Captain's innings

Remember the 1993 Hero cup semifinal vs South Africa? With five (or was it six?) runs required of the last over, there was immense pressure on the Indian team and particularly the front line bowlers. After deliberations that lasted infinity, to the utter astonishment of the thousands watching from the stands and millions over TV, the ball was given to Tendulkar ! Remember, Tendulkar was not ‘The Sachin Tendulkar’, back then. And even if he were, this was bowling, not batting. If you think I am talking of ‘grandpa’s times’, let’s talk about something ‘recent’. Remember when Joginder was asked to bowl the last over of the 2007 T20 world cup? Or for that matter, when Dhoni altered the batting order of the "winning combination" during the 2011 world cup? Or for that matter ….the numerous gambles of M.S Dhoni (oh and there are plenty of them in all formats)? Well I am going to stop here! Time for the younger generation to take over and talk about cricket!
Anyways, there are numerous such decisions that have given us unforgettable moments in cricket. There are also those moments where the outcome was contrary to our expectations and everybody from ‘experts’ to masses have blamed such decisions.  The narrative for such matches usually goes beyond the usual one “The boys played really well. The ball was coming on to the bat nicely. The running between the wickets was good. The lower order responded well. XXX played well and was striking the ball in the middle of the bat”. Or for that matter “We fielded well. The bowlers bowled a good line and length. Timely wickets helped. There was moisture in the field and the ball was swinging nicely”. There is one common factor in all these wins (or losses at times) .It is the captain. The captain in these cases has taken a decision beyond the usual. He is responsible for the decision and the direct consequences of it. Ever wondered what goes on in the captain’s mind while taking such decisions in a matter of seconds? We enjoy the win, celebrate and go to bed. The captain has to live with his decisions. Right or wrong. Success or failure. We all have been ‘captains of some ship’ or ‘some game’ at different points during our lives. So although, we have probably not faced the extreme stress that the cricket (or any sports) captains have to endure, we kind of know ‘how it feels’. If not anything, I am pretty sure you would have tried the stock markets or ‘hedged’ your studies trying to explore the ‘optional questions’ during exams. Each such decisions comes with its share of success and possible consequences of a failure.
Imagine a headline like – “20 soldiers martyred during cross border firing along the LOC” (for India would never accept a ‘surgical strike’ if it were a failure or partial success) or for that matter “40 Indian soldiers trying to infiltrate into Azad Kashmir killed by Pakistan Army” (headline form Pakistani newspapers). This of course is not imagination, but a very finite possibility! This very well could have been the headlines if the surgical strikes were not successful or for that matter partially successful. The risk was huge, the cost of failure was unthinkable. You could say that somebody was investing his entire political capital into this decision.  A failure would have meant multiple things. For one, it would have resulted in the loss of lives of Indian soldiers. The enemy would have been alerted, thereby making such strikes in the near future extremely difficult. Those who were already criticizing the government and the PM would have got a shot in the arm. Popularity of the PM would certainly have gone down considerably. Failure in their first ever ‘public’ strike (it would not have been public then. That’s another matter!)  would have had significant impact on the confidence of the security forces and the public at large. All the powers that be from across the globe would have come down running to ‘preach restraint’ to the Indians – the subtle message being, c’mon, it’s not your cup of tea.
Any decision tree analysis in the world would have favored not going with the strikes considering the political, economic risks and the possibilities of human casualties. The ‘bright’ side of the decision also was not a smooth sailing. There were to be adverse ramifications even of a successful operation. Possibly extreme, more violent ones. It is in context of these outcomes that the operations needs to be viewed. We had a very professional military, a well-established security structure and fairly competent intelligence agency. This was the case all along. At least for past few years. Capability was never an issue. Decisiveness was( and I don't mean to imply incompetence. There may have been strategic considerations as well).. Most PMs in the past stopped at this point- The consequences of failure or rather the dire consequences of success! The fact that the operation (or preemptive strikes as we prefer to call them) were executed flawlessly speaks volumes of how professional our military is. And they deserve all the kudos for this success. However, this could not have been possible without the captain of the ship. For daring to breach that line, for risking your political capital, for giving millions the sense of ‘pride’ and for pressing the ‘YES’ button,
                 TAKE A BOW MR. MODI! You deserve every bit of it !
                 THANK YOU!
This event is significant in yet another way.  For those, reasonably in the know of the Indian (or Pakistani) army, cross border skirmishes are not uncommon across the LOC. There have been instances of infiltration by the Pakistani army and also by the Indians. There could also have been instances of Special Forces used for some of these operations. Barring a few , most of the incidents were not in the public domain or reported as ‘ Unprovoked LOC firing’  For that matter, I still believe that ‘rumor’ from few days back which said India had crossed the LOC and killed 10 militants, was true. The difference is – This time India chose to go public with it.  While increasing public pressure to act would definitely played a role in this decision, there were certainly wider considerations. For one it was necessary to tell Pakistan and the world that we not only had the ability to do it, we now have the will to go ahead and the courage to come out in open and face the consequences.  That according to me is the biggest success of the operation. Something akin to going public with the Nuclear tests in 1998.
So – While the nation celebrates and stock markets get back on track and our enemies begin their nefarious plans, while your political opponents figure out new ways to get back at you, while Kejriwal continues with his ‘Modi rap’, while Pakistan continues to ‘use’ their nuclear weapons ( well the words ) every day, while Katju comes up with something stupid , while Bhakts continue to sing your praise( and possibly decide to erect a temple- I know you wouldn’t agree of course ) and while ‘sickulars’  find faults in your acts and decisions, while Mr Shah prepares for the next assembly battles and before you plan for your next foreign tour :)  …
You can chill out! Have a feast of Bhakri and Khichdi and enjoy the rest of your day! This is your 'Sourabh Ganguly' moment Mr. Modi. Whether you prefer to take your shirt off or not is entirely up to you! But I am pretty sure, there are many who would die for a glance of that ’56 inches of chest’!

