreme sacrifice during various counter-insurgency operations and offensive tactical missions in 2015. Apart from ORs, five officers were also killed.

As per Indian army, two colonel and one officer, each, of the rank of lieutenant colonel, major and captain along with two subedar, six naib subedar, 15 havildar, one lance havildar, six naik, 14 lance naik and 36 other rank were martyred.

Right from the army’s elite Para Special Forces to Rashtriya Rifles which directly comes under the ministry of defence who are specialized in counter-insurgency/ anti-terrorist operations, a total of 48 army regiments and unit personnel, who were deployed from the line-of-control in Jammu & Kashmir to borders along the north-eastern states bordering Myanmar attained martyrdom last year.

According to Army, maximum causalties were reported from 6 Dogra regiment in the month of June, in which it lost 15 personnel in a deadly ambush in Manipur’s Chandel district. In the incident, a total of 20 soldiers died. Apart from the Dogra regiment, various units of Rashtriya Rifles deployed in Jammu & Kashmir lost 19 men, followed by Gorkha Rifles, Garhwal Rifles, Rajputana Rifles, Army Service Corps Battalion, 28 Punjab and 9 Para (Special Forces).

IX Para which comes under parachute regiment whose men are trained in Agra as paratroopers for airborne combat, lost three men, out of which Lance Naik Govind Singh Mehta, laid down his life fighting militants in Mendhar sector of Poonch district of Jammu & Kashmir on October 14. He gunned downed five terrorists. He hailed from Uttarakhand, Mehta lived with his family in Agra. Lance Naik Mehta who is 32-year-old took three bullets, including one in the head. For his act of valour, the Army has recommended his name for Sena medal, to be awarded on January 26. He was the third man in his family to serve in the armed forces, apart from his father Pratap Singh and elder brother Mahendra Singh, who fought in the Kargil war.

Speaking to TOI, Army’s central command public relation officer Gargi Malik said, “The Indian Army has always lived up to its pledge of safeguarding the country’s borders and today if we feel safe, it’s all because of the commitment of these courageous men donning the olive green uniform. Our army has many victories to its name, and the stories of sacrifice of our soldiers fill us with immense pride and gratitude.”

Colonel Santosh Yashwant Mahadik of 21 Para (Special Forces) and commanding officer of 41 Rashtriya Rifles:

On November 17, succumbed to his grievous injuries under heavy fire from militants, while leading a search party in the dense forests of Haji Naka, near the line of control in Kupwara district of Kashmir.

Colonel Munindra Nath Rai, YSM (Yudh Seva Medal) of 2/9 Gorkha Rifles and commanding officer of 42 Rashtriya Rifles:

On January 28, laid down his life in the fierce encounter against Hizbul Mujahideen terrorist group at Handora village of Tral in south Kashmir.

Captain Prem Kumar Patil of 36 Rashtriya Rifles (Artillery):

On August 7, during a search operation in Gurez sector near Line of Control, he was leading his search party of 36 RR. While roll down he turned back to confirm the presence of any traitors in a hideout behind. While doing this on a slope of 80 degrees, he lost control and fell down in the Nausheranar flowing down below 280 feets where he sacrificed his life.On September 5, creating a unique history of valour and dedication to duty, eliminated 10 militants in a short span of 11 days during three counter-terrorism operations before making the supreme sacrifice in Kashmir.

 

Lance Naik Govind Singh Mehta of 9 Para (Special Forces):

On October 14, laid down his life fighting militants in Mendhar sector of Poonch district of Jammu and Kashmir. He gunned downed five terrorists. He was from Agra.

 

Lance Naik Mohan Nath Goswami of 9 Para (Special Forces):

