Islamabad, January 5

Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan on Sunday condemned the recent incident of vandalism at the Nankana Sahib, saying it goes against his “vision” and the government will show “zero tolerance” against those involved in it.

Gurdwara Nankana Sahib, also known as Gurdwara Janam Asthan, is a site near Lahore where the first Guru of Sikhs, Guru Nanak, was born.

According to media reports, a violent mob had attacked the Gurdwara and pelted it with stones on Friday. A team of police had to intervene briskly to control the situation.

Breaking his silence on the incident, Khan said that there is a “major difference between the condemnable Nankana incident and the ongoing attacks across India on Muslims and other minorities”.

“The former is against my vision & will find zero tolerance & protection from the govt incl police & judiciary (sic),” he tweeted, referring to the Nankana Sahib incident.

Khan claimed that Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s “vision supports minorities oppression and the targeted attacks against Muslims.”

He also alleged that the Indian police, supported by the government, are leading attacks against Muslims.

India has strongly condemned vandalism at the revered Gurdwara and called upon the Pakistan government to take immediate steps to ensure the safety and security of the Sikh community there.

On Saturday, Indian leaders cutting across party lines and various outfits condemned the mob attack on the historic Gurdwara, terming it as “cowardly” and “shameful”.

Hundreds of protesters thronged the streets near the Pakistan High Commission in New Delhi demanding that Islamabad provide adequate security to Sikh shrines and community members there.

Shiromani Gurdwara Parbhandhak Committee (SGPC), the apex body which manages Sikh shrines in India, said it will send a four-member delegation to Pakistan to take stock of the situation and urged the Pakistan government to take stringent action against the culprits who attacked the gurdwara – one of the holiest sites in Sikhism.

Pakistan’s Foreign Office on Friday rejected the media reports that the Gurdwara Nanakana Sahib was desecrated in a mob attack, saying the birthplace of founder of Sikhism remains “untouched and undamaged” and the “claims of destruction” of one of the holiest Sikh shrines are “false”. PTI

Sikh youth killed in Pakistan’s Peshawar; India condemns ‘targeted killing’

Peshawar, January 5

A 25-year-old Sikh man has been shot dead by unknown gunmen in the northwestern city of Peshawar in Pakistan, police and the victim’s family said on Sunday, a day after a mob attacked Gurdwara Nankana Sahib in Lahore where Sikhism founder Guru Nanak Dev was born.

Rowinder Singh had come to Peshawar from Shangla district in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa to shop for his wedding, police said.

“His bullet-riddled body was recovered from the area under the Chamkani police station and sent to a hospital,” police said in a statement.

“Police have already launched a probe into the killing,” the statement said.

Harmeet Singh, the victim’s brother, told the media that an unknown person called him from Rowinder’s mobile on late Saturday and informed him that “my brother was killed”.

“The government must arrest the culprits as early as possible. I will not find peace until the criminals are arrested,” he said.

No group has claimed responsibility for the murder which took place a day after a mob attacked Gurdwara Nankana Sahib where Sikhism founder Guru Nanak Dev was born.

India on Sunday strongly condemned the “targeted killing” of the minority Sikh community member in Peshawar.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1213740992895078400

India condemns ‘targeted killing’

The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) said Pakistan should stop “prevaricating” and take immediate action to apprehend and give exemplary punishment to the perpetrators of the crime.

“India strongly condemns the targeted killing of minority Sikh community member in Peshawar that follows the recent despicable vandalism and desecration of the holy Gurdwara Sri Janam Asthan at Nankana Sahib and the unresolved case of abduction, forced conversion and marriage of a Sikh girl Jagjit Kaur,” the MEA said.

Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan on Sunday condemned the recent incident of vandalism at the Nankana Sahib, saying it goes against his “vision” and the government will show “zero tolerance” against those involved in it.

Punjab Chief Minister Capt Amarinder Singh too condemned the killing and demanded that the Imran Khan government conduct a thorough investigation and punish the culprits.

