India could not have done anything better

On 14 February, a convoy of CRPF personnel was attacked in Pulwama district of Jammu and Kashmir near a place call Awantipora by a suicide bomber. He came from the by lane joined the convoy and hit with precision the 5th bus in the convoy resulting in the death of 40 CRPF personnel.

There was a release of a video of the suicide bomber Adil Ahmad Dhar immediately thereafter and Jaish-e Mohammad, a terrorist organisation based from Pakistan immediately claimed responsibility for the attack.After the 2016 Uri and Pathankot attack this was the biggest incident leading to a death of 40 paramilitary forces. We also had two other incidents of this century of an attack on the parliament in 2001 and the attack in Mumbai in 2008.

In 2001 and 2008 we chose not to retaliate though it was very clear that the actors are operating from the Pakistani soil presumably with full support and connivance of the armed forces and other state players. The nexus between the state of Pakistan and the extremist groups is by now well known.

ISI the intelligence agency of the Pakistan works very closely with these terrorist groups and this is part of the military doctrine followed by Pakistan against India of " bleed India with thousand cuts". It consists of waging covert low intensity war against India. It was Zulfikar Ali Bhutto who promised a thousand years jihad against India but general Zia-ul-Haq seems to have improvised on it in terms of a low intensity warfare with militancy and infiltration.

Kashmir insurgency and the above major incidents are part of this doctrine which Pakistani government is implementing with success and precision.What were the options left for government of India in the wake of Pulwama attack? One, we could have like at the time of Parliament attack or Mumbai attack could have chosen the easy option of putting international pressure on Pakistan stating that any direct action would further complicate the issues.

That such international pressure had no meaningful effect is borne out by the fact that these non-state organisations located in Pakistan with full connivance and support of the state systematically implementing the doctrine of bleeding India with thousand cuts by continuing to indulge in covert low intensity war even after Mumbai attack.

This time Government of India rightfully so has decided to retaliate and planned it so carefully that the Indian Air force can go deep inside Pakistan Bomb the targets and come back without suffering any losses. The response from Pakistan in the day varied from they only crossed the LOC and that the aircrafts have not come up to balakot in the morning to acceptance by evening that they came up to Balakot but when challenged dropped the bombs indiscriminately and left.

By now it is very clear that the Indian Air force did have specific information and intelligence and acted on that and was able to identify the target and hit it correctly. The Air force chief was correct in stating on March 4 in his press conference that they did not miss the target but how many died is something he cannot comment on since that would depend on how many were there at that particular place at that point of time.

But the fact that Pakistan promised to take the world media to the site the very next day and show them that there was no damage but subsequently backtracked shows that the damage was substantial. Imran Khan also conceded the same in a different way when he told they waited for the damaged to be assessed before they retaliated.

Face saving token retaliation from Pakistan side and a reply from outside resulting in the loss of two aircraft, one belonging to Pakistan, one belonging to us, the death of a Pakistani pilot, capture of Indian pilot by Pakistan and subsequent return have at least for the time being led to a certain level of de-escalation.

Main question still remains unanswered. How to deal with a rogue nation harbouring rogue organisations. It is very clear that these non-government organisations are not acting independent of the state but are part of a much broader design of Pakistan to inflict sustained damages on the social fabric of India. There is no point in not retaliating whenever such acts of aggression are committed in a covert manner by these organisations with full support and connivance of the state of Pakistan.

We have sent the wrong signals both the times when we had an opportunity to respond but did not at the time of attack on the Parliament as well as attack on the city of Mumbai. The message should be loud and clear that any such acts of violence by organisations based in Pakistan will be treated as acts of aggression and responded to.

As Gandhiji told "if the choice is between cowardice and violence I would advise violence . I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honour rather than that she should in a cowardly manner become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonour."

(Writer is former ChiefSecretary, Government ofAndhra Pradesh)