What to Read in Indian Express Editorial( Topic and Syllabus wise)

Editorial 1 : To Win Without Fighting

Context: It’s time India framed a national security doctrine.

Introduction: India needs a comprehensive national security doctrine to address evolving threats, enhance deterrence, and expand its sphere of influence.

Necessity of a Doctrinal Approach

• Historical Context
  • India has historically relied on operational military tactics, winning 3 wars with Pakistan but lacks a cohesive strategy to prevent conflicts.
  • Nuclear deterrence (articulated in the 2003 Nuclear Doctrine) has failed to stop aggression from nuclear-armed neighbours (China, Pakistan) or curb terrorism.
• Strategic Limitations
  • Current policies focus on reactive defence rather than proactive deterrence.
  • Smaller neighbours (e.g. Nepal, Sri Lanka) increasingly align with adversaries due to India’s lack of a clear strategic vision.

Lessons from China’s Strategic Doctrine

• China’s military doctrine, influenced by Sun Tzu’s The Art of War, prioritizes subduing the enemy without fighting.
  • Example: No major wars since 1979, yet it has expanded influence through diplomacy, economic power, and strategic alliances.
• Contrast with India: India’s reactive posture allows adversaries to dictate terms (e.g. border incursions by China, cross-border terrorism by Pakistan).

Limitation of India’s Policy-Making

• Inconsistent Philosophical Foundations
  • Romanticism vs. Pragmatism
    • No First Use (NFU) nuclear policy reflects India’s self-image as a peaceful nation but risks being perceived as passive.
    • It contrasts with Krishna’s Mahabharata philosophy i.e. resolved to wage war to establish dharma (righteous order).
  • Policy Paralysis: Debates over revising NFU highlight India’s reluctance to align doctrine with ground realities.
• Fragmented Security Approach
  • Overemphasis on military solutions while neglecting diplomacy, soft power, and socio-political tools.
    • Example: Emperor Ashoka used Buddhist missionaries to create a ring of security around his empire.
  • Chanakya’s Mandala Theory: Neighbours are natural enemies, but security depends on influencing the farthest borders through political and diplomatic engagement.

Way Forward: Recommendations for a Doctrinal Framework

• Core Principles
  • Preventive Deterrence: Shift from winning wars to avoiding conflicts through credible deterrence (e.g. unacceptable damage doctrine for nuclear and terror threats).
  • Multi-Dimensional Security: Integrate military, diplomatic, cultural, and economic tools (e.g. leveraging India’s soft power in neighbouring regions).
• Flexibility and Adaptability: Doctrine should provide guiding principles, not rigid rules, allowing strategies to evolve with geopolitical shifts.
• End Goals
  • Strategic Autonomy: Avoid re-hyphenation with Pakistan or other rogue powers in global narratives.
  • Sphere of Influence: Expand regional leadership through trust-building and proactive engagement (e.g. countering China’s Belt and Road Initiative).

Conclusion: A national security doctrine would enable India to deter aggression through clarity of intent and capability, project strategic consistency to adversaries and allies and move beyond romantic ideals to pragmatic, multi-domain solutions. Without such a framework, India risks remaining reactive, allowing adversaries to exploit its fragmented approach.

 

Editorial 2 : The Adversary’s Ally

Context: Three messages from Operation Sindoor

Introduction: The Pahalgam terror attack brought back memories of the Uri (2016) and Pulwama (2019) attacks. India’s response after these attacks seemed as if they brought down the levels of terrorism. But Pakistani terrorism reared its ugly head again.

Historical Context of India-Pakistan Tensions

• Pakistan’s Proxy Militancy Strategy
  • Operation Tupac: Conceptualized by Gen. Zia ul Haq in 1988 to destabilize India through proxy terrorism.
  • Key Tactics: Low-cost strategy to keep India on the boil.
• India’s Diplomatic Efforts & Setbacks
  • Olive Branches extended by Indian PMs from I.K. Gujral to Narendra Modi is repeatedly undermined by Pakistan’s deep state.
  • Past Restraint: India avoided escalation post-2001 Parliament attack and 2008 Mumbai attacks.

India’s Response to Baisaran Valley Attack

• Diplomatic & Economic Measures: Indus Waters Treaty Suspension
  • Strategic manipulation of water flow from Western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab) to pressure Pakistan.
  • Pakistani generals labelled this an act of war.
• Military Retaliation: Operation Sindoor
  • Targets: 9 terror installations (4 in Pakistan, 5 in PoK).
  • Casualties: Pakistan admitted 26 dead, 42 injured.
  • Symbolism: Named after the sacred vermilion (sindoor) to signify retribution for atrocities against Hindu women.

Strategic Messaging of Operation Sindoor

• To Pakistan: Continued terrorism sponsorship will incur direct consequences.
• To Terrorists: India will inflict equal or greater pain than inflicted on citizens.
• To Global Community: Emphasized measured, proportionate, non-escalatory response to terrorism.

International Reactions

• Pakistan’s PR Campaign: ISPR (Inter-Services Public Relations) spread misinformation and leveraged foreign media for narrative control.
• Key Diplomatic Responses
  • China: Criticized India, backed Pakistan as an all-weather friend.
  • USA: Ambiguous stance, urged de-escalation while “monitoring the situation.”
  • Bangladesh: Potential to foment unrest in India’s Northeast as Pakistan’s ally.

Future Implications & Preparedness

• India’s Counter-Strategy
  • Citizen Preparedness: Mock drills for civil defence and disaster response.
  • Countering Pakistani Narratives: Developing a robust PR strategy to combat misinformation.
• Potential Threats
  • Pakistan’s Misadventures: Anticipated cross-border terrorism or military provocations.
  • Regional Alliances: Risk of coordinated pressure from China and Bangladesh.

Conclusion: The Baisaran Valley attack underscores Pakistan’s persistent use of terrorism as a geopolitical tool. India’s multi-pronged response signals a shift from restraint to proactive deterrence. However, sustained vigilance and international diplomacy will be critical to navigating escalating tensions and ensuring long-term regional stability.