• Home
  • About RSIS
    • Introduction
    • Building the Foundations
    • Welcome Message
    • Board of Governors
    • Staff Profiles
      • Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
      • Dean’s Office
      • Management
      • Distinguished Fellows
      • Faculty and Research
      • Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
      • Visiting Fellows
      • Adjunct Fellows
      • Administrative Staff
    • Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
    • RSIS Endowment Fund
    • Endowed Professorships
    • Career Opportunities
    • Getting to RSIS
  • Research
    • Research Centres
      • Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
      • Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
      • Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS)
      • Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
      • International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
    • Research Programmes
      • National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
      • Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
    • Future Issues and Technology Cluster
    • [email protected] Newsletter
    • Other Research
      • Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
    • Graduate Programmes Office
    • Overview
    • MSc (Asian Studies)
    • MSc (International Political Economy)
    • MSc (International Relations)
    • MSc (Strategic Studies)
    • NTU-Warwick Double Masters Programme
    • PhD Programme
    • Exchange Partners and Programmes
    • How to Apply
    • Financial Assistance
    • Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
    • RSIS Alumni
  • Alumni & Networks
    • Alumni
    • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
    • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
    • International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
    • SRP Executive Programme
    • Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
  • Publications
    • RSIS Publications
      • Annual Reviews
      • Books
      • Bulletins and Newsletters
      • Commentaries
      • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
      • Commemorative / Event Reports
      • IDSS Paper
      • Interreligious Relations
      • Monographs
      • NTS Insight
      • Policy Reports
      • Working Papers
      • RSIS Publications for the Year
    • Glossary of Abbreviations
    • External Publications
      • Authored Books
      • Journal Articles
      • Edited Books
      • Chapters in Edited Books
      • Policy Reports
      • Working Papers
      • Op-Eds
      • External Publications for the Year
    • Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
  • Media
    • Great Powers
    • Sustainable Security
    • Other Resource Pages
    • Media Highlights
    • News Releases
    • Speeches
    • Vidcast Channel
    • Audio/Video Forums
  • Events
  • Giving
  • Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
RSISVideoCast RSISVideoCast rsis.sg
Linkedin
instagram instagram rsis.sg
RSS
  • Home
  • About RSIS
      • Introduction
      • Building the Foundations
      • Welcome Message
      • Board of Governors
      • Staff Profiles
        • Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
        • Dean’s Office
        • Management
        • Distinguished Fellows
        • Faculty and Research
        • Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
        • Visiting Fellows
        • Adjunct Fellows
        • Administrative Staff
      • Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
      • RSIS Endowment Fund
      • Endowed Professorships
      • Career Opportunities
      • Getting to RSIS
  • Research
      • Research Centres
        • Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
        • Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
        • Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS)
        • Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
        • International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
      • Research Programmes
        • National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
        • Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
      • Future Issues and Technology Cluster
      • [email protected] Newsletter
      • Other Research
        • Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
      • Graduate Programmes Office
      • Overview
      • MSc (Asian Studies)
      • MSc (International Political Economy)
      • MSc (International Relations)
      • MSc (Strategic Studies)
      • NTU-Warwick Double Masters Programme
      • PhD Programme
      • Exchange Partners and Programmes
      • How to Apply
      • Financial Assistance
      • Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
      • RSIS Alumni
  • Alumni & Networks
      • Alumni
      • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
      • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
      • International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
      • SRP Executive Programme
      • Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
  • Publications
      • RSIS Publications
        • Annual Reviews
        • Books
        • Bulletins and Newsletters
        • Commentaries
        • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
        • Commemorative / Event Reports
        • IDSS Paper
        • Interreligious Relations
        • Monographs
        • NTS Insight
        • Policy Reports
        • Working Papers
        • RSIS Publications for the Year
      • Glossary of Abbreviations
      • External Publications
        • Authored Books
        • Journal Articles
        • Edited Books
        • Chapters in Edited Books
        • Policy Reports
        • Working Papers
        • Op-Eds
        • External Publications for the Year
      • Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
  • Media
      • Great Powers
      • Sustainable Security
      • Other Resource Pages
      • Media Highlights
      • News Releases
      • Speeches
      • Vidcast Channel
      • Audio/Video Forums
  • Events
  • Giving
  • Contact Us
  • instagram instagram rsis.sg
Connect