“Shocked and anguished over killing of Sikh youth Ravinder Singh in #Pakistan, coming on the heels of #NankanaSahibAttack. @ImranKhanPTI govt must ensure thorough investigation and strict punishment for the culprits. This is the time to act what you preach,” Amarinder Singh tweeted.

Gurdwara Nankana Sahib, also known as Gurdwara Janam Asthan, is a site near Lahore where the first Guru of Sikhs, Guru Nanak, was born.

Pakistan’s Foreign Office on Friday rejected the media reports that Gurdwara Nanakana Sahib was desecrated in a mob attack, saying the birthplace of founder of Sikhism remains “untouched and undamaged” and the “claims of destruction” of one of the holiest Sikh shrines are “false”.

Minorities in the Muslim-majority Pakistan make up some two per cent of the country’s total population.

Pakistan has witnessed violence against religious minorities in the past as al-Qaeda and Taliban-led militants regularly target Christian, Sikhs, Hindus, Ahmadis and Shiite communities in the country. — PTI

A humble man who is direct and professional with colleagues and an officer who is known to deliver. Apart from his experience in counter-insurgency ops and the strike corps, these are qualities likely to hold General M M Naravane in good stead, as he takes over as Army Chief

General Naravane will serve as the head of the 1.3 million strong Army till he turns 62 in April 2022. (Illustration: Suvajit Dey)

As per tradition, on Independence Day, the General Officer Commanding (GOC), Delhi Area, a lieutenant general-rank officer, escorts the Prime Minister to the dais, stands behind him as he delivers his speech from the ramparts of Red Fort, and then escorts him back to his seat. In 2016, the then GOC, Delhi Area, Lt General Vijay Singh, followed the protocol. However, during Narendra Modi’s speech, he was asked to shift to the side so that he was not visible in the same frame as the Prime Minister.

The following year, there was a new GOC, Delhi Area. During Independence Day rehearsals, the Special Protection Group (SPG) once again raised the 2016 argument and objected to his presence behind the Prime Minister. This time, however, the new GOC did not stand behind Prime Minister Narendra Modi or shift to the side. After escorting Modi to the dais, he returned to his seat in the audience and after his speech ended, he got up to escort the Prime Minister back.

The officer was Lt General Manoj Mukund Naravane, who took over as the 28th Chief of Army Staff on the last day of the previous decade. General Naravane will serve as the head of the 1.3 million strong Army till he turns 62 in April 2022.

His colleagues say General Naravane’s ramrod straight posture and perfect military bearing is indicative of his conduct as a senior military officer: humble, fair, direct and professional. Whenever he was congratulated for his promotions, his reply, invariably, would be a laconic, “It is a part of the profession”.

 In his first media interaction as Army Chief on New Year’s morning, after inspecting the Guard of Honour, he revealed his regimental affiliations when he invoked ‘Waheguruji’ to give him “courage and strength” in his new role. (File)

Born in 1960 in Pune to an Indian Air Force officer and an All India Radio announcer, he joined the National Defence Academy (NDA) at the age of 16 after his schooling from Jnana Prabodhini Prashala in the city. General Naravane’s childhood friends recall him as being very close to his parents. He came down to Pune a few months ago to celebrate his father’s birthday. His mother passed away in 2018.

Shimla-based writer-historian Raaja Bhasin, who got to know Naravane when he commanded the Army Training Command in Shimla, where he was also president of the Amateur Dramatics Club, says, “He is one of the most down-to-earth persons I have met. He is informal to the extent that when he came to meet us, he would ring the bell himself without any paraphernalia… We couldn’t stage a play for him but we did a rehearsed reading of Twelve Angry Men at his farewell.”

In 1976, General Naravane joined the NDA’s 56th course in Lima squadron, where the current IAF chief, Air Chief Marshal R K S Bhadauria, was his batchmate. The current Navy chief, Admiral Karambir Singh, was also part of the same batch, but in the Hunter squadron. To add to the string of coincidences, the fathers of all the three current service chiefs served in the IAF.

