Home Contact Us  
   

Peace Audit and Ceasefire Monitor - Articles

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
#4946, 16 December 2015
 

1971 War

Analysing International Intervention as a Concept Today
Lt Gen (Retd) Syed Ata Hasnain
Member, Governing Council, IPCS, and former GOC, 15 Corps, Srinagar
 

The UN Charter says, “[n]othing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state...” The principle does not rule out the application of enforcement measures in case of a threat to peace, a breach of peace, or acts of aggression on the part of the state. The 1948 Genocide Convention also overrode the nonintervention principle. Two major examples where the UN misread the situation and did not intervene were, Rwanda in 1994, and Srebrenica in Bosnia in 1995.

16 December 2015, the 43rd anniversary of India’s victory over Pakistan in the 1971 war and the creation of Bangladesh is an apt moment to recall the event as a classic case of positive military intervention to put a halt to a virtual genocide and aid in separating a people from ethnic domination despite being in majority. The unnatural make up of then Pakistan consisting of the East and West parts was considered as a geographical travesty, separated by two thousand kilometers of Indian Territory. The ethnic domination of the West over East for 24 years culminated in a standoff, over the formation of national government by a party of the East that had legitimately won an election, was in majority, and was yet being denied it’s due. What followed was rogue action by the existing military government located in the West resulting in a virtual genocide. The politics of Cold War did not permit humanitarian intervention by the UN even though this was a classic case for the same.

Nine months of waiting and ten million refugees on its soil later, India finally intervened after facing the wrath of the military government of Pakistan. A decisive military victory achieved in 14 days, controlled euphoria, immediate establishment of civil-military control, prevention of retribution against the defeated army and every tenet of conflict stabilisation characterised the handling of the post conflict events under the direct orders of an iconic military leader such as General (later Field Marshal) Sam Manekshaw. Whether such a thing can still happen in today’s world is worth an examination.

In the post-Cold War period, the power of the UN increased exponentially as the traditional balance of power in most regions broke down. UN intervention operations in Cambodia, Somalia and Bosnia were successful in bits and pieces but there were errors of judgment in Rwanda, and in Srebrenica in Bosnia.  Exit policies included conflict stabilisation via cantoning of soldiers, disarming, rehabilitation, and elections to form a national government. Unfortunately, since the turn of the millennium, intervention operations have not seen success. Afghanistan led to regime change as did Iraq but stabilisation remained elusive as classic resistance by irregular elements prevented that; and ideology was exploited to enhance resistance.

Long wars led to challenge to stamina, economic effects of trillion-dollar costs and poor conflict stabilisation before exit. Intervention was a grand failure as much as it was in Libya where the NATO intervention failed to protect civilians, used false allegations to justify regime change and did not retain presence for stabilisation – leading to chaotic descent of the state into principalities under no one’s control. It also led to proliferation of weaponry to the Islamic State (IS) via Turkish and Syrian territories.

The trend of intervention, which attempts destruction of forces/resources and infrastructure through aerial action without commensurate deployment of ground forces (boots on the ground), has not been found to be effective as a tool in the face of organised resistance of the irregular type.

Commitment of ground forces is expensive and rarely meets public approval because of casualties and longer terms of deployment. Syria is a classic case where the air war against the resilience and discipline of Daesh is not proving effective. Deployment of ground forces has completely different connotations in terms of intelligence, taking over of locations destroyed by aerial action, and provision of humanitarian aid. Yet, the militaries of the world are generally shying away from it.

Russia has demonstrated the deployment of limited ground forces in Syria but its logistics is already pinching.

With North Africa in economic ferment and with politico-ideological turbulence in West Asia, the humanitarian situation in the region bordering or in the vicinity of Europe will probably witness extreme violence and mass displacement of population with movement towards Europe. How will such threats be handled by conventional forces and UN agencies?

The model of the birth of Bangladesh will recede further in the background as nations and their armies find ways and means to intervene positively with civilian protection as the crux and not regime change. The handling of Syria and Iraq by the international community has been a monumental humanitarian failure.

Achieving success of any measure against similar threats from other nations and North Africa will need a completely different model of response, with formed troops, air power, aid agencies and NGOs all in tandem; a challenge the world should be prepared for.

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
IPCS Columnists
Af-Pak Diary
D Suba Chandran
Resetting Kabul-Islamabad Relations: Three Key Issues
Can Pakistan Reset its Relations with Afghanistan?
The New Afghanistan: Four Major Challenges for President Ghani
Big Picture
Prof Varun Sahni
Understanding Democracy and Diversity in J&K
When Xi Met Modi: Juxtaposing China and India
Pakistan?s Tactical Nuclear Weapons: The Inevitability of Instability

Dateline Colombo

Asanga Abeyagoonasekera.
Sri Lanka: Moving Towards a Higher Collective Outcome
The Importance of Electing the Best to our Nation's Parliament
Sri Lanka: Toward a Diaspora Re-Engagement Plan
Dateline Islamabad
Salma Malik
Pakistan's Hurt Locker: What Next?
IPCS Forecast: Pakistan in 2015
India-Pakistan Relations in 2015: Through a Looking Glass
 
Dhaka Discourse
Prof Delwar Hossain
IPCS Forecast: Bangladesh in 2015
18th SAARC Summit: A Perspective from Bangladesh
Bangladesh in Global Forums: Diplomacy vs. Domestic Politics
Eagle Eye
Prof Chintamani Mahapatra
India-US: Significance of the Second Modi-Obama Meet
Has President Obama Turned Lame Duck?
Modi-Obama Summit: Criticism for Criticism?s Sake?