Pratibha Chauhan,Tribune News Service,Shimla, January 20

With the objective of keeping a closer and stricter vigil on any possible movement by China along the border that it shares with India in the tribal district of Kinnaur, the Indian Air Force is keen to set up their radar near here.The Indian Air Force (IAF) officials from Kasauli yesterday held a meeting with senior state government officials regarding transfer of land for the setting up of the radar and other infrastructure near Theog, 30 km from here. They are keen that the formalities with regard to acquiring of private land for setting up of the radar is expedited so that they are able to have their set up at the earliest. They are also probing the possibility of having radar close to the Chinese border in Kinnaur.The Indian Air Force (IAF) had initiated the process for acquiring of land for setting up their radar near Theog more than three years ago but did not pursue the matter further. In fact, the then Deputy Commissioner (Shimla) had got the land identified and the forest clearances had also been sought for that chunk of land to be used for defence requirements.After the terror attack at its air base in Pathankot, the IAF is keen to go ahead with the proposal which had been lying dormant till now.India shares boundary with China in the Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR) in the tribal district of Kinnaur. “The IAF is keen to have a radar and other set-up closer to the Chinese border in Kinnaur so that there can be closer vigil and faster communication which is presently done from Ambala,” said sources.There has been an instance when two Chinese helicopters entered the Indian air space in Kinnaur. It took some time before this violation could be communicated and action could be taken. The Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) guards the border with China in Kinnaur.Intelligence agencies have been stressing on India strengthening its communication network and other infrastructure along the Chinese border in Kinnaur. Though trade between India and China has resumed along the Shipki La Pass in Kinnaur, till date no Chinese trader has been allowed to enter India. While in sharp contrast to the poor roads and communication network in the border villages of Kinnaur, the roads and other infrastructure is excellent in the villages on the Chinese side.

Stepping up vigil

• After the terror attack on Pathankot air base, the IAF is keen to go ahead with the proposal
• China shares border with India in the tribal district of Kinnaur
• IAF officers from Kasauli met senior state government officials to explore the possibility of having radar close to the Chinese border in Kinnaur

Ex-servicemen, who have been agitating for changes in the government’s one-rank-one-pension (OROP) scheme, on Sunday staged a protest outside the official residence of Union finance minister Arun Jaitley here, alleging that he failed to respond to concerns raised by them during an earlier meeting.

This is the second time in two weeks the veterans have staged demonstrations outside the minister’s official residence.

“We had staged protest outside the minister’s residence on January 3. At that time, he had assured us he will speak to the defence minister (Manohar Parrikar) over our demands. He had said he would get back to us within a week. But it’s two weeks now that he has not responded. What kind of finance minister he is if he can not keep his word?” said Group Capt. VK Gandhi (Retd).

Mr Gandhi, general secretary of Indian Ex-Servicemen Movement, said the veterans will continue with their protest until Mr Jaitley or Mr Parrikar holds parleys with them. “Either of the ministers will have to come and speak to us. We will not move an inch from here un-til then. If they don’t want to give us actual OROP, they should clarify so to us. Why lie?” he said, reiterating that the government notification has “flaws” and was “unacceptable”.

Around 200 ex-servicemen including Maj. Gen. Satbir Singh, who has been spearheading the protest, have been demonstrating outside Mr Jaitley’s residence, Mr Gandhi added.

Parrikar must spend more time at South Block

If there is one consistency towards national security in the last one year, it is the National Democratic Alliance’s predilection for firing six-monthly warnings about its intent to launch covert operations against Pakistan. On June 11 last year, a junior minister, who had served in the Army and, therefore, should have known better, warned that “western disturbances” would be equally dealt with. This was soon after Indian Army commandoes had carried out a raid across the eastern border in Myanmar and destroyed two militant camps of the NSCN (Khaplang) faction. The Pakistani riposte was not long in coming when its Interior Minister warned that “Pakistan is not Myanmar.”Now Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar no less, who should know the ground situation even better than the former Colonel, has taken to the same heightened pitch. In between, the Gurdaspur attack has come and gone and there has been no sign of India walking the tough talk. It is just as well that Narendra Modi has not fallen to the temptation of indulging in a few fireworks across the border. The Indian Army is well motivated and equipped to lean across the border to even the score. But is India prepared to deal with the consequences of what comes after that?When Parrikar indulges in excessive or needless talking, is he seeking to distance himself from his Prime Minister’s endeavour to rebuild ties with Pakistan? Is the Hon’ble Raksha Mantri scripting his own Pakistan policy? Statements such as “if someone is harming the country, he should also receive the pain of such activities at a time and place of our choosing,” hardly send shivers down the spine of quarters who have made violence their calling card. Such formulations only make India look ridiculous. His remit should be to make walk-throughs like Pathankot and Gurdaspur impossible.  Parrikar also needs to spend more time at his desk in South Block to craft an implementable defence manufacturing policy that remains riddled with too many gaps, especially on the crucial issue of selecting strategic partners for Indian companies.

