The Courage of His Convictions

THE YEAR WAS 1991. IT WAS AMONG THE BLOODIEST YEARS IN independent India’s history. On December 27 that year, four Khalistani terrorists, rooting for a separate Sikh state, boarded a local passenger train from Ludhiana to Ferozepur at Ludhiana. Upon reaching Sohian village, they pulled the emergency cord, forcing the train to a grinding halt. Six armed terrorists climbed aboard and shot indiscriminately at passengers with AK-47s. All but two of the 49 victims were Hindus. After the massacre, they vanished into the darkness of the night. Earlier that year, Khalistanis had stopped two trains about a kilometre from Ludhiana station by pulling the emergency cord, boarded the trains, and fired at unsuspecting passengers at around 9:35PM, killing over 80 (some reports say over a 100) of them, mostly Punjabi Hin­dus, just five hours after polling closed in a national election following the assassination of former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.

The year 1991 was also when the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), with party chief Murli Manohar Joshi at the helm, launched the Ekta Yatra from Kanyakumari to coincide with the birth anniversary of Subramania Bharati and the Balidan Diwas of Guru Tegh Bahadur to highlight the need to revoke Article 370 in Jammu & Kashmir (a founding commitment of BJP) and signal that Kashmir was an integral part of India. Narendra Modi was Joshi’s main man but, as far as the national media was concerned, a non­entity. The yatra was to end with flag hoisting at Srinagar’s iconic Lal Chowk on January 26, Republic Day. On January 23, four volun­teers of BJP’s Ekta Yatra were killed and 20 others were injured when extremists fired on two buses near Mehtan village in Phagwara, Kapurthala district. That was a warning signal to the party’s leaders.

The Ekta Yatra could have been stalled or called off completely. But this was when Modi first demonstrated his resolve to proceed despite threats. The very next day after the killings, declaring that no power on earth could prevent him from unfurling the na­tional flag at Lal Chowk, Modi asserted, “The success of this yatra has completely unsettled the terrorists. Posters have been put up in Lal Chowk in Srinagar declaring that only those who have the guts to defy their diktat (jisne bhi ma ka doodh piya hai) should come to Lal Chowk and wave the Tricolour. I say to them: Listen up and clearly, there are just a few hours to January 26. You will see who has the guts to defy you and who does not.” Modi’s was the strongest voice, among all the yatris, that urged that the yatra should not buckle down, asserting that calling it off would only embolden anti-India forces. The Tricolour was hoisted at Lal Chowk, finally.

In his second term as prime minister years later, Modi’s govern­ment announced its decision in August 2019 to revoke the special status for J&K state under Article 370, a demand first raised by Syama Prasad Mookerjee, founder of the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, from which BJP was born. On August 5, the BJP-led Union gov­ernment fulfilled the promise and the state was divided into two Union territories—Ladakh and Jammu & Kashmir—under the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act. The decision came into effect on October 31, 2019.

Ironically, in the wake of the Pahalgam attack on April 22 which claimed 28 lives, mostly Hindu tourists from the mainland, Modi’s credentials on the security front to combat terror decisively are being questioned in some quarters. Questions are being asked whether the prime minister has the resolve and is capable of actu­ally retaliating in a manner that will serve as a long-term deterrent to terror activists of any kind in the Kashmir Valley. The attack was brutal and barbaric, the biggest in the recent past against civilians. As in the case of the 1991 Khalistani terror attacks, they singled out Hindus by religion. Nearly 20 of the total 26 Hindus killed, all men, were reportedly found by the police, who later sent their bodies for post-mortem, to have been either stripped of their pants or had the zippers of their trousers down, something their distraught family members failed to notice. Eyewitness accounts say many victims were asked to name their religion and recite the Kalma (Islamic prayer verses from the Quran), failing which they were shot point blank. The terrorists vanished into the nearby woods as mysteriously as they had appeared.

As the details emerged, outrage swelled across India. Several of the tourists were from Karnataka, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, and other mainland states. Modi rushed back home from an official visit to Saudi Arabia and dived headlong into a battery of high-level meetings focused on security, getting briefed mid-air on the developments in Kashmir and the subsequent meetings held by his closest aide and Home Minister Amit Shah, National Security Advisor (NSA) Ajit Doval, and the heads of intelligence agencies in the immediate aftermath. In his first, prescheduled visit to poll-bound Bihar on April 24, two days after the massacre, Modi scotched all speculation about his resolve on fighting terror to the end, thundering a warning to the perpetrators and conspira­tors of the Pahalgam terror.