Getting to RSIS

Map

Address

Nanyang Technological University
Block S4, Level B3,
50 Nanyang Avenue,
Singapore 639798

View location on Google maps Click here for directions to RSIS

Get in Touch

    Connect with Us

      rsis.ntu
      rsis_ntu
      rsisntu
    RSISVideoCast RSISVideoCast rsisvideocast
      school/rsis-ntu
    instagram instagram rsis.sg
      RSS
    Subscribe to RSIS Publications
    Subscribe to RSIS Events

    RSIS Intranet

    S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Think Tank and Graduate School Ponder The Improbable Since 1966
    Nanyang Technological University Nanyang Technological University

    Skip to content

     
    • RSIS
    • Publication
    • RSIS Publications
    • CO10130 | “Mumbai II?”: Why India Will Again Show Restraint
    • Annual Reviews
    • Books
    • Bulletins and Newsletters
    • Commentaries
    • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
    • Commemorative / Event Reports
    • IDSS Paper
    • Interreligious Relations
    • Monographs
    • NTS Insight
    • Policy Reports
    • Working Papers
    • RSIS Publications for the Year

    CO10130 | “Mumbai II?”: Why India Will Again Show Restraint

    13 October 2010

    download pdf
    RSIS Commentary is a platform to provide timely and, where appropriate, policy-relevant commentary and analysis of topical and contemporary issues. The authors’ views are their own and do not represent the official position of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), NTU. These commentaries may be reproduced with prior permission from RSIS and due credit to the author(s) and RSIS. Please email to Editor RSIS Commentary at [email protected].

    Synopsis

    In case of another Mumbai-type terrorist attack, soft power will pay more dividends to India than the use of force against Pakistan. Thus there will be neither a conventional nor a nuclear war.

    Commentary

    PETER BERGEN and Bruce Hoffman, in their recent report “Assessing the Terrorist Threat”, foresee another Mumbai-like terrorist attack on Indian soil by a Pakistan-based terrorist group. In such a contingency, they presume that India might, under domestic pressure, use force against the terrorist bases in Pakistan. And that could drift towards a full-scale war between India and Pakistan, possibly even nuclear.

    Pakistan’s military-intelligence establishment does not curb Lashkar -e- Taiba (LeT), and other anti-India jihadi organisations. It continues to believe in their utility to engage India, a perennial enemy, in an asymmetrical conflict. India, thus, remains vulnerable to attacks by these proxy forces. But will India retaliate by using force? Soft power might have turned out to be less substantive in the past, yet using military muscle will be less effective and too risky — however appropriate it might be in the first place. Thus, India would again maintain restraint. A “full-blown” war can be discounted, let alone a nuclear one.

    Limits on the use of force

    India’s military policy seems to have been re-examined, partly due to its apparent weakness to defend against the increasing intensity of Pakistan’s proxy war in recent years. Thus India has been building its capability for a limited war — that meets its objective to punish its adversary quickly and decisively either before the international community intervenes or before Pakistan finds excuses to escalate the conflict to the spectre of nuclear weapons. But until India gets a capacity for such a limited war strategy (which will take several years), the use of its limited force across the Line of Control will not give the desired political advantage.

    India could destroy some training camps in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir with limited air strikes, but that specific action will not end the terrorist bases in Punjab, Sindh and other parts of its territory. Again, it will have to make a choice whether that limited objective is worth inviting Pakistan for a conventional war and nuclear blackmail. In case war breaks out after its use of limited force, Pakistan may not keep the war to the smallest possible proportions as India would like. Given its disparity with India in conventional forces, Pakistan will jump to nuclear escalation. That helps explain why India has maintained restraint, despite Pakistan’s covert war in the last two decades.