After Parrikar’s tough talk, Rajnath says will trust Pak

Pakistan ‘submits report’ on initial findings to India

Tribune News Service,New Delhi, January 12

A day after Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar said those who had inflicted pain on India “would also feel the pain”, Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh today said there was “no reason” to distrust Pakistan’s commitment of “action” against perpetrators of the Pathankot attack.Talking to mediapersons on the sidelines of a function in Noida, Rajnath said, “India has given inputs related to terror attacks to Pakistan. The Pakistan government has promised to take action. I think we should wait.”Insisting that since Pakistan has assured India, the minister said, there should be no reason to disbelieve them so early. “There is no reason to distrust them (Pakistan) so early,” he said.After the attack, India had said it has provided to Pakistan actionable intelligence to act upon the perpetrators of the attack. During a post-attack telephonic conversation between PM Narendra Modi and his Pakistan counterpart Nawaz Sharif, the government had said, “Our PM very strongly urged the Pakistan PM to take action”.It had said, “Actionable intelligence in regard to the terror attack and the links with the perpetrators in Pakistan were provided to Pakistan. The Pakistan PM promised us prompt and decisive action. We now wait for its action.”Meanwhile, reports from Pakistan yesterday said law enforcement agencies had picked up “some suspects” connected to the Pathankot attack from Bahawalpur district, the hometown of Maulana Masood Azhar, the chief of banned terror outfit Jaish-e-Mohammad.India has identified Masood Azhar as the mastermind of the attack. It also blamed his brother Rauf and five others for carrying out the attack that killed six terrorists and seven soldiers on January 2.

Days to go, but no clarity on talks yet

Simran Sodhi,Tribune News Service,New Delhi, January 12

The Foreign Secretary-level talks between India and Pakistan remained in limbo even as reports emerged that Pakistan has submitted to India its initial findings. Officially, there was no word from either side as to whether any such report has been submitted, though sources in the government maintained that Pakistan has not yet sought more evidence from India.India has provided evidence to Pakistan in the form of telephone intercepts of conversations that the terrorists reportedly had with their handlers in Pakistan. According to reports in the Pakistan media, Pakistan has informed India that these telephone numbers are not registered in the country and the evidence provided by India is not enough and will not stand scrutiny in a court of law.The National Security Advisers (NSAs) of both countries continue to be in touch amid speculation that instead of the Foreign Secretaries of the two countries meeting in Islamabad on January 15 as scheduled, it could well be the NSAs meeting in a third country to discuss the Pathankot attacks.India, however, stuck to its stand that until action is seen being taken by Pakistan against the perpetrators of the Pathankot attack, talks cannot happen, indicating that the talks are likely to be postponed.Though Pakistan has shown some degree of response to India’s insistence for action on the intelligence provided by it with Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif setting up a Joint Investigative Team (JIT) comprising officials from the Military Intelligence (MI), Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) and Intelligence Bureau (IB) to probe the Pathankot attacks. But for India, sources say, the action will be to see JeM leader Masood Azar arrested or detained.There is intense international pressure on both countries to talk. Hence, both sides are making efforts to salvage the talks. With Sharif, it has meant forming the JIT and conducting raids in various villages and even arresting a few people who might be connected to these attacks. India has firmly put the ball in Pakistan’s court.

NSAs may meet to discuss attacks

• The National Security Advisers (NSAs) of India and Pakistan continue to be in touch amid speculation that instead of the Foreign Secretaries meeting in Islamabad on January 15, the NSAs may meet in a third country to discuss the Pathankot attacks

‘Mobile numbers not registered in Pakistan’

• Pakistan has reportedly informed India that the telephone numbers provided to them are not registered in the country and the evidence is not enough and will not stand scrutiny in a court of law

Strategic setback. It’s Israel, China buy-buy

The high optics of Modi”s meeting with Israeli leadership, ardently backed by the defence community”s right-wing corner, have failed to halt Tel Aviv”s move towards strategic ties with China.