Later, in June 1980, after completing his training from the Indian Military Academy, he was commissioned in the seventh battalion of the Sikh Light Infantry. In his first media interaction as Army Chief on New Year’s morning, after inspecting the Guard of Honour, he revealed his regimental affiliations when he invoked ‘Waheguruji’ to give him “courage and strength” in his new role.

As a young officer, he served with the Indian Peace Keeping Force in Sri Lanka, one among his many stints in counter-insurgency operations — most notably in Jammu and Kashmir, where he commanded a Rashtriya Rifles battalion as a Colonel, and was Inspector General of the Assam Rifles in the Northeast. He also served as the country’s defence attaché to Myanmar. His path to the top was evident when he commanded the prestigious Strike Corps headquartered at Ambala and then headed the Eastern Command that’s tasked with securing the sensitive India-China border.

Though the present BJP government has come up with surprises in its selection of military chiefs, General Naravane was seen as the most likely candidate to succeed General Bipin Rawat after he moved to South Block as Vice Chief of Army Staff in September 2019. The official announcement of his elevation was made on December 16, an auspicious date for the Indian Army — it was on this date in 1971 that the Pakistan Army surrendered in Dhaka.

“General Manoj Naravane has served extensively in the mountains and in counter-insurgency environments. This, along with his exposure as Strike Corps Commander, would have truly empowered him to tackle the challenges that the Army faces today. A man of few words, he made his intent clear in his short media interaction shortly after taking over. His emphasis on reinforcing the core values of the Army, including its apolitical nature, was particularly welcome,” says Lt General A K Singh (retired), former Southern Army commander and former lieutenant governor of the Andaman & Nicobar Islands. “Also, as Army Chief, one of his first acts was to visit soldiers at the Base Hospital. That sends a good message to the rank and file.”

Speaking about his vision for the Army and the challenges ahead, the General said at the media interaction, “The priority will always remain to be ever-ready to meet any challenge and to be operationally prepared at all times. This will happen as a result of modernisation. We will continue to build up capabilities, especially in the North and Northeastern regions of the country. We will also lay emphasis on raising security awareness among the rank and file.”

Known to keep his family away from the limelight, Naravane is married to Veena Naravane, a teacher. They have two daughters, Isha, who is a performing artiste, and Amala, a PR consultant.

An M.Phil from Devi Ahilya Vishwavidyalaya, Indore, General Naravane is a keen reader of non-fiction. Not known to be fussy about food, he harbours a special interest for the state of Nagaland and is very fond of his Labrador.

Lalit Mohan

Tribune News Service

Dharamsala, January 2

“Politicians forget the promises made to the families of martyrs. They come to hog limelight at the time of cremation of martyrs and make announcements,” said Komal, daughter of Sanjeevan Rana, a soldier who attained martyrdom in 2016 on this day while defending the Pathankot Indian Air Force (IAF) base from terrorists.

Sanjeevan Rana from Siyunh village in Shahpur area of Kangra district and Jagdish Chand from Gola village in Sihunta area of Chamba district were two soldiers from Himachal who attained martyrdom on January 2, 2016 while fighting terrorists who had attacked Pathankot IAF station.

Ironically, on the Martyrdom Day of the bravehearts these are just the families that remember the martyrs.

Komal, daughter of Sanjeevan Rana, said when her father attained martyrdom a host of politicians came to express remorse. They promised a government job to a family member. However, till date none of the three children of Sanjeevan Rana has been given government job by the state government.

“Our brother after failing to get a job from the state government has joined the Indian army. The family has been pleading with government offices for a government job to my elder sister for the past about four years without any success”, Komal alleged.

She further said that political leaders promised that Government College, Chatri, would be named after her father and a park would be made in his memory. “However, till date neither the college has been named after my father nor the park developed”, she said.