    India’s choice for a prolonged conventional war with Pakistan will not only be risky, but will also undermine its credibility to rise as a responsible world power. Moreover, if Pakistan continues to be the epicentre of Islamist jihadists, the military may be radicalised, and may not remain rational in a future conflict with India. Therefore, India’s nationalistic response to a terrorist attack cannot ignore this risk.

    Case for Soft Power

    India’s use of soft power — mainly, through restraint, resilience and diplomacy — has paid political dividends and should be the way out.

    Firstly, India after the Mumbai attack has been successful to persuade the United States to see Pakistan- exported terrorism in India (especially, through LeT) as part of its own fight against terrorism. The LeT is no longer seen by America merely as a Kashmiri group, but rather as a “common enemy”. India’s restraint has increased the scope for counterterrorism cooperation between the two countries. The US provided unprecedented access to Indian law enforcement agencies to question David Coleman Headley (a Pakistani- American), who seems to have been instrumental in plotting the Mumbai attack. The US and India have also signed recently a new Counterterrorism Cooperation Initiative. These initial cooperation would further a value- based alliance between the two largest democracies to fight against the existential challenge from jihadist terrorism.

    Secondly, this time, India has been able — with American help — to expose Pakistani links to a major terrorist attack in India before the international community. It has mustered significant international opinion against Pakistan and its jihadi organisations by showing remarkable restraint and resilience. The UN Security Council has declared Jamaat-ul-Dawa (a front organisation of LeT) as a terrorist organisation, and placed four of its leaders on its terrorist list. China, a long-time ally to Pakistan, did not veto the move unlike the past.

    Thirdly, any resolution of the Kashmir disputes needs a platform of trust between India and Pakistan. By harbouring Kashmiri groups and fighting selectively against Taliban, Pakistan’s military-intelligence establishment is still fostering many jihadi groups — that not only aim at terrorism in India, but also to establish radical Islamist societies in the subcontinent. Arguably, India’s restraint against another attack will help it to legitimise its position on Kashmir, and increase its acceptance as a great power.

    The decision by the Indian Muslim community not to bury the bodies of the Mumbai attackers speaks volumes about the difference it makes between murderers and martyrs. And Pakistan’s unwillingness to act against the supporters of these murderers will only dissociate them from the intolerant lot in Pakistan. Only through positive measures like resilience and restraint will India be able to identify with the free world.

    In short, India’s response to conspicuous terrorist attacks in future will be based on recognising the contextual limitations of its military muscle, and relative political utility of soft power.

    About the Author

    Ajaya Kumar Das is a Ph.D candidate and Senior Analyst with the South Asia Programme at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University. Before joining RSIS, he completed his M. Phil from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India. 

    Categories: Commentaries / / South Asia

    Last updated on 13/10/2014

    RSIS Commentary is a platform to provide timely and, where appropriate, policy-relevant commentary and analysis of topical and contemporary issues. The authors’ views are their own and do not represent the official position of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), NTU. These commentaries may be reproduced with prior permission from RSIS and due credit to the author(s) and RSIS. Please email to Editor RSIS Commentary at [email protected].

    Synopsis

    In case of another Mumbai-type terrorist attack, soft power will pay more dividends to India than the use of force against Pakistan. Thus there will be neither a conventional nor a nuclear war.

    Commentary

    PETER BERGEN and Bruce Hoffman, in their recent report “Assessing the Terrorist Threat”, foresee another Mumbai-like terrorist attack on Indian soil by a Pakistan-based terrorist group. In such a contingency, they presume that India might, under domestic pressure, use force against the terrorist bases in Pakistan. And that could drift towards a full-scale war between India and Pakistan, possibly even nuclear.

    Pakistan’s military-intelligence establishment does not curb Lashkar -e- Taiba (LeT), and other anti-India jihadi organisations. It continues to believe in their utility to engage India, a perennial enemy, in an asymmetrical conflict. India, thus, remains vulnerable to attacks by these proxy forces. But will India retaliate by using force? Soft power might have turned out to be less substantive in the past, yet using military muscle will be less effective and too risky — however appropriate it might be in the first place. Thus, India would again maintain restraint. A “full-blown” war can be discounted, let alone a nuclear one.

