Bibi Persuades Modi to Take Back Spike Deal & Here’s How it Helps

If the prime minister of India is your friend, you can do many things, even revive an arms deal that has recently been cancelled by his Ministry of Defence. Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu has demonstrated this by persuading Modi to allow the recently cancelled Spike anti-tank missile deal to get back on track.

In this case, at least, “friend” Modi has taken the right decision. The deal for the fourth generation anti-tank missile Spike had been struck in 2014. India has a larger need for some 40,000 anti-tank missiles and the 8,000 or so Spike missiles would fill only part of its requirement but they are urgently needed

Why Spike is Ideal for Cross-Border Raids

It’s not clear which versions India wanted, but they appear to be a mix of the medium range (MR) and short-range (SR) versions of the missile light enough to be carried into battle by infantrymen and Special Forces for use against tanks and hardened enemy positions.

The missile is a tried and tested system, having been used by over 20 countries and seen action in Israel’s various regional wars since its invasion of Lebanon in 1982.

Two months ago, the Ministry of Defence had cancelled the $500 million deal which would have also seen it being produced in India through technology transfer. They had, instead, decided to back the DRDO which had claimed that it would develop a system based on its Nag NAMICA system within  four years.

The Spike has seen constant enhancement in its technology since the 1980s. The latest version of Spike SR has a missile that is 98 cm long. Its disposable control launch unit weighs 1.2 kg with battery, and the missile and launch tube together weigh 8.6 kg. The total weight of the system is just under 10 kg. According to Jane’s 360, there is no other missile which knocks out targets between 50 m and 1.5 km in this weight class currently in production.

Over the years the Israelis have refined the system which has ensured that the missile does not have a separate booster to push it out of the launch tube, the task being done by a single unified motor. The Imaging Infrared sensor locks on to the target day or night and it has a proprietary fixed seeker which has a wide angle of vision. The operator locks on to the target using the missile’s seeker, fires it and the missile finds its own way to the target.

As is evident, it is an ideal missile for the Special Forces to carry in cross-border raids.

DRDO’s Ability to Deliver Nag on Time is Dubious

The DRDO’s anti-tank missile Nag is a non-starter for this task. It is simply too big and heavy for a single soldier to carry. It weighs 42 kg and has a length of 1.9 metre, and therefore has to be mounted on a vehicle or helicopter.

A September 2017 report suggested that the DRDO would begin work on a portable Nag which would weigh around 14 kg. But a similar report had earlier suggested that DRDO was beginning work on this in 2015 as well. Clearly, as of now they have no product and as the reports suggest, they have now promised a “world class missile” in 2022.

The DRDO’s ability to deliver on time is highly suspect and the army faced the prospect of having no missiles for the foreseeable future to replace their obsolete systems.

Since the Spike would fit only part of the Army’s needs, the DRDO’s Nag can still find its place in the balance of the Army’s requirements for a missile that can be carried on infantry combat vehicles and the attack helicopters of the army. However, it’s not clear that the DRDO’s product would fit the bill unless it actually goes through the tests.

There have been  varying claims of the success of the two Nag NAMICA tests that had taken place in September 2017. While the DRDO claimed they were a great success, Indian Army said that the tests had only been partially successful and postponed the induction of the missile till further tests were conducted. If this was the case with a missile that has been nearly 30 years in development, it will be some time before the DRDO can come up with missile that can match the Spike.

Perhaps the DRDO can take a leaf out of its own book and do a joint venture with Israeli companies to produce an anti-tank missile. After trying in vain to develop world-class surface-to-air missiles, the DRDO tied up successfully with the Israelis to develop the medium and long-range surface to air missiles which will equip all three Indian services in the future.

The Quint January 19, 2018

The Trump policy on Iran

The Trump Administration’s decision, on Friday,  to continue waiving sanctions relating to the 2015 Iran nuclear deal is good news for the world and India. However, and somewhat ominously, Trump said that this was the last waiver he would issue.  Which means in four months, we will confront the possibility of the deal collapsing and its attendant consequences.

In addition, the US issued  new sanctions against 14 Iranian officials and institutions relating to human rights, its ballistic missile programme and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). New sanctions have been issued against the head of Iran’s judiciary Sadegh Larijani  and a cyber warfare unit accused of internet censorship and this could further roil relations between Iran and the US.