“Shanta Kumar, former Chief Minister, who was earlier a BJP MP from Kangra, had given a grant for installing a tube well and a hand pump in our village in the name of my father. However, neither the tube well nor the hand pump has been installed”, alleged daughter of Sanjeevan Rana. She also said that former minister GS Bali had given a grant of Rs 3 lakh for improvement of facilities at the village cremation ground. However, the funds have been diverted to the adjoining village.

Bindu Rani, village pradhan, alleged that many schemes announced in the name of martyr Sanjeevan Rana had not been implemented as government has not provided land for them.

The family of Jagdish Chand, the other martyr in terror attack, had demanded that the road to their village should be metalled. The residents of Goha village, most of whom were serving in the army, had to walk about two km to reach their village. However, despite announcements by various politicians the demand remains a distant dream.

Mumbai, January 4

Referring to the row over the Rafale purchase deal, former Air Chief Marshal B S Dhanoa said on Saturday that such controversies slow down defence acquisitions, affecting the armed forces’ capabilities.

Had Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman been flying a Rafale instead of a MiG-21 during the India-Pakistan stand-off after the Balakot strike, the outcome would have been different, he said.

Speaking at the Techfest event organised by IIT-Bombay here, Dhanoa referred to the Rafale row, and said the Supreme Court gave a “fine judgment” on the issue (giving a clean chit to the Naredra Modi government).

“I have always personally maintained that…when the Rafale thing was thrown up, if you politicise the defence acquisition system, the whole system goes behind,” he said.

“All other files also start moving at a slow pace because people start becoming very, very conscious,” he said.

The Bofors deal too got mired in controversy (during the Rajiv Gandhi government) despite the Bofors guns “being good”, he noted.

There are several agencies in the country to look into a deal if there are complaints, he said.

At the same time, the former Air Chief Marshal added that people have the right to ask questions about the price of the aircraft as tax payers’ money is at stake.

“The fact is, because of creating a controversy out of it, the slowing down of defence modernisation later affects you,” said Dhanoa, who retired in September last year.

“Like the Prime Minister made a statement. People are saying it is a political (statement) but the fact is that the statement he made is correct.

“If we had Rafale, the question would have been totally different,” he said.

Modi had said in March last year that the results would have been different if India had Rafale jets during the air strike on terror camps in Pakistan.

Dhanoa said the outcome would have been different had Wing Commander Varthaman, who downed an enemy jet during a dogfight but was captured himself, been flying a Rafale instead of a MiG 21 fighter plane.

“100 per cent it would have been different. Why was he not flying a Rafale? Because you took 10 years to decide which aircraft to buy. So, it (the delay) affects you,” he said, without naming the earlier Congress-led UPA government.

He also reiterated that the governments of the day rejected the IAF’s proposal to carry out air strikes on terrorist camps in Pakistan after the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack and the earlier 2001 Parliament attack.

“But the decision, like I keep saying, is a political decision. It (the proposal) was not accepted at that time. So it gave the terror-sponsoring state confidence that India will not retaliate to a terrorist attack,” he said.

The Pakistan Air Force (PAF) was clueless about the IAF’s strike in Balakot, Dhanoa said.

He said there was a lack of co-ordination between the Pakistani Army and the PAF during the 1971 (Bangladesh) war and the 1999 Kargil war too.

“When Balakot happened, the PAF did not know (about the IAF’s strike). There were no terminal weapons in Balakot.

Even we were surprised,” he added.

Dhanoa also said that terror attacks in Pathankot, Uri and Pulwama indicated that India’s conventional deterrence, “though it is superior to its enemy”, was not stopping the enemy from carrying out terrorist activities on Indian soil.

“Thus, the Balakot strike was approved by the government to send a message to Pakistan that henceforth, such acts will come with a heavy price. The government changed the stand,” he said.

