Our Political Desk
The demand by National Conference leader Farooq Abdullah and his Congress ally for India to engage in peace talks with Pakistan during External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar’s visit to the SAARC summit is both untimely and misaligned with India’s national security priorities.
The situation in Jammu and Kashmir continues to be tense, with Pakistan’s unabated support for cross-border terrorism putting India’s security forces on high alert. Given these conditions, any proposal to initiate peace talks seems not only imprudent but also counterproductive to India’s longstanding policy on terrorism and national defense.
Farooq Abdullah’s call for dialogue with Pakistan raises questions about the consistency of his stance, especially when viewed against his previous positions during his alliance with the NDA under Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s leadership. Back then, both Farooq and Omar Abdullah took a firm stance against Pakistan’s misadventures, warning of strong punitive actions. The glaring contradiction in their positions now — criticizing the government’s refusal to engage with Pakistan while earlier supporting tough measures against terrorism – exposes the political opportunism that appears to drive their narrative.
This shift in stance becomes even more puzzling when considering the clear evidence of Pakistan’s involvement in terrorist activities targeting the Indian state. The security forces have repeatedly foiled Pakistan-sponsored attempts to infiltrate terrorists into Jammu and Kashmir to disrupt the electoral process. To demand talks with a nation that openly supports terrorism only to appease domestic constituencies is not just misguided but undermines the security efforts of our armed forces.
Since taking office, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, under the guidance of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has firmly established India’s position on terrorism and foreign policy. Jaishankar’s diplomatic acumen has not only elevated India’s stature on the global stage but also ensured that Pakistan faces significant international pressure for its role in fostering terrorism. The Modi government’s zero-tolerance policy toward terrorism has made it clear that any misadventures by Pakistan will be met with a decisive and overwhelming response.
The result of this unyielding stance is visible in Pakistan’s deteriorating economic condition, further compounded by its international isolation. Pakistan’s reputation as a global hub for terrorism has led to financial institutions like the IMF and even its closest ally, China, reconsidering their financial support. The rampant corruption within Pakistan’s military and civilian leadership has left the nation struggling, with little prospect for economic recovery unless it abandons its support for terror activities.
Prime Minister Modi’s initial efforts to normalize relations with Pakistan were thwarted by a series of provocations, including the Pulwama attack. Following these incidents, Modi’s government decisively abandoned the diplomatic overtures and instead focused on a strategy that emphasized accountability. India’s message to Pakistan has since been unequivocal — talks can only proceed if they address the issue of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) and its eventual return to India.
Defense Minister Rajnath Singh and Home Minister Amit Shah have also reinforced this position in Parliament, clearly stating India’s intentions to reclaim PoK. The strikes on terror camps in Balakot and along the Indo-Pak border served as a stark reminder to Pakistan of the consequences of its actions. Jaishankar’s refusal to engage in talks during the SAARC summit further cements India’s stance, emphasizing that Pakistan must first vacate its illegal occupation of PoK.
While the Opposition attempts to undermine the Modi government’s position, India’s handling of its relationship with another adversarial neighbor, China, has yielded positive results. After clashes in Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh, India’s military preparedness and infrastructural developments along the border have deterred further Chinese incursions. The Modi government’s strong stance has contributed to a cautious recalibration in Beijing’s approach, leading to a more balanced dialogue on bilateral issues.
China’s strategic rethink can also be linked to the broader geopolitical landscape, including the ongoing conflicts involving Russia-Ukraine and Israel-Hamas. With China’s Belt and Road Initiative passing through PoK, Beijing would be wary of India’s intentions to reclaim this territory. Strengthening ties with India now appears to be in China’s strategic interest, as global dynamics shift and new alliances take shape.
Amidst these shifting dynamics, the Indian Opposition’s approach to the Jammu and Kashmir issue seems increasingly out of touch with reality. Their attempt to criticize Modi’s policy towards Pakistan is unlikely to gain them political mileage, especially when national security concerns are paramount. By appearing to side with a narrative that weakens India’s stance against terrorism, the Opposition risks alienating voters who prioritize national integrity over political gamesmanship.
The Opposition’s efforts to politicize foreign policy and national security betray a lack of cohesive strategy, driven more by an anti-Modi agenda than by genuine national interest. In the face of India’s strategic gains against both Pakistan and China, this discredited narrative appears not only misplaced but also counterproductive to the country’s long-term security goals.
India’s firm stand against terrorism and its diplomatic successes on the global front are a testament to the Modi government’s focused approach to national security. The Opposition’s attempt to derail this progress through divisive rhetoric and inconsistent policies not only weakens India’s position but also risks undoing years of hard-earned gains. It is high time for the Opposition to prioritize the nation’s security over short-term political gains and to adopt a unified approach in dealing with threats to India’s sovereignty. Hence, the question; why political over national interests?
