Geopolitics

A Modi-fied Operational Art against Pakistan’s Hybrid Threat
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
Issue Net Edition | Date : 07 Oct , 2016

The new Modi-fied operational art is an unprecedented change in India’s response to Pakistan’s hybrid threat because India never had an operational art. The absence of it gave Pakistan a tacit approval of its adventurism in India leaving strategic decision making in India nearly impossible.

The Indian Army conducted surgical strikes on the terrorist launch pads across the Line of Control (LOC) in retaliation to terrorist strikes on an Army base in the Uri Sector, Jammu and Kashmir. Although popular media houses and others have regarded the strikes to be a knee-jerk reaction there seems to be much more than what meets the eye.

…the strikes preceded by the political and diplomatic ground work in tilting international and domestic opinion in India’s favour marks a revolutionised operational art.

The strikes signify a change in the commander’s (Prime Minister) operational art, resulting in the legitimate appreciation of the hybrid threat emanating from Pakistan. To this point, cross border terrorism, jihadi terrorism in mainland India, meddling with Kashmir issue and several other contentions in Indo-Pak bilateral relations were received by Indian political leaders in isolation from one another. What resulted was a lethargic understanding of the hybrid threat that Pakistan was, and an inability to design an effective operational art to address the same. However, the strikes preceded by the political and diplomatic ground work in tilting international and domestic opinion in India’s favour marks a revolutionised operational art.

Hybrid nature of warfare emerged as states and non-state actors realised that defeating a superior conventional force is impossible through conventional military means. Nadia Schadlow describes hybrid warfare as a “blend of military, economic, diplomatic, criminal, and informational means to achieve desired political goals”. This is evident in the case of Arab confrontation with Israel, US’ threats in Iraq and Afghanistan and more so in the case of Pakistan’s confrontation with India after 1971. This gave birth to hybrid actors who were willing to employ all instruments available at their disposal to fight the superior combatant, who is constrained by norms and rules. These include rules of engagement, global media coverage, military doctrines and traditions.

In such a complex engagement, the superior combatant can either exhibit resilience and keep absorbing multiple attacks by the hybrid actor awaiting a conventional war, or adapt to the situation by modifying its operational art effectively to eliminate the threat. Therefore, development of a flexible operational art dominated by propaganda mechanism and offensive action is the key.

Operational art works to build up synergy through integration of campaigns in different theatres towards achieving a strategic objective. Without operational art, any number of campaigns or operations would be futile disconnected engagements. Successive Indian leaders had failed to develop an operational art that could connect their national security mechanism in line with Pakistan’s hybrid threat. This resulted largely from a lack of political will to act. With the political leadership unclear about the course of action, commanders of the diplomatic corps, armed forces and the intelligence agencies were left with little freedom of action.

The attacks of 26/11 were one of the worst attacks the world witnessed. Yet, lack of political will to act not only saved Pakistan but also made India a victim to accusations of weak counterterrorism machinery.

An example of such consternation was Operation Parakram, following the 2001 attack on the Indian parliament. While the estimated cost of our troop mobilisation and consequent standoff was a little over USD 3.2 billion, the benefit of the operation are still imperceptible. A series of terrorist attacks with ties to Pakistan continued to threaten India. The attacks of 26/11 were one of the worst attacks the world witnessed. Yet, lack of political will to act not only saved Pakistan but also made India a victim to accusations of weak counterterrorism machinery.

Nevertheless, the incumbent regime seems to have a comprehensive grasp on the hybrid nature of the threat posed by Pakistan. Consequently, an operational art has been built that can be understood by decoding some of the post Uri developments. As noted earlier, the hybrid actor is privy to a wide range of exploitable weaknesses of the superior combatant enforced by an adherence to established norms. In such case, an unorthodox operational art is the key to confuse the hybrid enemy and gain a competitive advantage. Modi’s operational art did just this. India’s operational art addressed three principal components of Pakistan’s hybrid threat design:

•   Military component: India’s operational art, in the current context, was emboldened with the political will that gave all the sub commanders power and direction to act. In doing so, India managed to crack the pivotal component of Pakistan’s threat design by calling its nuclear bluff. This marked a crucial transformation in India’s operational at which was hitherto choked by Pakistan’s nuclear threat. The nuclear component was the only facet that gave Pakistan a sense of parity with India and a sense of insurance against retaliation despite its nefarious adventurism against India.

