Could There Be a More Ridiculous Belief That War Can Bring Peace?

Many in the last few days have been thrilled that Indian armed forces have taught Pakistan a lesson. Among them was a woman who vividly described the 'sparkling' rays of drones in the dark skies over Kashmir and Punjab, parroting the electronic media feed about every Pakistani missile being defused without any damage. “The fun is,” she exclaimed, “our missiles hit the target in Lahore!”

Fun? Her heart doesn’t feel the pain and her mind is free of worries because she resides far away from the battle zone, where people are scared for their safety in the dead of night. Imagine what would happen if the Pakistani army chief chose to press the nuclear button. One bomb can wipe out an entire state, leaving unbearable scars on the body and soul of our nation.

What if a bomb falls on a school bus on either side of the border, blowing children to smithereens? Is this fun? This is not our imagination running wild. Thousands of innocent children have been massacred by Israel in Gaza over the past two years. Conservative estimates suggest Israel has been killing an average of 30 children every day. A genocide in plain sight. It is the evidence of political leadership’s brazen war on humanity.

The answer to questions about Pakistan using nuclear weapons is invariably this: "They won’t indulge in this madness. Pakistan will show restraint." Their hope rests on the sensibility of the enemy that is being sought to be devastated. So people celebrate war only if the thrill is not interrupted by an unbearable calamity. They presume that the sanity and restraint of the enemy will ultimately save them.

They want insanity in small doses, until it doesn’t harm them. Isn't this hypocrisy? If restraint is the key, if being responsible is a virtue, why keep it reserved for use to prevent a tragedy? Mankind has seen thousands of wars but has refused to draw any meaningful lesson from history.

While 40 million people perished in the First World War, over 75 million were killed in the Second World War. Now science and technology have created weapons that are capable of wiping off humans from earth. The world has enough explosives to finish off this world 55 times over.

Science and technology are clearly in the control of criminals. People die of mosquito bites in poor countries but the civilized world has no protection for them. People die of hunger but the world can’t feed everybody. However, the ammunition to kill everybody is ready.

Most TV anchors are clowns. They are functioning on a deadly cocktail of sycophancy and mediocrity. They are rejoicing in war as if it is nothing more than a video game. Ironically, even sensible people who have closely seen the scourge of wars enthusiastically explain, as experts, how precision bombing hits targets. Precision bombing!

No such precision targeting of viruses in healthcare. No such precision aid for the starving. Nobody knew what to do with COVID-19. Despite decades of research, there is no cure for simple diseases like diabetes and hypertension. Cancer cure? Perish the thought.But military warfare is perfect.

This not only shows the perverse priorities of global leadership but also the destructive exploitation of scientific knowledge. What could have been used for betterment of human existence was used for annihilation of humanity.

Pakistan is a failed state. Its leadership doesn’t show wisdom and foresight. Which civilized country nurtures terrorism? How could Pakistani citizens tolerate their international image getting marred by the likes of Masood Azhar and Hafiz Sayeed? Why did they give shelter to Osama Bin Laden?

But, what about the Indian leadership? Don’t they know the answer to 26 bodies isn’t 26,000 bodies? Haven’t they seen the dynamics and outcomes of the Israeli strategy in Palestine? What happened to the US-led military campaign against the Taliban? What did Russia gain by attacking Ukraine?

Has the Narendra Modi government fixed the template – that every terror activity will be replied to with a military operation? Can two nuclear powers go to war every now and then, whenever someone fires bullets on innocent citizens?

India’s National Security Adviser Ajit Doval takes pride in his 'doctrine of force'. Many senior Bharatiya Janata Party leaders, who interacted with Doval, reveal how emphatically he believes in the doctrine. What happened to that doctrine when China encroached upon Indian territory? Why did the Union external affairs minister S. Jaishankar say, “Look, they (China) are the bigger economy. What am I going to do? As a smaller economy, I am going to pick up a fight with the bigger economy? It is not a question of being reactionary, it’s a question of common sense…”

Is India’s bravery and commitment to protect its sovereignty subject to the size of the economy? Is that doctrine of force limited to Pakistan or smaller countries? How do we make sense of Modi’s speech from July 10, 2024, “For thousands of years, we have been sharing our knowledge and expertise. We didn’t give ‘Yuddh’ (war), we gave the world ‘Buddh’. India always gave peace and prosperity, and therefore India is going to strengthen its role in the 21st century.” He repeated this ‘Buddh-not-Yuddh’ message on several occasions in the past year. Is that philosophy not applicable in the context of Pakistan?

There is no denying the fact that Pakistan has conspired to bleed India through its policy of supporting cross-border terrorism. There have been countless audacious attacks in the past, having indisputable evidence of Pakistani involvement. Why else would a plane be hijacked and taken to Kandahar in Afghanistan to secure the release of Masood Azhar and others? The Pakistani establishment could have said then that the terrorists are not welcome. Ajmal Kasab came from Pakistan and attacked Mumbai. The Manmohan Singh government succeeded in isolating Pakistan through coercive diplomacy and avoided a military conflict despite such a grave provocation. All the evidence to show Pakistani involvement in the planning and execution of that attack was collected and shared with the world.

The details of the Pulwama attack, however, are still not available. It is our failure that we could not show to the world how Pakistan planned and executed that operation. Pahalgam too was clearly a terror attack but we should have presented undeniable evidence of Pakistani involvement to justify our response. What’s good is that the Indian Armed Forces said they don’t want escalation and hence only terror outfits were targeted. Pakistan chose to escalate, compelling a firmer response from India, but both sides now need to show restraint and explore non-military engagements to settle our disputes.

It's critical to avoid war hysteria. The narrative that Pakistan should be wiped out from the map is dangerous and impossible. It is also irrational to believe a weakened Pakistan will not indulge in peaceful coexistence. Both sides need to understand that war is a calamity that brings ruins. It is never a thing to rejoice. No logic can be invented to justify butchery of innocent citizens who neither have a say nor interest in wars.

Could there be a more ridiculous belief that war can bring peace? Wars do not correct wrongs, they multiply them. The world is bruised and cynical, grappling with myriad problems. It doesn’t need an Alexander or a Napoleon, nor a Stalin or a Hitler. No, not even Einstein and Newton. Today’s world is aching for a Buddha and a Gandhi. That’s the understanding at least India shouldn’t bury beneath the sands of stupidity, hatred or political guile.