“One of the reasons for the strategic surprise was that they (Pakistan) had always underestimated our leadership.

They never expected our leadership to give a go ahead (to Balakot-like air strike),” he said. PTI

Ajay Banerjee

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, December 30

Army Chief General Bipin Rawat will the first Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) of the country, the government announced on Monday. He has been given an extension in service till the period he serves as CDS.

Two days ago, the government had amended service rules to allow CDS to serve till the age of 65. Service Chiefs serve till 62 or have a three-year tenure. General Rawat completes his three-year tenure as Army Chief on Tuesday. He will turn 62 later next year.

Picked as the first CDS of the country, ‘integrating’ the forces will be his prime task. The General, whose father was a senior officer, hails from Uttarakhand. He was commissioned into 5/11 Gorkha Rifles in 1978 on passing out from the Indian Military Academy, Dehradun. He was the ‘sword of honour’ of his batch, meaning the best-performing cadet.

In February 2015, when posted as Commander of 3 Corps at Dimapur, he survived a helicopter crash. In December 2016, he was picked as Army Chief, superseding two seniormost Commanders — Eastern Army Commander Lt Gen Parveen Bakshi and Southern Army Commander Lt Gen PM Hariz.

Before that, an Army commander was superseded when Gen AS Vaidya was appointed Army Chief in July 1983. It was during General Rawat’s tenure as Army Chief that India and China were locked in a standoff at Doklam in 2017. It was the second longest standoff between troops of the two countries along the un-demarcated Line of Actual Control (LAC).

The Indian side dug in its heels in the standoff, reminiscent of a similar situation at Sumdorong Chu (October 1986 – May 1987) in the north-western part of Arunachal Pradesh. General Rawat, then a young Major with just eight years of service, watched the moves of General K Sundarji, who launched ‘Operation Falcon’ and moved a brigade, some 3000 men, North of Tawang.

Ajay Banerjee

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, January 3

The Army’s review of its cadre — to decide on strength of officers, pace of promotions and level of ranks — is linked to the outcome of the Integrated Battle Groups (IBGs) which has been proposed to the government, the newly appointed Army Chief Gen MM Naravane told The Tribune on Friday evening.

The last cadre review was conducted in 1984. The recommendations of the Ajai Vikram Singh Committee for reducing age profile of commanding officers by two years following the Kargil war in 1999 had resulted in an increase in higher designations. The Second Administrative Reforms Commission had also suggested periodic review of the cadre.

“A committee is looking into cadre review, but its outcome will depend on the IBGs,” said the Army Chief, adding that the approval for the integrated groups was awaited. “After the approval, it would take two years to set up an IBG,” the Army Chief said.

The IBG is the biggest restructuring of the Army’s offensive capabilities since the ‘Cold Start doctrine’ was drafted after the Operation Parakaram in 2001. It will involve integration of existing elements of infantry, tank regiments, artillery, UAVs, engineers and signals.

The IBG is expected to bring a significant operational change in the Army. The Army has carried out two field tests — one under 9 Corps in the Pathankot sector and the other in the Northeast using the mountain strike corps.

On the issue of the opening avenues for soldiers, General Naravane said training was being given to young jawans who wanted to appear for test to become officers. “We will not lower the selection standard, but are providing them Services Selection Board-level education to take the test and have more opportunities. There is an age limit,” he said.

On being asked if any changes were being considered in policies for grading officers, the Army Chief said, “Every evaluation system has to work. We are keeping an eye on sudden increase or decrease of grading by the seniors.”

On taxing pensions of disabled soldiers, the General said “The matter is with the Ministry of Defence.”

BY MICHAEL KUGELMAN

Turmoil is never far away in South Asia, between disputed borders, acute resource shortages, and threats ranging from extremist violence to earthquakes. But in 2019, two crises stood out: an intensifying war in Afghanistan and deep tensions between India and Pakistan. And as serious as both were in 2019, expect them to get even worse in the coming year.