East Asia Compass
Dr Sandip Mishra
India-Japan-US Trilateral: India?s Policy for the Indo-Pacific
China-South Korea Ties: Implications for the US Pivot to Asia
Many ?Pivots to Asia?: What Does It Mean For Regional Stability?
Himalayan Frontier
Pramod Jaiswal
Nepal?s New Constitution: Instrument towards Peace or Catalyst to Conflict?
IPCS Forecast: Nepal in 2015
Constitution-making: Will Nepal Miss its Second Deadline?

Indo-Pacific
Prof Shankari Sundararaman
IPCS Forecast: Southeast Asia in 2015
Indonesia's Pacific Identity: What Jakarta Must Do in West Papua
Modi in Myanmar: From ?Look East? to ?Act East?
Indus-tan
Sushant Sareen
IPCS Forecast: Pakistan in 2015
Islamic State: Prospects in Pakistan
Pakistan: The Futility of Internationalising Kashmir

Looking East
Wasbir Hussain
Myanmar in New Delhi's Naga Riddle
China: ?Peaceful? Display of Military Might
Naga Peace Accord: Need to Reserve Euphoria
Maritime Matters
Vijay Sakhuja
Indian Ocean: Modi on a Maritime Pilgrimage
Indian Ocean: Exploring Maritime Domain Awareness
IPCS Forecast: The Indian Ocean in 2015

Nuke Street
Amb Sheelkant Sharma
US-Russia and Global Nuclear Security: Under a Frosty Spell?
India's Nuclear Capable Cruise Missile: The Nirbhay Test
India-Australia Nuclear Agreement: Bespeaking of a New Age
Red Affairs
Bibhu Prasad
Countering Left Wing Extremism: Failures within Successes
Return of the Native: CPI-Maoist in Kerala
The Rising Civilian Costs of the State-Vs-Extremists Conflict

Regional Economy
Amita Batra
India and the APEC
IPCS Forecast: South Asian Regional Integration
South Asia: Rupee Regionalisation and Intra-regional Trade Enhancement
South Asian Dialectic
PR Chari
Resuming the Indo-Pak Dialogue: Evolving a New Focus
Defence Management in India: An Agenda for Parrikar
Pakistani Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan: Implications for Asian Security

Spotlight West Asia
Amb Ranjit Gupta
Prime Minister Modi Finally Begins His Interaction with West Asia*
A Potential Indian Role in West Asia?
US-GCC Summit: More Hype than Substance
Strategic Space
Manpreet Sethi
India-Russia Nuclear Vision Statement: See that it Delivers
Global Nuclear Disarmament: The Humanitarian Consequences Route
Nasr: Dangers of Pakistan's Short Range Ballistic Missile

The Strategist
Vice Admiral Vijay Shankar
Jihadi Aggression and Nuclear Deterrence
The Blight of Ambiguity
Falun Gong: The Fear Within


OTHER REGULAR contributors
Gurmeet Kanwal
Harun ur Rashid
N Manoharan
Wasbir Hussain
Rana Banerji
N Manoharan

Ruhee Neog
Teshu Singh
Aparupa Bhattacherjee
Roomana Hukil
Aparupa Bhattacherjee


 

Browse by Publications

Commentaries 
Issue Briefs 
Special Reports 
Research Papers 
Seminar Reports 
Conference Reports 

Browse by Region/Countries

East Asia 
South Asia 
Southeast Asia 
US & South Asia 
China 
Myanmar 
Afghanistan 
Iran 
Pakistan 
India 
J&K  

Browse by Issues

India & the world  
Indo-Pak 
Military 
Terrorism 
Naxalite Violence 
Nuclear 
Suicide Terrorism 
Peace & Conflict Database 
Article by same Author
Evolving External Influence in Jammu and Kashmir (Part II)

Evolving External Influence in Jammu and Kashmir (Part I)

J&K: A Strategy is What May Still Be Elusive

The Ominous Calm is both Good and Bad for J&K

An Opportunity to Bring Heart Back to Kashmir

From South Kashmir to Uri: The Strategic Connect

J&K: Communication Strategy is Key but First, Stabilise the Streets

Governance & Strategic Communication: Keys to Stabilising J&K

ADD TO:
Blink
Del.icio.us
Digg
Furl
Google
Simpy
Spurl
Y! MyWeb
Facebook
 
Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
Year 2017
 January  February  March  April  May
 2016  2015  2014  2013  2012  2011  2010  2009
 2008  2007  2006  2005  2004  2003  2002  2001
 2000  1999  1998  1997
 
 

The Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS) is the premier South Asian think tank which conducts independent research on and provides an in depth analysis of conventional and non-conventional issues related to national and South Asian security including nuclear issues, disarmament, non-proliferation, weapons of mass destruction, the war on terrorism, counter terrorism , strategies security sector reforms, and armed conflict and peace processes in the region.

For those in South Asia and elsewhere, the IPCS website provides a comprehensive analysis of the happenings within India with a special focus on Jammu and Kashmir and Naxalite Violence. Our research promotes greater understanding of India's foreign policy especially India-China relations, India's relations with SAARC countries and South East Asia.

Through close interaction with leading strategic thinkers, former members of the Indian Administrative Service, the Foreign Service and the three wings of the Armed Forces - the Indian Army, Indian Navy, and Indian Air Force, - the academic community as well as the media, the IPCS has contributed considerably to the strategic discourse in India.

 
Subscribe to Newswire | Site Map
18, Link Road, Jungpura Extension, New Delhi 110014, INDIA.

Tel: 91-11-4100-1902    Email: officemail@ipcs.org

© Copyright 2017, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.