It is no secret that Trump hates the Iran deal and had threatened to talk away from it, but since taking over as President, he has waived sanctions for the third time. By law, the US President is required to certify to its Congress every 90 days as to whether Iran is complying with the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) Agreement that it signed with six world powers to limit its nuclear programme. In October 2017, Trump refused to certify the agreement and is since been issuing waivers on the sanctions that he is mandated to impose.

Trump now wants to work with the European powers who were behind the deal and push for a follow on agreement which would impose new conditions on Teheran. Trump’s ideas are contained in amendments to the  Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act (INARA). This would mandate that Iran allow timely and sufficient inspection of all its sites by international inspectors, that Iran does not come close to getting nuclear weapons.

However, while UK may want to go with the US on this, Germany, France,  are not likely to follow and China and Russia most certainly not.

The Europeans have been categorical in opposing any efforts to re-write the deal. On Thursday, the Europeans made it clear that they support the JCPOA. In Brussels, Federica Mogherini, the EU foreign policy chief said that while there were concerns about Iran’s development of ballistic missiles and other activities in the Middle East, they could be dealt with as a separate issue. But this would require Chinese and Russian cooperation as well as that of the Iranians, something that looks unlikely.

That is why there has been a big debate within the US about the Presidential waiver. Some have argued that the recent political protests are an opportunity to further push Iran to the point where the people overthrow the mullah-led government. However, others say that pressure would actually do the opposite—generate support for the government. Whatever it is, the US is poorly equipped to handle the issue because so far the US has been looking at the issue through only a military perspective. But while the protests have convinced the President that the Iranian leadership must be punished, the Europeans believe that the deal should be preserved.  

The Americans realise that they lack significant diplomatic heft to push the Europeans, but their real problem is that they want to re-write the deal which was achieved through very tough negotiations.The JCPOA was worked out through a UN Security Council resolution with monitoring by the International Atomic Energy Agency which must certify that Iran is complying with its side of the deal which includes limiting its enrichment of uranium, reducing its heavy water stockpiles,  dismantling centrifuges, pouring cement over the core of the Arak reactor.  So far the IAEA which has got unprecedented access to the programme,  has certified that Iran is in compliance with its part of the deal.

From the outset there has been little trust between Iran and the US. So while Iran has continued ballistic missile testing, the US has continued its sanctions through using the issue of  human rights and terrorism and many international companies have stayed away from Iran so as not to get entangled in US laws.

Trump’s policy has two pillars—the dismantling of a deal worked out by his predecessor Barack Obama which has been criticized by Israel as well. And containing Iranian activism in Yemen, Syria and Iraq. The American policy is strongly influenced by the military men in his administration, people like the National Security Adviser H R McMaster who commanded American forces in Iraq.

Supporters of the deal say that it had a single focus—prevent Iran from going nuclear. Other issues such as ballistic missiles, Iranian activities in Yemen, Lebanon and Iraq were not part of the arrangement. Those who thought that the deal alone would transform Iranian behaviour towards the US and its allies were unduly optimistic.

A breakdown of the deal and tension in the Persian Gulf has implications for India which imports significant quantities of Iranian oil and is also committed to building the Chah Bahar project.

Greater Kashmir January 15, 2018

Why Balochistan has become a thorn in Pakistan's crown

On Saturday, Abdul Quddus Bizenjo of the Pakistan Muslim League (Q), the so-called kings' party of the Musharraf era, took over as chief minister of Balochistan along with a 14-member cabinet. He is the third chief minister in four and a half years.

Bizenjo replaced Sanaullah Zehri of the PML (Nawaz), who was forced to resign from office ahead of a no-confidence motion against him. Not surprisingly, 11 of the 14 incoming cabinet members are members of the PML(N).

Army interference

Most observers see this manoeuvre as the Pakistan Army’s move to punish former PM Nawaz Sharif by depriving his party of any sustenance. If anything, this is a sign that parties and ideology don’t matter in official Baloch politics, but it is individuals who are easily open to manipulation. In fact, Bizenjo won the 2013 election with just 544 votes cast in his favour. The turnout in his constituency was just 1.18 per cent.

In 2013, PML(N) won a majority of seats and formed a coalition government and selected a middle-class Baloch nationalist, Abdul Malik Baloch of the National Party as chief minister. But Malik had to make way for Zehri in 2015. Baloch nationalists opposed the elections and many boycotted the process. Even those who did participate, such as Sardar Akhtar Mengal, the leader of the Balochistan National Party, rejected the outcome, charging authorities with manipulating the results.