Despite being known for its dare devil attitude and bravery in targeting and eliminating terrorists and enemies in any given environment Israel has failed to gain a strategic victory over them. This is purely, due to a lack of operational art.

•   Terrorism and Criminal component: Pakistan’s connivance in terrorist plots inside India has been a repetitive phenomenon. Compare and contrast the current episode with the previous attack on Pathankot. Analysing through the lens of a hybrid actor, Pakistan was adept in using terrorist proxies that would provide it plausible deniability. In addition, the Indian response was also predictable owing to its modus operandi of blaming Pakistan, gathering evidences, conducting investigations: all resulting in nothing more than wastage of time. The change in India’s operational art facilitated the military commander to adopt the necessary course of action against terrorist groups across the LOC. This unanticipated response clearly put the hybrid actor into confusion.

•   Informational and Psychological component: This is the central aspect to the survival of a hybrid actor as it completes the comprehensive picture. Given the relative weakness of the hybrid actor, heavy reliance on psychological warfare is compulsory. This is evident in the case of the PLO and Hezbollah fighting the Israelis. International backing becomes a compelling factor in demonising the acts of the superior combatant. Pakistan is no exception to this. It has banked on two points to garner international support. One is advertising itself as a victim of terror, on which it tries to portray India as a sponsor, and the other is accusing India of human rights violation in Kashmir.

India took this factor into cognizance and devised an operational art that tasked its diplomatic corps of exposing Pakistan’s knavery. Subsequently, the SAARC summit to be held in Islamabad was boycotted by India with other members like Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Afghanistan endorsing the boycott, while Nepal expressed concerns over cross border terrorism in the region. The surgical strikes were later backed by several other powerful nations of the world like Russia, Germany and the United States.

The new Modi-fied operational art is an unprecedented change in India’s response to Pakistan’s hybrid threat because India never had an operational art. The absence of it gave Pakistan a tacit approval of its adventurism in India leaving strategic decision making in India nearly impossible.

Hybrid actors like Hezbollah and Pakistan are aware of the nature of their enemy. Hence, they do not seek an outright victory, but thrive to wear out the enemy through a long war of attrition using all practical means.

The current episode that has exhibited the rise of a Modi-fied operational art through integrating several instruments of state-policy seems to be set in a direction of devising a strategic response that can tackle Pakistan for long. Should the operational art break, strategic victory becomes cloudy and the surgical strikes will remain only an episode of tactical advantage gained over Pakistan.

This is a mistake that Israel has repeated over the years and India can borrow a lesson from their experience. Despite being known for its dare devil attitude and bravery in targeting and eliminating terrorists and enemies in any given environment Israel has failed to gain a strategic victory over them. This is purely, due to a lack of operational art. While offensive action has eliminated some ruthless terrorist figures, the issue still remains at large because Israel has lost the psychological warfare that has resulted in hostile international opinion despite being a victim of terror.

Hybrid actors like Hezbollah and Pakistan are aware of the nature of their enemy. Hence, they do not seek an outright victory, but thrive to wear out the enemy through a long war of attrition using all practical means. In this case, a comprehensive operational art is the key and India looks headed in that direction.

Rate this Article
Star Rating Loader Please wait...
The views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily represent the opinions or policies of the Indian Defence Review.

About the Author

Dheeraj P C

PhD Scholar in Intelligence Studies and International Security, University of Leicester, U.K.