AFTER Russia breached the exclusivity in its military association with India, Israel may be the next in line despite Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s unprecedented contacts for an Indian Prime Minister with the Jewish state. Modi had become the first Indian Prime Minister to hold a meeting under arclights with his Israeli counterpart Benjamin Netanyahu in New York besides holding an extended conversation with President Reuven Rivlin at Singapore strongman Lee Kuan Yew’s funeral. To the accompaniment of a crescendo of approvals from the right corner of the Indian strategic community, Modi let it be known that he will become the first Indian Prime Minister to visit Jerusalem. The tour was going to be packaged with balancing-out stopovers in a couple of Muslim-majority countries.It may not longer be a mystery why neither External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj nor Modi could persuade themselves to visit Tel Aviv the whole of last year despite making an announcement to that effect (Ms. Swaraj will now visit Tel Aviv from January 17). Instead the Government opted to send President Pranab Mukherjee to the three destinations, including Israel. The reason lies in Israel’s inability to resist Chinese overtures for its military equipment. Even as the right-wing corner of the Indian strategic community was hailing the upswing in ties with Tel Aviv and diplomats of both countries were burning the wires to prepare for the Modi visit, China was indulging in some quiet bargaining with Israeli defence manufacturers.   As in the past, once military equipment is sold to China, it is a matter of time before Pakistan lays its hands on it. The recent inauguration of a top Israeli defence  company’s factory in China has negated some 15 years of spirited Indian diplomacy to thwart the two from defence cooperation that enters the realm of joint research and development. With active US help, the Atal Bihari Vajpayee Government had accomplished something very rare in the annals of international military trade. Israel was forced to return Chinese advance payment for high-end aircraft-mounted radars that spot planes in a 400-km radius, thus providing considerable advance warning for the air defence systems to get ready for action. Without resorting to this Government’s penchant for high-end optics, the Vajpayee Government followed by the Manmohan Singh regime then quietly shaped a unique India-Israel-Russia partnership to get this technology for its armed forces.For the record, Israel Aeropsace Industries (IAI) claims its upcoming factory in China will cater to the civilian sector. The ambitious Chinese plans to double the number of its civilian fleet and add about 60 airports within the next two decades may underscore the assertion. It is true that China-Israel military relationship is of older vintage than India’s defence ties with Tel Aviv. Goaded by the US, China and Israel had separately equipped the Mujaheedin in Afghanistan to take on the Soviet Red Army.  Israel is also said to be China’s second biggest foreign supplier of military equipment. This statistic conceals Israel’s huge gap with Russia, China’s biggest supplier of equipment. It also does not tell the story of Israel developing military equipment for India not obtainable elsewhere in the world such as Barak ship-busting missiles, advanced men and equipment-detection radars and lethal aircraft-fired missiles.   The Chinese breakthrough in poaching companies exclusively equipping the Indian armed forces is the second strategic set back in the defence sphere during this Government’s tenure. Russia had caused a flutter in the Indian strategic community when six months into the Modi Government, its Defence Minister went to Islamabad and met Pakistan’s leadership.  Two months earlier, Pakistan army chief Raheel Sharif witnessed live demonstrations of Russian military equipment, inked a defence cooperation pact and came away with a promise for the same Mi-35 attack helicopters deployed by India in Pathankot to scorch wooded portions near the airbase where militants were believed to have been hiding. Pakistan has so far been using F-16s for bombing bases of rogue Taliban factions. Operating from lower heights, the Mi-35s cause considerably less collateral damage or inadvertent killing of civilians, a factor that has fed vengeful recruits to Taliban and Al-Qaida factions trying to bring down the Pakistani State. More important, Mi-35s are deployed as tank busters, flying over own side’s armoured formations to destroy oncoming enemy tanks. As a follow up of the first contract for four Mi-35s, Russia has promised to supply Pakistan with at least 20 more pieces. These have the potential to even out the overhead advantage enjoyed by Indian tank formations in the event of a thrust into Pakistan.Apart from India, Russia had so far supplied these helicopters to Brazil, Venezuela and Azerbaijan. None of them is likely to turn over the technology to Pakistan till the present Government’s inordinate proximity to the US led Russia to redraw its strategic game plan for military cooperation in South Asia.Now Israel seems unable to resist Chinese overtures for its military technology. Apart from Modi’s top-level meetings, India abstained from a recent UN vote on the Israel’s strong arm tactics in Gaza, the first time ever. The first visit by an Israeli Defence Minister to India also took place under his watch. Modi also did the unprecedented for an Indian Prime Minister to keep Israel happy. He got himself photographed while standing next to the booth of an Israeli company at the Indian defence expo last year. His spin managers billed it was a public display of Israel and India’s strategic relationship. That solid and quiet diplomacy and agile political footwork is no match for ploys such as these has become painfully apparent after the same company, IAI, now breaks bread with the Chinese. China in the past could not persuade four visiting Israeli Presidents and three Prime Ministers to go the whole hog in defence equipment transfers. Modi’s simplistic approach to international relations may have unravelled India’s previous efforts to prevent exactly that.

sandeep4731@gmail.com

The Pathankot attack is not a spontaneous response to recent developments; it is a manifestation of Pakistan’s national security strategy to pursue its revisionist agenda against India, says C Christine Fair, author of Fighting to the End: The Pakistan Army’s Way of War, and an associate professor in the Peace and Security Studies Programme at Georgetown University’s Edmund A Walsh School of Foreign Service. Fair, who earlier served as a political officer to the UN Assistance Mission to Afghanistan in Kabul, tells Bhaswar Kumar in a telephonic interview that there is a consensus within the Indian security establishment that India lacks the offensive capability to defeat Pakistan in a short war.