Balochistan has suffered from prolonged political turmoil and successive phases of insurgency and violent religious extremism. The most recent bout of violence began in 2003 and is still continuing. In the period between 2011 and 2016, nearly 4,000 people were killed, including 1,000 classed as terrorists, who could be separatists or sectarian killers who target Shias in the Quetta area.

In 2017, violence intensified with massive bombings in Quetta, and other areas targeting Shias, Sufis and security forces. At the end of the year, a bomb blast killed nine and injured 57 people when a Methodist Church was targeted by the Islamic State. The Pakistan Army has sought to use violent religious extremist groups to counter Baloch nationalism and blame India for the violence.

Banking on China

There are of course nationalist groups such as the Balochistan Liberation Army, Baloch Republican Army and Baloch Liberation Front. Pakistani authorities focus their ire on Brahamdagh Bugti of the BRA as the principal villain because he is openly pro-Indian and has even sought political asylum in India. But actually, most Baloch nationalists reject secession in favour of greater autonomy and the groups are hopelessly divided along tribal lines.

Balochistan has now come into international focus because of a report that the Chinese may be establishing a naval base on the Jiwani peninsula, adjoining the port they built and operate in Gwadar. Not many are taken in by Beijing’s denial. As for Gwadar, it is the starting point of CPEC, which has become a flagship scheme of Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Pakistan claims Chinese investments will generate jobs and prosperity for everyone, including the Baloch. The government believes that once the mega projects kick in, Baloch nationalism will lose steam.

There is an element of wishful thinking in the Pakistani belief that CPEC will be an answer to all its problems and moderate Baloch nationalism. They believe the Baloch live in a feudal environment, dominated by their sardars and once the area is opened up, things will change.

Blaming India

Pakistani authorities have shown little sophistication in addressing the challenge of violence in the province whose roots go back to the sensitive issue of Baloch identity. The Pakistani state, especially the Army, tends to see Baloch nationalism as a threat to Pakistan’s integrity.

In recent years, Pakistan has sought to introduce the “Indian hand” as the cause of problems. They cited Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s references in his Independence Day speech in 2016 and their capture of naval officer Kubhushan Jadhav to back their claims. However, Modi’s reference was innocuous to say the least and as for Jadhav, there is no real proof that he was involved in doing anything in Balochistan.

Politics are not normal in Pakistan, and even less so Balochistan. Violence and political turbulence are, of course, there, but the real problem is that it is somehow not seen as being part of the Pakistani mainstream. By and large, its parties are electoral coalitions that rise and come apart depending on the exigencies of power. Sentiments are with Baloch nationalists, but authority is exercised by an elite which is backed by the Army.

Mail Today January 15, 2018

Beyond Modi-Bibi Bonhomie, Limits of Indian-Israeli Convergence

In the Modi era, India-Israel relations exist in two planes. The first is the normal one of friendly relations between two states who have had normal diplomatic relations since 1992 and, from India’s point of view, have a strategic dimension based on Israel’s capacities in the area of technology.

The second is visible through the prism of BJP/RSS’s adulation for the Jewish state because of its achievement in not only recovering the purity of its ancient civilisation in the face of alleged Islamic hostility, but vigorously defending it with its military might thereafter.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will be in New Delhi this week in return for Modi’s 2017 visit, the first ever by an Indian Prime Minister. It will be another occasion to see how these two planes intersect.

Bonhomie Between Modi and ‘Bibi’

We are likely to see enhanced movement in a range of areas such as military-technical trade and cooperation, agriculture, water technology, renewable energy, healthcare and cyber security. At the same time, no doubt, there will also be gestures by the government to signal its special feelings for Israel.

Modi’s July 2017 visit was an event in itself. He pointedly avoided visiting Ramallah, the capital of Palestine in the same tour, and paid homage at the tomb of Theodor Herzl, the founder of Zionism. There was easy informality between Netanyahu and him as they strolled on the beach. Modi addressed his Israeli counterpart by his nickname “Bibi”, and there were numerous trademark ‘Modi hugs’.

Early enough Netanyahu, not the most popular man in the world, sensed the opportunity that Modi and the BJP’s uncritical admiration provided his country. He was the first to congratulate Modi on his election as Prime Minister in 2014. Subsequently, high level exchanges between the two countries intensified with mutual visits of their respective Presidents and ministers, Modi’s Israel-visit in 2017 and now Netanyahu’s visit to India.