Jai Hind.

Indo-Pak : The broken narrative

Every object continues in state of ‘rest or motion ‘unless a force acts on it- so we were taught. In simplistic terms, everything happens for a reason. If we broaden the scope of this statement from physics to a universal one, it would still hold true. ‘Everything happens for a reason’ .It’s just that we don’t happen to know the reason or at times cannot comprehend it.   The converse also is true –
‘Nothing happens without a reason!’
I am pretty sure, that apart from physicists, astronomers, cosmologists, politicians even foreign policy pundits must believe and accept this simple but powerful fact. I for sure have always believed in this. A small error or distraction in an otherwise coherent story says a lot and minutely observing such distractions can tell you if things have changed, if not necessarily, what has changed. Last year when there was a lot of bonhomie between the PMs of India and Pakistan (and I am stopping short of calling that bonhomie between the two countries), I had written about the same. The story was still incoherent but it seemed to be headed in a direction. At least peace seemed to be the ultimate objective.
A lot has happened since then. There have been NSA level talks albeit a surprise meeting at a ‘third country’ to avoid Media, Foreign secretary level talks, a surprise visit by the Indian PM for PM Sharif’s grand daughter’s wedding eve and the Pathankot terror attacks.  Surprisingly India acted very maturely even after the attacks and the official statement specifically talked about terror groups within Pakistan without directly blaming the Pakistan Govt. India even facilitated the visit of the investigative team from Pakistan to visit Pathankot and sought reciprocity, which was denied. That was like early this year. Things seem to have nosedived south since then. To the extent that currently the relations between India and Pakistan are at one of their lowest points in recent years.  The India PM has openly mention Baluchistan (more about that in a while) and Pakistan seems to be leaving no tables unturned to rake up and exploit the Kashmir unrest, while supporting it by all means.  My earlier post gives a perspective and reasons for the sudden surge in violence.
However, thinking further on this, it doesn’t seem to be a story started by the killing of Burhan Wani, fuelled by Pakistan and possibly China. So I may have been wrong in localizing it.  Although event starting with the killing of Wani till the current escalations may have been prompted by the NSG- South China sea factors, it looks like the whole narrative was scripted differently , the contours of which are coming out in open now.
Let’s start with the last major event in the series. The Indian PM mentioned Baluchistan in his Independence Day speech.  Apart from the popularity it got, the mention was a major foreign policy statement.  India had so far never even acknowledged any form of (moral, financial or otherwise) support for the Baloch moment, let alone any official statement.  While it was an unofficial ‘open’ secret that Indians were sympathetic to the Baloch cause, it was never a public statement. From that point to a state where the Indian PM mentions it in his I-day speech is definitely a big leap. Although, the PM merely ‘thanked’ the Baloch people for wishes, the B-word itself ruffled feathers within Pakistan and even China.  Now, the PM would not have done so without consulting all the relevant stakeholders.  For one, India may have developed enough ‘deep assets’ in the Baloch region. Earlier statements from the NSA seem to hint towards that direction. The arrest of an ‘Indian agent’ from Baluchistan also adds credence to the story. Whether the person was an Indian agent and if he was truly arrested from Baluchistan are matters left unanswered. But then even assuming that he was neither, there must be a ‘reason’ why Pakistan publicly exposed an Indian agent and that too accusing him of fomenting trouble in Baluchistan. And obviously to get things to a state where we can publicly espouse the cause takes good amount of time and money to build resources.  The ground work for this must have been going on for months and possibly years. It may not be a ‘Modi phenomenon’, but promoted by earlier governments as well. Net Net, the PMs Mention, although may have been camouflaged as a reaction to the Kashmir unrest, certainly is part of another narrative that was being developed all along. It is possible that the Indian side got enough confidence and also thought that the timing was ripe to go public.
It’s kind of a reversal in the chicken-egg story and may partly explain the sudden disruption since March –April. So was India politically and otherwise preparing for a ‘big push’ on Baluchistan?  Was it something that Pakistan realized (well that country doesn’t have a moral conscience, so we shouldn’t feel guilty –you know!) and led to the slump in relations? Instead of “India mentioning Baluchistan because of Kashmir unrest “, could the story possibly be “Pakistan causing unrest in Kashmir in retaliation to India’s grand design in Baluchistan “?  Nobody knows for a fact. But cannot be ruled out. To me, it kind of fits into the broken narrative –somehow.
Whether, if at all, India achieves any real geographical or political advantage by its involvement in Baluchistan, is a separate topic, which I will dwell upon later. It’s the beginning of a long drawn battle. I am pretty sure that neither Pakistan nor China are going to let us proceed with any sort of design , that easily .But for now, it suffices to say that it has ruffled enough feathers for both of our neighbors. That India may have been involved, was never hidden from the Chinese. But what would come as a surprise is – What is that prized possession that gave enough guts to the Indian leadership to make it public!  And why now!
So where will this really end? Another bloody spate of violence that both countries will have to experience? Another 'narrative' where people and issues are used as pawns to settle scores ?Or is it the will of the almighty to enable create circumstances so that the humans on both sides see rational and try to strive for peace? After all questions need to be answered in the same language to complete the test!
I don’t know the answer. But what I do know is –
Nothing happens without a reason!!