More by the same author

Post your Comment

2000characters left

10 thoughts on “A Modi-fied Operational Art against Pakistan’s Hybrid Threat

  1. well Israel offered to help at that time to conduct strikes in IC814 but refused by India, as Israel did helped in Kargil, and another recent strikes held on 26/11 It was Only Israel’s had that we were able to took control over Taj days after terror attack, we cannot deny its trustworthiness in the time of need, and moreover Israel had faced what India is facing now however mastered the art of covert ops, Now its India’s time to engage into many more ops to get the real time experience in order to avoid asking for help from other countries in the near future.

  2. The views expressed by the student about Israel clearly shows his lack of knowledge about Israel. I think he has not read the Operation of Entebbe conducted by Israel. They are the people who shown the world that Surgical strikes are useful to save the life of the hostages in any foreign soil. I cannot imagine how much planning and effort Israel might have put up to conduct a Surgical strike in the year 1974. But India could not conduct a similar surgical strike in the year 1999 in Afganistan. Ex. PM VAJPAYEE did not have the courage to conduct a surgical strike. Perhaps he might have thought the faith of Ex USA President Jimmy Carter in the American hostage crisis in Iran. The result is Maulana Masood Azhar is giving constant trouble to India. Only Indira Gandhi had the courage and long-term planning like the present PM. PM has taken a personal risk by authorising the surgical strike in the Pakistan territory protected by the USA AESA radars is one of the bests in the world. Israel has similar radars. The Commies in India do not like India’s friendship with the Israel, as they think they will lose the support of Muslims. So this article is completely biased because indirectly the JNU student says that the PM is following Isreal policy and it is not good for the country. Only to criticise the Govt Policies particularly the recent Surgical strike he brought the name Israel as if they got the bad name after every surgical strike conducted by them for the safety of Israelis. So I doubt the full article has not written by this student and some commie might have asked him to add the last few paragraphs. If he has written then he is a commie.

    • About India’s inability to conduct a strike to rescue passengers held hostage in Afghanistan, you need to read the cover story of The Week – Covert Strike. Please do not comment on matters which are not known to you. The same NSA was the coordinator at that time.

      • Your knowledge about IC 814 plane is from some articles. But my knowledge is from seeing the incident live on the TV and later on various paper reports and views. I was continuously watching the TV without a break till the plane left the Amritsar Airport. Failure of the Govt to control the plane in the Amritsar Airport was a great blunder. This decision helped the Terrorist to take full control of the situation and later on the Govt had to agree on the conditions laid down by the terrorists. Everybody knows what happened in Afganistan. I do not know why is the PM chosen a Bureaucrat ? he does not know anything about war strategy and counter-terrorism. The same mistake was done by the UPA. Govt. But the present PM has taken the best suitable persons as NSA and MoD.
        IC 814 plane could have been controlled in Amritsar Airport.There were several ways to control the plane in the Amritsar airport. At that time there was no way to give instant suggestions to the Govt like the present .time. 1)They should have punctured the tyres of the planes.
        2) They should have put a metal piece inside the engine. This would have broken the fan blade into pieces.
        3) Instead of Aviation fuel, they should have filled water
        4) Cut the Hydraulic pipe to make the landing gear inoperative.
        Entebbe Airport in Uganda hostage crisis was a sudden development and it was a French passenger aircraft in the year 1976. They took the help of Israel. Similarly, India could have taken the help of Israel. Some political leaders in Congress and Commies might have raised an objection at that time like the way you have written in your last paragraphs. One has to read the 1967 and 1973 Arab-Israel war. to know war strategy. Similarly one has to read Mahabharat Yudh in detail.

  3. This is an article with merits. The author should have gone on to add the fact the a lowly educated tea seller with a sincere will to make India great is far better than an highly qualified oxford graduate with a lowest respect for the real Indian people, working under a barmaid, cannot and will not deliver India from the 45 years of misrule and corruption.

More Comments Loader Loading Comments