Also Read: Modi-Bibi Partnership: Bringing India-Israel Ties Into the Open

close

Walking a Tightrope

• Netanyahu’s visit likely to see enhanced movement in areas such as military-technical trade and cooperation, agriculture, water technology, etc
• Early enough, Netanyahu sensed the opportunity that Modi and the BJP’s uncritical admiration provided his country.
• From supporting nuclear weapons programme in the 1970s to providing assistance during the Kargil War, Israel has been India’s key ally.
• While BJP might admire Israel’s tough military posture, India can’t afford such a stand as terrorists, in our case, are backed by a nuclear weapons state.
• Trump can take a tough stand on Jerusalem, but India has to step carefully in a region where it has vital interests.

Ties with Israel Since the 1950s

India has had important and pragmatic ties with Israel since the 1950s. In the 1970s, the Israelis reportedly gave a leg-up to India’s nuclear weapons programme through the important RAW and Mossad relationship. In the wake of Indira Gandhi’s assassination, Israeli experts advised India on setting up VIP security.

In the 1990s, Israel became a means through which technologies, which the US denied to us, could come through. This became important for Tel Aviv after the US embargoed certain kinds of technologies to China.

The direct benefit was India’s AWACS (Airborne Warning and Control System) which has been built with Israeli electronics on a Russian airframe. Israel also gave a boost to the Indian Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) programme by agreeing to supply its Green Pine radar.

Israeli assistance during the Kargil War of 1999 has helped shape the relationship of today, which sees Israeli Searcher and Heron drones, Barak surface-to-air missiles, and AWACS aircraft in the Indian armoury.

In addition, Israel provided unspecified sensor technology for India’s border fence on the Line of Control with Pakistan. Perhaps the most ambitious project currently underway is $2 billion medium and long range surface-to-air missile system, jointly developed by several Israeli companies and the DRDO. Equally important in the mid-2000s, it provided India with RISAT-2, its first radar imaging satellite.

Also Read: Israeli PM to Visit India, Hold Roadshow in Gujarat With PM Modi

India Offers Economic Opportunity But Security Dimension is Different

The positive trajectory of relations between the two countries had been set well before Modi and Netanyahu became Prime Ministers.

Even so, having a government of a party which has an almost fawning attitude towards Israel is a big plus, especially since that country is a respected member of the Non Aligned Movement. Equally important is the opportunity that an economically flourishing India provides for Israeli companies.

Of course, India stands to benefit a great deal from Israel, whether it is in the area of technology, or in creating an eco-system that encourages technology development, whether it is for the civilian sector or the military. But we should not overstate the security dimension.

The security scenarios of the two countries could not be more different. Israel cannot afford any major military or terrorist setback on its territory, whereas India can absorb a lot. Many Indians, especially those close to the BJP, admire Israel’s tough military posture which involves periodic cross-border strikes against its enemies. Israel can carry out those strikes because it has total air superiority against its non-state actor adversaries. Unlike Israel, our terrorists are backed by a nuclear weapons state.

Also Read: India Stays Consistent: Votes Against US Decision on Jerusalem

Limits of Indian-Israeli Convergence

But is Israel safer, despite its repeated invasions and attacks in Gaza and Lebanon? Where India has managed to successfully eliminate Khalistani terrorism and contain its Islamist variety, successive Israeli military operations have ended up with its enemies becoming more dangerous.

Israel’s problem is not Islamist extremism per se, but a people whose land it is militarily occupying. Israel sees no contradiction in achieving Jewish nationality in Palestine by depriving the Muslim and Christian Palestinians of their nationhood. This may have a resonance with some Hindutva forces, who would not mind marginalising and dis-empowering Muslim citizens of the country, but is not acceptable to the world.

This was evident in the recent UN resolution criticising the US decision to name Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and calling for an end to its military occupation of Palestinian territories. India’s support for the resolution indicated the limits to the Indian-Israeli convergence. This is but natural – the two countries do not have an identity of interests. Israel may be a nuclear power, but its real influence lies through its ties with the US.

India Has to Tread Carefully

A larger part of India is also friendly to the US, but it has a more complex regional agenda, which involves a difficult US friend, Pakistan, and balancing relations between Tel Aviv, Teheran and Riyadh. Trump can do the sword dance in Riyadh and recognise Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, but India has to step carefully in a region where it has vital interests. And hence Modi’s return to the region, probably next month, to visit UAE, Palestine and Jordan.