Afghanistan has already seen several grim milestones in the last 12 months that attested to the ferocity of the Taliban insurgency. Casualty figures for Afghan security forces and civilians set new records. It was also the deadliest year for U.S. forces since 2014.

Ironically, violence soared even as there was unprecedented momentum toward launching a peace process. U.S. President Donald Trump, eager to exit Afghanistan, stepped up efforts to secure a deal with the Taliban that would give him the political cover for a troop withdrawal. U.S. negotiators and senior Taliban representatives held multiple rounds of talks, and by September the two sides were finalizing a deal that centered on a withdrawal of U.S. troops coupled with a commitment by the Taliban to renounce ties to international terror groups.However, in September, Trump abruptly called off talks, giving a recent Taliban attack on a U.S. soldier as the reason. The likelier explanation, as I wrote for Foreign Policy back then, was the administration’s recognition that the emerging accord with the Taliban—which didn’t call for any type of cease-fire—was a lousy deal for Washington and Kabul.

The suspension of talks didn’t last long. Trump announced plans to scale up offensives against the Taliban, but this was more of a bargaining tactic than a battlefield redirection. Washington wanted to increase military pressure on the Taliban so that the insurgents would make more concessions at the negotiating table—such as the cease-fire they had refused to agree to earlier. Indeed, several days after Trump made a surprise Thanksgiving visit to Afghanistan, talks resumed—and this time with U.S. negotiators aiming to get a Taliban commitment to reduce violence against U.S. troops.During the last few days of December, media reports revealed that the Taliban had agreed to a temporary ceasefire to clear the way for a deal with the United States. The Taliban, however, rejected these reports.

Meanwhile, 2019 was a dangerously tense year for India and Pakistan—two rivals that are both neighbors and nuclear states. In February, a young Kashmiri man in the town of Pulwama staged a suicide bombing that killed more than three dozen Indian security forces—the deadliest such attack in Kashmir in three decades. Jaish-e-Mohammad—a Pakistan-based terror group with close ties to Pakistan’s security establishment—claimed responsibility. India retaliated by sending jets across Pakistan-administered Kashmir and launching limited strikes, for the first time since a war in 1971. Soon thereafter, Pakistan claimed it had carried out six air strikes in Kashmir to showcase its might, and it also shot down an Indian fighter jet and captured the pilot. The confrontation, which de-escalated when Islamabad announced the pilot’s release several days later, represented the most serious exchange of hostilities in years.

Then, in August, India revoked the autonomy of Jammu and Kashmir, the India-administered part of Kashmir, and declared it a new territory of India. New Delhi also imposed a security lockdown in Kashmir that included the detention of hundreds of people and a communication blackout. For Islamabad, which claims Jammu and Kashmir as its own, the move amounted to a serious provocation, if not a hostile act. Pakistan retaliated by expelling India’s envoy from Islamabad and suspending trade with New Delhi. Undaunted, in the weeks that followed, senior Indian officials—including the defense and foreign ministers—turned their attention to Pakistan-administered Kashmir, which New Delhi has long claimed, and suggested they eventually planned to reclaim it.

Bilateral relations remained fraught over the last few months of the year. Islamabad issued constant broadsides against New Delhi for its continued security lockdown in Kashmir. By year’s end, an internet blackout was still in effect. Then, in December, India’s parliament passed a controversial new citizenship law that affords fast-track paths to Indian citizenship for religious minorities—but not Muslims—fleeing persecution in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, and Pakistan. The new law angered Islamabad not just for excluding Muslims, but because of the implication—accurate but not something Islamabad likes to admit—that Pakistan persecutes its Hindu and Christian communities.

These prolonged tensions often overshadowed what was arguably the biggest story in both countries in 2019: economic struggle. India suffered its biggest economic slowdown in six years, and Pakistan confronted a serious debt crisis. The two weren’t unconnected: Given the inability of New Delhi and Islamabad to fix their economies, both governments arguably sought political advantages from the distractions of saber rattling.

