Modi is right
in wanting to respond strongly to the Uri attack
Calling a
meeting on the Indus Waters Treaty and MFN (Most
Favoured Nation) status to Pakistan proves
that Prime Minister Narendra Modi intends
to examine all the non-military options before the government for a strong
response to the Uri attack.
Dams required
to hold the course of the tributaries of the Indus to alter water levels to Pakistan
dramatically would take more than a decade to build. Revoking the MFN status
will hardly punish Pakistan’s economy given the low levels of bilateral trade. Terrorist attacks such as the one at Uri require a combination of
measured but firm responses. The Uri attack has exposed the need to shore up
its defences.
Legally, it is
not possible to stop the water flow of IWT. If we do that there are less
chances that we might win the case globally. Yes, economic sanctions are
warnings to hard decisions and are known world-wide practice, including the
UNO. It is well within India’s sovereign right to resort to that practice
against Pakistan for all the bad things it is doing against our country. A
country’s self-respect cannot be bartered for securing certificates of good
conduct from other countries. Nation’s self-respect cannot be measured on the
basis of profit and loss yield. Why do we want to build an image of good boy
when aggressor is always ready to destroy very Idea of India? Why to be afraid
of world bank/world community? Have any one of them come to our aid? Answer is
big no. They just condemn and their job is over. We have to do it on our own.
Water has
always been a weapon of war since ancient times. In trans-national water
system, country at up-stream has always a strategic advantage in regulating
flow of water. Even the way water is released by country at up-stream can work
like ammunition. Even under ambit of treaty arms of down-stream country can be
twisted by regulating water skilfully. Moreover, only one treaty between two
countries does not work in isolation, but, both the countries must respect and
follow other treaty also. If one does not follow Shimla Agreement, then why
other should follow IWT. As far as issue on loss on bi-lateral trade on MFN
status is concerned, it has to be seen in totality on percentage loss of GDP,
economic strength, other strategic gains and future economic gains.
If leverage as
provided in Indus Water Treaty, 1960 is utilized, it would be a good start to
begin with. It would enable the better utilization of our due of water resources
out of the three western river and propel the developmental activities in J
& K especially in the infrastructure. Further, it would also send a strong
message in the international fraternity about the constructive response of
India to destructive activities of Pakistan. However, the response shall not
limit to such diplomatic moves wherein room is made within four corners of
treaties or agreements. We must need to enhance our capabilities to neutralize
terrorists as far as their presence in Indian territory is concerned. The way
they are able to conduct their operation on Indian land attacking critical
infrastructure such as defense establishments etc. is a matter of concern. We
must introduce new technologies and train our personnel along with boosting
their morale to inflict irreparable loss to the enemy.
Pakistan has
been and continues despite ongoing onslaught of terrors instigated by its
Military and ISI institutions. This makes one feel that India should proceed
with the abrogation of IWT treaty.
No comments:
Post a Comment