There is little doubt that in terms of its economic achievements and military power, Israel flies high in its region.

But the real existential challenge is in making a soft landing. Either it agrees to the two-state solution mooted by most countries, or it becomes travesty of a democracy which keeps millions of people in captivity, a prospect guaranteed to generate perpetual insecurity.

The Quint January 13, 2018

Seven Reasons Why US Relations With China Will Get Worse in 2018

2018 could be a portentous year for China. Its principal relationship – that with the United States – is on a cusp. Things could get better, but more likely they will get worse. The Trump administration’s retreat from the world has just enlarged China’s strategic opportunity. Such circumstances are not the most propitious for international relations.  

1. Internally, the trend of the Communist Party of China (CPC) reasserting its control over the state and society is likely to intensify. As Xi Jinping told the 19th Party Congress: “Government, military, society and schools, north, south, east, west, the Party is the leader of everything.” Private businesses, educational and other institutions are being told that the Party head of that institution must also be inducted into the governing board of that entity.

2. Xi is very much in-charge of the Party and the state and has consolidated his hold as the most powerful leader China has seen since Deng Xiaoping. Indeed, the very first meeting of the Politburo after the Congress decided that the CPC needed to “safeguard Xi’s position at the core of the CPC Central Committee and the whole Party.”

He is also holding the military close to himself, among the most important meetings he held following the Party  Congress were with the military. On the occasion of new year, Xi again donned a military uniform and conducted what Xinhua said was a fist ever “mobilisation meeting” where Xi issued instructions to the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to strengthen “ real combat training an improve its war willing capability.” Though the parade involved one crack division of the PLA ground force, it was witnessed over close circuit  TV by PLA formations in 4,000 different locations.

Another new development has been the decision to resume the old practice of having PLA personnel in the Party Standing Committees which deal with every aspect of administration in China.

---

3. It will be interesting to watch how these trends impact on the economic development of China. The signal came in the Party Congress when it changed the principal contradiction, geared to boosting the material life of the people, to one which  focused on removing imbalances and improving their  quality of life. The Chinese leadership need to deal with four major issues – dealing with the massive debt overhang which could undermine economic stability, eliminating the vestiges of poverty which could destabilise society, reducing pollution which affects the life of all those who live in China, and coping with the American demands on trade and North Korea.

4. The last named has the potential of degenerating into a military conflict and has serious implications for China and the North-east Asian region. The US may not be directly affected, but any military action will result in a downward spiral of the global economy and, if anything, tip the regional balance in favour of China. Deneuclarisation of North Korea is not likely to happen. Sanctions alone will not work, just as they have not in the case of India or Pakistan.

5. The new US National Security Strategy (NSS) has clearly shifted tracks of the US policy. The NSS says that the US had worked on the assumption that integration of China into the international system it had created after World War II was its norm, now the Trump team believed that America has been led up the garden path and China wants to integrate on its own terms, accepting the benefits and avoiding the obligations. For a long time Trump had been claiming that the US is being taken for a ride by China and we may now be at the cusp of a major change in US–China relations as the Americans being to implement punitive trade measures against Beijing.

---

6. The post-Tiananmen CPC was led largely by engineers and technocrats who had become politicians like Jiang Zemin, Hu Jintao, Li Peng, Zhu Rongji and Wen Jiabao. However, now professional politicians are at the helm – Xi Jinping and Li Keqiang. The former did study engineering, but has never worked as an engineer, the latter followed the route of many Indian politicians, he studied law.

The point is that in the main they all have a technotronic orientation and so it is not surprising that they are taking uncommon interest in promoting Big Data, Artificial Intelligence and Robotics very seriously. Their aim is to have all the AI revolution under the command of the CPC. China has huge data sets and few privacy controls, further, this data is being used for maintaining social control in a society that is already under authoritarian rule.

7. Ever since Xi has taken over, China has been more assertively pushing its foreign goals. China is already a major economic power across the globe. It now wants its military also to catch up with the kind of economic clout it has. China is inexperienced and somewhat gauche in the exercise of global power. But it is being helped along by the US retreat from its global responsibilities.

Under Xi, China has launched a massive programme of infrastructure and connectivity development involving hundreds of billions of dollars. This could be a make or break project which could see China waste a lot of money, or transform its economy. In 2018 China’s influence will continue to expand across South, South-east and Central Asia. Now, as the US retreats, China is the principal beneficiary. 