The January 2 attack on an Indian Air Force base in Pathankot was allegedly carried out by Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) operatives. What are the dynamics between organisations like JeM and Pakistan’s military and civilian establishments?

Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) set up JeM as a competitor to the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), which the ISI had formed earlier. Before the formation of JeM, three Pakistani terrorists – Mushtaq Ahmed Zargar, Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh and Maulana Masood Azhar – were released by Indian authorities in return for hostages taken during the hijacking of the Indian Airlines flight IC-814 in December 1999. Azhar and the two other terrorists, upon their release in Kandahar, were ferried to Pakistan under ISI escort. Within a few weeks, Azhar announced the formation of JeM in Karachi.

LeT and JeM are ideologically distinct organisations. JeM, like the Afghan and Pakistani Taliban, is Deobandi; LeT is Ahle Hadees. Besides, JeM generally conducts suicide attacks, while LeT conducts high-risk missions where the goal is not to die but its operatives would still rather die than be taken captives.

These terrorist groups have an army major assigned to them. It is the majors’ responsibility to ensure the groups’ operatives are trained and they get the required resources. A major can, for example, authorise a small-level attack in Kashmir against an Indian army unit — an offensive that does not have major strategic implications. On the other hand, every attack outside of Kashmir has to have the army chief’s imprimatur, given the likely strategic implications — after all, if the Americans get upset and hold up coalition support funding, it is the army chief who will have to answer.

The Pathankot attack came within a week of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Lahore and the resumption of talks with Pakistan. Have the terrorists and their handlers achieved their goal by creating a hurdle for the peace process?

If the attack is seen as an attempt to derail the nascent peace process between the two countries, it might be a misreading of the way in which Pakistan employs its jihadi assets to secure its strategic interests in the region. The attack on the air base is not a spontaneous response to recent developments. It is simply the latest manifestation of the Pakistani national security strategy to pursue its revisionist agenda against India.

Pakistan has called PM Modi’s bluff. Despite all the rhetoric, there is a consensus within the Indian security establishment – at least among those who draw their conclusions from data instead of speaking from nationalist sentiment – that India lacks the offensive capability to defeat Pakistan in a short war. That is important because there will only be a short war between India and Pakistan, due to the presence of nuclear weapons on both sides, if the former responds to such a provocation.

They did it at Gurdaspur, too. The Gurdaspur attack was not in response to the meeting between Modi and Sharif in Ufa. The timing of the Gurdaspur attack is important; it occurred after the reported Indian raid in Myanmar against militants. You will remember the statements issued after the Myanmar raid, warning that all other neighbours of India harbouring terrorists would receive the same treatment. You will also remember the Pakistani response to these statements. Gurdaspur was really about calling the Indian government out on its statements and bravado after the Myanmar incident.

Both these attacks – Pathankot and Gurdaspur – were conducted in and around tier-III cities or small towns. Unlike an attack on a city like Mumbai or Delhi, which will cause a massive uproar and have a galvanising impact on the populace – the Parliament attack, for instance – these were carefully calibrated probes to continue to test India’s red lines. We need to see this in tandem with the attack on the Indian consulate in Mazar-e-Sharif. Pakistan has been testing India’s red lines within Indian territory and in Afghanistan.

When you say Pakistan has called the government’s bluff, are you referring to Pakistan’s civilian government or its military establishment?

The civilians are irrelevant in this case. This is all coming from the army. There is no “rogue” ISI, either. The ISI reports to the Pakistani army chief.

Don’t you think that the recently revived dialogue process is the only way forward?

India should not be talking to Pakistan at all. Pakistan says it has a legitimate claim on Kashmir, which it does not. The Indian Independence Act of 1947 allowed the princely states to decide their fate. India possesses Kashmir’s instrument of accession. The case of Junagarh and Hyderabad complicates the morality of India’s actions, but that is a different issue.

Pakistan could have made a claim for Junagarh at the UN but it has no claim over Kashmir. Pakistan also did not fulfil the first condition required for a plebiscite under the UN Security Council resolution on Kashmir. Of course, the Shimla agreement obviates that in any event.

As India continues to talk to Pakistan on the issue of Kashmir, it emboldens the Pakistanis and legitimises their narrative domestically. It fosters the belief among Pakistanis that their claim is entertained by India. The Pakistani army gets to tell its people that even the Indians know that they need to talk to us.

If Pakistan wants peace, it could have it by accepting the LoC as the formal border and desisting from sending terrorists across the border. By the way, that would technically be a concession from the Indian side since it has an instrument of accession for the whole of Kashmir. India should be willing to talk only when Pakistan is willing to ratify the LoC as the border.