    Limits on the use of force

    India’s military policy seems to have been re-examined, partly due to its apparent weakness to defend against the increasing intensity of Pakistan’s proxy war in recent years. Thus India has been building its capability for a limited war — that meets its objective to punish its adversary quickly and decisively either before the international community intervenes or before Pakistan finds excuses to escalate the conflict to the spectre of nuclear weapons. But until India gets a capacity for such a limited war strategy (which will take several years), the use of its limited force across the Line of Control will not give the desired political advantage.

    India could destroy some training camps in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir with limited air strikes, but that specific action will not end the terrorist bases in Punjab, Sindh and other parts of its territory. Again, it will have to make a choice whether that limited objective is worth inviting Pakistan for a conventional war and nuclear blackmail. In case war breaks out after its use of limited force, Pakistan may not keep the war to the smallest possible proportions as India would like. Given its disparity with India in conventional forces, Pakistan will jump to nuclear escalation. That helps explain why India has maintained restraint, despite Pakistan’s covert war in the last two decades.

    India’s choice for a prolonged conventional war with Pakistan will not only be risky, but will also undermine its credibility to rise as a responsible world power. Moreover, if Pakistan continues to be the epicentre of Islamist jihadists, the military may be radicalised, and may not remain rational in a future conflict with India. Therefore, India’s nationalistic response to a terrorist attack cannot ignore this risk.

    Case for Soft Power

    India’s use of soft power — mainly, through restraint, resilience and diplomacy — has paid political dividends and should be the way out.

    Firstly, India after the Mumbai attack has been successful to persuade the United States to see Pakistan- exported terrorism in India (especially, through LeT) as part of its own fight against terrorism. The LeT is no longer seen by America merely as a Kashmiri group, but rather as a “common enemy”. India’s restraint has increased the scope for counterterrorism cooperation between the two countries. The US provided unprecedented access to Indian law enforcement agencies to question David Coleman Headley (a Pakistani- American), who seems to have been instrumental in plotting the Mumbai attack. The US and India have also signed recently a new Counterterrorism Cooperation Initiative. These initial cooperation would further a value- based alliance between the two largest democracies to fight against the existential challenge from jihadist terrorism.

    Secondly, this time, India has been able — with American help — to expose Pakistani links to a major terrorist attack in India before the international community. It has mustered significant international opinion against Pakistan and its jihadi organisations by showing remarkable restraint and resilience. The UN Security Council has declared Jamaat-ul-Dawa (a front organisation of LeT) as a terrorist organisation, and placed four of its leaders on its terrorist list. China, a long-time ally to Pakistan, did not veto the move unlike the past.

    Thirdly, any resolution of the Kashmir disputes needs a platform of trust between India and Pakistan. By harbouring Kashmiri groups and fighting selectively against Taliban, Pakistan’s military-intelligence establishment is still fostering many jihadi groups — that not only aim at terrorism in India, but also to establish radical Islamist societies in the subcontinent. Arguably, India’s restraint against another attack will help it to legitimise its position on Kashmir, and increase its acceptance as a great power.

    The decision by the Indian Muslim community not to bury the bodies of the Mumbai attackers speaks volumes about the difference it makes between murderers and martyrs. And Pakistan’s unwillingness to act against the supporters of these murderers will only dissociate them from the intolerant lot in Pakistan. Only through positive measures like resilience and restraint will India be able to identify with the free world.

    In short, India’s response to conspicuous terrorist attacks in future will be based on recognising the contextual limitations of its military muscle, and relative political utility of soft power.

    About the Author

    Ajaya Kumar Das is a Ph.D candidate and Senior Analyst with the South Asia Programme at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University. Before joining RSIS, he completed his M. Phil from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India. 

    Categories: Commentaries

    Last updated on 13/10/2014

    Back to top

    Terms of Use | Privacy Statement
    Copyright © S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. All rights reserved.
    This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. By continuing, you are agreeing to the use of cookies on your device as described in our privacy policy. Learn more
    OK
    Latest Book
    more info