Is Balkanisation of Pak an Effective Strategy?

The successful separation of East Pakistan - known vide its new name of Bangladesh – from West Pakistan in 1971, has convinced many strategic analysts to ponder on the possibility of repeating the surgical act again to tame an intransigent Pakistan. The purported statement by NSA, Ajit Doval, that any repeat of a Mumbai blasts like situation would lead to the dismemberment of Pak sent shock waves through their power elite; perhaps Doval’s reputation as a man who had spent 7 years in Pak, incognito, as a covert agent, could also be a reason for replacing their NSA, Sartaj Aziz with Gen. Janjua.  The reference to Balochistan in the Sharm- El- Sheikh declaration earlier in July 2009, capture of Kulbhushan Yadav by Pak authorities in Mar 2016 & PM Modi clubbing together POK, Gilgit Baltistan & Balochistan during his independence speech, from the ramparts of the Red fort, in Aug 2016 & GOI showing its keenness to accord asylum to Baloch separatists, perhaps, is an indication that this strategy is indeed being taken seriously.

India’s attempts to de-hyphen itself with Pak & be seen as China’s equal by the international community shall always be torpedoed by China; China’s attempts to club India & Pak together for NSG membership falls into this strategic calculus.  With a $10 Trillion dollar economy – the 2^nd largest in the world after the US - & a $146 billion military budget, China wishes to challenge the unipolar world order & appears to be succeeding. China has traditionally treated the East China Sea & South China Sea as its backyard &  engaged in a conflict with Taiwan, Japan & ASEAN;  her claim over the entire South China Sea vide the nine dashed line has suffered a temporary reprieve through, because of the recent judgement of the International Court of Justice.

For details see http://meetrk.blogspot.in/2015/07/geopolitics-of-artificial-islands.html

Its attempts to circumvent India’s ambitions include a “string of pearls” strategy though engagement with Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Myanmar & now Maldives too. China had opened up a route into the Bay of Bengal vide infra development through Myanmar & is now planning a route through Pakistan into the Arabian Sea effecting challenging India in its backyard. This opening also wards off the possibility of getting chocked at the Malacca straits in the event of a war with any enemy country.

 For India’s response read http://meetrk.blogspot.in/2015/05/geopolitics-of-infrastructure-indias.html

The $46 billion CPEC (China Pakistan Economic Corridor) that provides unimpeded access to the Arabian Sea, if constructed could smoothen logistics support & India could be inconvenienced in the event of a war on two fronts.

China Pakistan Economic Corridor

Pakistan has 4 provinces Punjab, Sindh, Khyber- Pakhtunkhwa & Balochistan even as they continue to retain hold the disputed territories POK & Gilgit Baltistan known as “Northern Territories”.

CPEC is 3218Kms long, starting at Kashgar in the Western Chinese region of Xinjiang & passing through Gilgit-Baltistan terminates at Gwadar in Balochistan; it consists of pipelines, highways & railways & is expected to be operational by 2020. Economic prosperity & greater integration are expected to be the fallout of this project.

With Af-Pak relations strained, Pak has shunned Afghanistan & requested China to connect the CPEC to the OBOR (One belt one road) project to provide a link to Central Asian republics, bypassing Afghanistan where India has made substantial investments.  Ideally, if the aim is economic alone, it makes sense for India to connect the Delhi Mumbai industrial corridor to the CEPC & gain access to Central Asia rather than make further investments in connecting the Chabahar port in Iran via Afghanistan to Central Asia especially when Afghanistan continues to be in turmoil & our relations with Iran uncertain.  Pak realizes the strategic importance of the project & fearing sabotage is guarding the 7000 odd Chinese personnel working on the corridor with about 15000 soldiers.

What should be the Indian Response?

Hawks are convinced that dismemberment of Pak is the only solution. Severing Balochistan could cut off the Gwadar port - from the corridor - which China plans to develop as a naval hub. Here is assumption is that an independent Balochistan, cognizant of India's interest, would not allow the corridor or port to be developed by China; however, it is possible that looking at the economic benefits involved the Baloch leadership could allow China access effectively nullifying our efforts. While keeping the issue of Balochi response open, it is sane to assume that if Sindh continues to remain in Pak, then the Chinese could be expected to terminate the corridor at Karachi, nullifying the gains. Therefore, engaging Muhajirs – Indian Muslims who migrated to Pak in 1947 – largely residing in Karachi, smirking at being treated as second class citizens, could help achieve disturbances but not severance; other citizens of Sindh, who dominated the power apparatus, from 1947 & replaced by the Punjabi elite, since the 1960’s, could be tapped  &  resentment sharpened.  A better alternative would be to finish off the project at Gilgit- Baltistan, since it is technically Indian territory & the local population is seething with anger at the prospect of their traditional land holding being usurped by aliens. While evaluating all alternatives, it is important to find answers to 2 questions: Would an Indian action not lead to an ISI response?; Does dismemberment of Pak serve our purpose?

The Pak Army is about 5.5 lakh strong & dominated by Punjabis; the ISI too is dominated with a disproportionate representation from Punjab. Dismemberment of Pak shall not change the composition of either the ISI or the Pak army & they would continue their diatribe against India as they are wont to do now. They have not forgotten the ignominy they suffered against India in the 1971 war & further dismemberment or attempts in that direction would only accentuate these hard feelings, effecting peace in South Asia. If severed, the Pak armed forces would have only Punjab to defend, which they can do better, because of the principle of contraction defense; breaking of Punjab into smaller principalities is desirable to weaken the Pak Army but that is highly unlikely, unless "non state actors"like the LeT, JeM et al recoil on their patrons. Even if that does happen, India needs to be on guard for instability across its borders could always spell trouble.

China would not intervene in an Indo-Pak conflict unless it senses Pak annihilation. It needs Pak to continuously needle India & maintain an Indo-Pak narrative. Since CPEC helps China, to circumvent the Malacca Straits & gain access to the Middle East & Africa's natural resources at a cheaper cost, it would never ditch Pak. It is, therefore, important to step back & analyse if dismemberment of Pak would help us achieve out twin objectives of checkmating the Chinese & ensuring ever lasting peace with Pak. Obviously, there are no easy answers.