Every time one of these attacks occurs, the benefit that Pakistan gets is that the international community calls for talks between India and Pakistan for resolving outstanding issues. In other words, the international community imposes a false equivalence between Pakistan and India. If you cannot punish Pakistan for its support to terrorist organisations, at least you can deprive it of any benefit.

The international community will have to change its talking points. If the international community, instead of calling for talks, says Pakistan needs to act like a responsible nuclear power that does not conduct proxy warfare against its neighbours, and that the changing of maps by bloodshed is not acceptable, Pakistan will be deprived of any benefit from such attacks.

According to reports, Nawaz Sharif has called PM Modi and assured him of action against the persons responsible…

This is absolute dramebaazi. Sharif is an irrelevant actor in these matters.

Aside from military funding and support, consider the fact that Hafiz Saeed’s Jamat-ud-Dawa (JuD), the rechristened LeT, gets money from the budget of Pakistani Punjab’s government, which is run by Sharif’s party. The government said it would run JuD’s educational establishments, so JuD has a line item in every Punjab provincial government budget.

Besides, JeM enjoys political cover from the two factions of the Jamiat ul-e-Islami.

How can India build an effective deterrence against this form of sub-conventional warfare?

I do not see too many options that India has. It has not made the investments it needs to ensure deterrence against such acts by way of offensive superiority on its international border. India’s current conventional posture on the international border is of defensive competence instead of offensive superiority.

Defence modernisation for such deterrence requires reconfiguring your current military assets, which are bulky and easily detectable, into smaller units that can be forward-deployed much more rapidly without the intelligence footprint that Pakistan can easily detect.

It is about personnel policies. India does not need a huge standing army for such purposes as much as it needs special operators to conduct hot-pursuit missions into Pakistani territory without detection. Currently, India does not have a Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) or “jointness” among the different branches of its armed forces for seamless interoperability. Pakistan does not suffer from these shortcomings; it has “jointness” and it essentially has a CDS in the form of its army chief. Most disturbingly, Pakistan’s position has been significantly bolstered by American military largesse.

Lastly, but most importantly, there needs to be the political will to use these assets as and when required.

This is not a bad time to be an Indian. Successive governments have come to understand that if you remain focused on not having a large confrontation with Pakistan, India’s economy will continue to grow. But, you can have this attitude only if you are willing to suffer several casualties in attacks from Pakistan every year.

We have seen a resurgence of JeM in the recent past…

JeM had been defunct for years after it split in December of 2001. Its leadership was divided over whether they should turn their guns on Pakistan for aiding the Americans in bringing down the Taliban. Azhar said he would not turn against Pakistan even as members of his organisation revolted and went on to join Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).

Azhar was kept in protective custody for years and allowed to grow his empire in Bhawalpur. The thinking of ISI was that as long as people were loyal to Azhar they would not turn their guns on Pakistan.

As part of its strategy to combat TTP, the Pakistani army contacted TTP commanders and gave them a choice to go back and fight in Afghanistan; this coincided with the elections in Afghanistan. The other important part of the strategy was that the Pakistani army revivified JeM to draw back the original defectors from JeM and redirect them to India.

In a piece I had written for India Today in September last year, I predicted the next attack would probably be conducted by JeM, instead of LeT. My colleagues at the UN who had been monitoring Al Qaida and the Taliban informed me a year ago that the JeM cadre was amassing at the LoC between India and Pakistan.

The move to revivify JeM is very much part of the Pakistani army’s domestic security strategy.

http://wap.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/pathankot-attack-aimed-at-probing-modi-govt-s-red-lines-christine-fair-116010900252_1.html

Islamabad, January 8

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has asked the Intelligence Bureau to probe the leads provided by India on the alleged Pakistani links to the terror attack in Pathankot, a report said on Friday.

Sharif gave the directive to the Intelligence Bureau after chairing a high-level meeting here on Thursday, The Nation newspaper reported.

Among those who attended the meeting were Finance Minister Ishaq Dar, Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, Adviser on Foreign Affairs Sartaj Aziz, Special Assistant on Foreign Affairs Tariq Fatemi, National Security Adviser (NSA) Nasser Khan Janjua, Foreign Secretary Aizaz Ahmed Chaudhry and Intelligence Bureau chief Aftab Sultan.

“Officials said the prime minister and the aides agreed to launch investigations into the evidence provided by India,” the report said.

Hours earlier, India linked the upcoming foreign secretary-level talks with Pakistan to Islamabad’s action against suspected Pakistani terrorists who raided the Indian Air Force base in Pathankot on January 2.