The Wire January 9, 2018

US-Pakistan relation: How nasty can the US get with Pakistan?

On Thursday, the United States announced that it was suspending nearly all security assistance to Pakistan which includes $ 225 million military aid and the balance in reimbursements Pakistan gets for fighting militancy, called Coalition Support Funds (CSF) .

This is, of course, not a surprise. Beginning with President Trump, nearly all top officials have publicly warned Pakistan in recent months that it had not done enough to round up terrorist and dismantle militant camps.

This is not the first time that the United States of America and Pakistan have come to the brink in their relationship with each other. In May 1992, the then US Ambassador to Islamabad Nicholas Platt  delivered a letter from Secretary of State James Baker to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif saying that if Pakistan did not stop supporting terrorism in Indian controlled Kashmir, the US may declare Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism.

The scope of sanctions would have been far more drastic that what Pakistan had faced for its nuclear weapons programme and would have led to the shutting of funding from the World Bank, IMF and other international financial institutions. 

As Hussain Haqqani recounts, Sharif and the government decided that they could “manage” the US. Washington needed Islamabad, more than the other way round. So, the Pakistanis tweaked their support for the Kashmir militancy and put up $2 million to lobby the American media and Congress. Later that year, the Americans elected Bill Clinton as President of the US and that was the end of that. Indeed, in1993, Pakistan stepped up support for the militancy in Kashmir and helped establish the Taliban.

This little history is recounted here to serve as a backdrop to analyzing the current developments which began with a US decision to withhold $ 255 million aid to Pakistan for buying US military equipment and President Trump’s Tweet excoriating Islamabad which despite $ 33 billion aid “had given us nothing but lies and deceit.” Note, of course,  that the Tweet referred to Afghanistan and not Kashmir.

It is not so easy for the US to simply walk away from Pakistan. There are three big reasons for it. First, the US has decided to double down in its efforts to defeat the Taliban. Trump has ordered a doubling of US personnel in Afghanistan and given the Pentagon a free hand in dealing with the Taliban. But if the troops increase from 8,000 to around 14,000, the US dependence on Pakistan’s logistic lines of communications will only increase. US relations with Russia are such that the so-called Northern Distribution Network is non-functional. Likewise, the Trump administration’s antipathy to Iran ensures that the US cannot take advantage of the Indian developed port and lines of communications from Chah Bahar. So that leaves just Pakistan.

Second, Pakistan is a nuclear weapons state. Its nuclear arsenal, reportedly bigger than that of India, makes it vital for Washington to remain engaged with Islamabad. Any breakdown would result in creating yet another North Korea. The world and America’s nightmare is the possibility of terrorists laying their hands on nuclear weapons. Remaining engaged with Pakistan makes it much easier for the US to monitor the activities of these dangerous terrorist groups and their interface with the Pakistani society and state.

Third, a US hard line would only strengthen the Islamist parties grouped under the Difa-e-Pakistan Council, among its leading lights is  the Jamaat-e-Dawa, the front for the LeT .  

Pakistan’s commitments in Afghanistan and India are different. In the former, it seeks to expand its power by supporting the Taliban. While it seeks  to offset India’s size by supporting militant groups like the LeT and JeM. If push comes to shove, it will be willing to reduce its Afghan commitments, especially since that would buy peace with the mighty US, but is unlikely to concede to India in any way.

One of the obvious ways in which Pakistan will seek to offset US pressure is to use China. Not surprisingly, China  came to the defence of Islamabad with a strong statement hailing the “outstanding contribution” of Pakistan to counter-terrorism. Islamabad’s response was to signal its willingness to expand Beijing’s remit in Pakistan by allowing the use of China’s currency for bilateral trade and investment. However, China also shares the American worries about the growth of militancy in the region.  

The Pakistanis have a deep understanding of the US and the ways of handling it. Aid cuts and the like are things that have happened before and dealt with. The bottom line is just how nasty can the US get with Pakistan? Actually, plenty. The Pakistani elite is western-oriented with relatives, properties and bank accounts in the western countries and vulnerable to targeted sanctions which could take on the military.  Further sanctions on Pakistani banks could cripple foreign trade.

Any way, not many in India expect that there will be a break in Pakistan-US relations. They may desire that, but it is not likely to happen. US Defense Secretary James Mattis’ Friday press briefing suggests that the Pentagon is still hoping to strike a deal with Islamabad.

Greater Kashmir January 8, 2018