Against this tense backdrop, the opening in November of a new border corridor that enables Indian Sikhs to enter Pakistan visa-free to worship at a holy shrine, which in better times could have been a bridge to an improved relationship, amounted to little more than a one-off humanitarian gesture.

Bad as these crises are, they are poised to get worse next year.

The good news for Americans is that a U.S.-Taliban deal likely isn’t far off; both sides are fully invested in a troop withdrawal. For Trump, the importance of troop departures will grow as the U.S. presidential election draws closer, and especially because the Washington Post’s release in December of the “Afghanistan Papers”—documents that feature senior U.S. officials admitting failure in the war—will likely solidify U.S. public opinion in favor of winding down America’s role in the 18-year war.

However, any U.S.-Taliban deal will do little to reduce violence, other than halting attacks on U.S. troops. In other words, the war will continue.

A U.S.-Taliban accord would clear the path for an intra-Afghan dialogue between the Afghan government, other political stakeholders, and the Taliban that aims to produce a cease-fire and an eventual political settlement that ends the war.

The path to intra-Afghan dialogue, however, is fraught with obstacles. Afghanistan held a presidential election in September. The preliminary results—released in December—showed President Ashraf Ghani in the lead, but with barely the 50 percent of votes needed to avoid a second round of voting with the second-place finisher, his bitter rival Abdullah Abdullah (who rejected the results). The close margin suggests that when final results are announced, the loser won’t accept them.

This means Afghanistan is unlikely to have a new government in place for at least another few months, and even longer if the final results are different from the initial ones and require a second vote. Due to winter weather in Afghanistan, a runoff likely wouldn’t occur until the spring. Without a new government in place, it beggars belief that Afghanistan could launch a process to establish an intra-Afghan dialogue, much less negotiate an end to the war. And even if and when an intra-Afghan dialogue is launched, the hardest of sells will be required to convince the Taliban to lay down arms and agree to share power within a political system that it has long rejected and vowed to overthrow by force.

Consequently, Afghanistan in 2020 is likely to see a withdrawal of U.S. forces before a peace agreement is in place—a demoralizing outcome for already struggling Afghan forces that would deliver another boost to the Taliban and further increase violence.

Meanwhile, the underlying tensions between India and Pakistan remain sharp. Pakistan arrested dozens of Islamist militants this past year, but New Delhi wasn’t convinced Islamabad was taking strong and “irreversible” steps against India-focused terrorists and their networks. And New Delhi’s actions in Kashmir in 2019 represented worst-case scenarios for Islamabad.

The two nuclear-armed nations will enter 2020 just one big trigger event away from war. The trigger could be another mass-casualty attack on Indian security forces in Kashmir traced back to a Pakistan-based group, or—acting on the threats issued repeatedly by New Delhi in 2019—an Indian preemptive operation to seize territory in Pakistan-administered Kashmir.

The two nuclear-armed nations will enter 2020 just one big trigger event away from war. The trigger could be another mass-casualty attack on Indian security forces in Kashmir traced back to a Pakistan-based group, or—acting on the threats issued repeatedly by New Delhi in 2019—an Indian preemptive operation to seize territory in Pakistan-administered Kashmir.

In either scenario, escalation would be swift. Bilateral relations are much worse than they were during last February’s confrontation. Ever since its resounding reelection victory last spring, India’s ruling party has pursued its Hindu nationalist agenda in increasingly aggressive fashion—which gives it no incentive to go easy on Islamabad. Pakistan, not wanting to show weakness, will not give in easily.

The doomsday clock for the next India-Pakistan war is at a minute to midnight. Diplomatic intervention from Washington and other third parties, and cooler heads on both sides, may keep it from ticking further forward. But it’s hard to see a path to unraveling such tightly knotted tensions—or to solving Afghanistan’s unending conflict.

Source: Strategic Study India