The pre-dawn attack left seven Indian security personnel dead. Security forces killed all six attackers.

Sharif and his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi spoke on the telephone after the terror attack. India said it had provided “actionable” inputs to Pakistan, and Sharif assured Modi of “prompt and decisive” action against groups and individuals who might be linked to the attack.

The Nation quoted an official as saying that the leads provided by India were handed over to IB chief Aftab Sultan for further action.

Addressing the meeting, Sharif said Pakistan was ready to boost cooperation with India as part of counter-terrorism efforts.

Sharif also directed NSA Nasser Khan Janjua to remain in contact with his Indian counterpart Ajit Doval in a bid to keep renewed dialogue on track.

Another official, however, said the information provided by India was “not enough” as it was just limited to telephone numbers. He said Pakistan might ask for additional information.

“We would like to have solid information to build a case for action. Otherwise courts intervene and the suspects will be bailed out,” he added.

Ajay Banerjee,Tribune News Service,New Delhi, January 5

In what appears to be a serious lapse on the part of the security establishment, the command of the operation to flush out terrorists from the Air Force base at Pathankot was changed thrice. It has emerged that at least three officers of the Army, IAF and the National Security Guard headed the operation at different stages. Sources said a review was being carried on this.When the planning to counter the terrorists started in Delhi around 1 pm on January 1 —14 hours before the first shots were fired in Pathankot at 3:30 am on January 2 — two columns of the Army were rushed to Pathankot. Around 1 am on January 2, two-and-a-half hours before the terrorists struck, an NSG team from Gurgaon landed at IAF base. Around mid-morning, the Western Air Command Chief, Air Marshal SB Deo, landed in Pathankot to “oversee” the operation. The Director General of NSG, RC Tayal, arrived in the evening and “oversaw” the operation in coordination with the IG (Operations), NSG. It was amid this confusion and rush to make claims that Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh was “wrongly informed” that the operations were over on January 2 evening. The minister tweeted so, only to delete the message a few hours later. Among the questions being probed are whether the terrorists had a hideout in Punjab. Sources said since it has been established that the six terrorists were on Indian soil by 12:30 am on January 1 (when the first of the four calls  were made to Pakistan), they could not have roamed around on the streets carrying over 40 kg of bullets, 30 kg of RDX, guns and grenades for 26 hours when they attacked the IAF base. Another question is how the BSF “failed in securing an unfenced portion on the right bank of the Ujh near Bamyal village in Punjab and who owns this land.Another unusual thing was why the NSG, and not the Army, was told to carry out the operation when the “black cat” commandos are largely trained for urban combat such as the Mumbai attacks.300 NSG: commandos took part in the Pathankot operation160 commandos: flew from Palam military airbase to the attack site on January 170 ‘black cats’: each of two more units reached the IAF base on January 2, 31commando: (bomb squad chief Lt Col EK Niranjan) was killed21other: commandos suffered minor and major injuriesBury slain terrorists in pigskin: Tripura Guv New Delhi: In remarks that could kick up a row, Tripura Governor Tathagata Roy said bodies of terrorists should be wrapped in pigskin and then buried. “I seriously suggest Russian treatment to terrorists’ carcasses. Wrap them in pigskin, bury them face down in pig excreta.””Modi’s chai with Sharif cost us 7 soldiers: SenaMumbai: “India has sacrificed seven of its brave soldiers for Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s tea with Pakistan’s Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif,” the Shiv Sena said in an editorial in party mouthpiece Saamna on Monday. The Sena is critical of Modi’s engagement with Sharif. Kerala institute named after NSG officer Thiruvananthapuram: Hours after the last rites of NSG officer Lt Col EK Niranjan, Kerala’s labour department renamed the industrial training institute in his hometown Elumbulsherry in his honour. The ITI was opened in September last and was named Elumbulsherry Government ITI.

NSG Lt Col buried with full military honours

Tribune News Service,Bengaluru, january 5

The body of Lt Col EK Niranjan, killed while defusing a bomb at the Pathankot IAF base, was today laid to rest at his ancestral village Elambulassery in Palakkad district of Kerala.The body of the 34-year-old was buried on the premises of his paternal home amid chanting of ‘Hare Rama Hare Krishna’ by his close relatives and others present.Niranjan was accorded full military honours, including a 21-gun salute.“The Last Post played on the bugle brought a lump in the throat of many of those attending the funeral,” Kerala Home Minister Ramesh Chennithala said over phone. Earlier in the day, the body was kept at the local school for the people to pay homage.The Kerala government has also renamed the ITI at Lt Col Niranjan’s village after the martyr.Man held for FB postThiruvananthapuram: A 24-year-old man was on Monday arrested in Malappuram district (Kerala) for allegedly making derogatory  remarks on Facebook against Lt Col EK Niranjan and his family. Anwar Sadhik was booked under IPC 124 (A) (sedition). A casual labourer at a local shop, he posed as a journalist with a regional daily. pti

BSF conducts search, says no hint yet of infiltration

Shaurya Karanbir Gurung,Tribune News Service,New Delhi, January 5

Border Security Force Director General DK Pathak today reached Gurdaspur to supervise the fourth day of a search near the Ujh river for clues and evidence to suggest that the terrorists who attacked the Pathankot Air Force Station had infiltrated through the International Border with Pakistan.The BSF suspects a possible entry route of the terrorists through the area near Ujh, which also passes by Bamyal village, about 25 km from Pathankot. A BSF post is located ahead of the village.The BSF is also searching along the banks of the Ravi river and the areas around it.“We are looking at other possibilities such as tunnels having been constructed under the IB or underwater means to cross the border through the Ujh and Ravi rivers, which meander into Pakistan from India. But as it is not the monsoon season, the depths of the rivers are a few feet,” said a BSF officer.The officer said tell-tale signs such as fencing being cut, footprints, bending of the grass or an item left behind have not been found. “There were also no Intelligence alerts about any infiltration,” said a BSF officer.There is fencing along the IB in this area, but not in the nullahs (stream). The BSF has instead constructed posts, placed “adequate” manpower and surveillance equipment such as Hand Held Thermal Imagers (HHTIs) on the Ujh’s banks. “It is not possible for heavily armed terrorists to infiltrate through this area,” said the officer. Following the Dinanagar terrorist attack last July, the BSF had increased its deployment along the IB in Gurdaspur. This includes an additional battalion and seven training companies, consisting of more than 2,400 men.The BSF is planning to procure 300 more HHTIs, including for deployment along the IB. Another surveillance equipment used by the BSF in Punjab is the Battle Field Surveillance Radar.Possible entry routeThe BSF suspects a possible entry route of the terrorists through the area near Ujh, which also passes by Bamyal village, about 25 km from Pathankot. A BSF post is located ahead of the village.

Howrah (WB), December 29

A local court today remanded the Army jawan arrested in connection with the alleged gang-rape of a teenager inside a compartment of the Howrah-Amritsar Express in police custody for four days.Monjiris Tripathy, who was arrested by GRP from Madhupur railway station on Monday, was produced before the Howrah chief judicial magistrate’s court during the day and sent to police custody.Tripathy, who is posted in Kolkata at the Eastern Command headquarters, had allegedly compelled the 14-year-old, who had boarded the compartment at Howrah station, to consume alcohol. She was then allegedly raped by two other Army men inside the train. The two are absconding.The Army is cooperating with the police in tracing the absconding jawans. “The police are investigating and we are cooperating with them. We are sharing the information we have so that the accused can be caught and action taken against them as per the law of the land,” an Army source said. — PTI

Syed Ali Ahmed,Tribune News Service,New Delhi, December 23

Parliament mourns victims’ death | BSF, DGCA to probe | Angry kin confront Union Home Minister

Mourning the death of 10 BSF personnel in air crash yesterday at Dwarka in Delhi, members of the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha stood in silence for a brief while, though a separate inquiry by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation and the BSF is being done to know the reason behind the crash.In the Rajya Sabha, Chairman Hamid Ansari and in the Lok Sabha Speaker Sumitra Mahajan expressed condolences over the death of the BSF personnel and prayed for the injured.Sources, who were at the homage paying ceremony of the deceased, said the BSF and the DGCA have constituted inquiry to find out the actual reason for the crash. Union Minister Rajnath Singh was also present at the ceremony.A mourning relative of one of the 10 paramilitary personnel confronted Rajnath, asking him as to “why does a soldier’s family cries every time?”“Sir, why does the soldier’s family has to cry every time?” Why sir? Why wasn’t it a VIP plane? Why were they given such an old plane? It was an old aircraft. Sir, please answer me,” the girl questioned the Home Minister.Captain Shivrain’s family alleged that despite the aircraft was very old, it was never replaced by the force.“I told Rajnath Singh that the accident probably happened because it was an old plane. Though my son-in-law is no more, the BSF is yet to induct new planes,” said Wazir Singh Panwar, father-in-law of co-pilot Rajesh Shivrain, a deceased.