Two days after the butchery in Pahalgam, he asserted, “Today, from the soil of Bihar, I vow to the whole world that India will identify, track, and punish every terrorist, their handlers and sup­porters. We will pursue them to the ends of the earth. They will be punished beyond their worst nightmares.” Switching midway to English, to take that vow of punishing terror without respite to the entire world, he said, “The perpetrators will face the full force of India’s response.” In a mark of respect for those fallen at Pahalgam, he urged the crowd to observe a minute’s silence. The following Sunday, April 27, in his 121st Mann ki Baat session, Modi maintained that terrorists were growing increasingly frustrated about the return of peace and the end of the gun and stone-pelting culture in the Valley, and were determined to thwart democracy in J&K. “They are not enemies of India alone but also of J&K,” he said, adding, “Terrorists want to destroy Kashmir once again. Global leaders have called me, written letters, and sent messages. Everyone has strongly condemned this heinous terrorist attack.” He further said, “The entire world stands with the 1.4 billion Indi­ans in our fight against terrorism. The unity of this nation is our greatest strength, and we must strengthen our resolve as a people and demonstrate our unwavering willpower. The outrage over this incident is being felt worldwide.”

The jury was no longer out on Modi’s intent to retaliate with full force against both terrorists and terrorist enablers in the Paki­stan army. There should have been little doubt on this since Modi’s USP has always been national security, and his personal and politi­cal image has long been firmly linked to his credentials as a leader who prioritises safeguarding the nation. But that the weight of ex­pectations on him is the primary driving force behind the decision to hit Pakistan hard is only part of the story. The courage of Modi’s convictions about India’s special identity, her strong cultural and religious roots, her sovereignty and her power as a democratic na­tion has been evident all through his political journey, as far back as the 1991 Ekta Yatra. This is something that has always defined Modi. This conviction led him to turn cold towards LK Advani, one of his mentors, when he started glorifying Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the man who unleashed armed Islamists against Hindus with his Direct Action Day call and worked with the British to thwart every effort to preserve a united India. It was also Modi who pressed for Jaswant Singh’s expulsion from the party when he carried out a similar reappraisal of Jinnah. According to Singh, Jinnah was demonised because India wanted a demon. It may be recalled that Singh was shown the door when his patron Atal Bihari Vajpayee had a central role in the running of BJP.

A TOUGH LEADER IS a combination of factors. First, there are certain intrinsic capabilities, convictions, and character traits. Second, a schooling that buttresses the convictions and other traits through conditioning. Third, a leader’s character is strengthened further through the challenges he faces. And fourth, a clear-headed, grand vision for the nation and its people. All of this has gone into the making of Modi. He was always known to be tough. His association with the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), an organisation driven by the idea of nationalism, since his early years has honed his convic­tions. Modi is a man with a larger ideological bandwidth. Finally, the challenges that Modi has faced on his personal and political journey have made his leadership qualities stronger and sharper. What can be a bigger challenge than a real prospect of war on two fronts, having to deal with neighbours who believe in inflicting a thousand cuts on India? Little wonder Modi has remained very high on the terrorists’ list since his days as Gujarat chief minister.

For Modi, public pressure and the high expectations from him—that he do something radical to retaliate against Pakistan— are additional factors. Much of that expectation from the public is, in fact, rooted in the very self-confidence and pride in being Indian and a cultural Hindu that Modi himself has cultivated since his first term. The realistic calculation is that failure to act at this critical juncture—when Pakistan is seeking to set back his core project of integrating J&K with the national mainstream—could impose heavy costs on India. That Pakistan, by deliberately targeting in­nocent tourists based on faith, is furthering its policy of bleeding a resurgent, culturally vibrant and economically strong India— and with no cost imposed on it for decades—can have only one response from a leader of Modi’s stature.

Within hours of the Pahalgam attack, US President Donald Trump had called to offer support to Modi on any action taken to defeat terrorism. His Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, called it an attack on Hindus by Islamic terror­ists. “We stand in solidarity with India in the wake of the horrific Islamist terrorist attack, targeting and killing 26 Hindus in Pa­halgam. My prayers and deepest sympathies are with those who lost a loved one, PM @narendramodi, and with all the people of India. We are with you and support you as you hunt down those responsible for this heinous attack,” she posted on X. FBI Director Kash Patel, who is of Indian origin, posted on social media:

“President Donald Trump called PM Narendra Modi and con­veyed his deepest condolences at the loss of innocent lives in the terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir. President Trump strongly condemned the terror attack and expressed full support to India to bring to justice the perpetrators of this heinous attack. India and the United States stand together in the fight against terror.”

Within days of Pahalgam, the Modi government had called an all-party meeting where all leaders affirmed their support for any retaliatory action the government planned to take against the terror hub of Pakistan. Amit Shah personally called the likes of Asaduddin Owaisi of the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Musli­meen (AIMIM) to the meeting. This was a meeting where the government did not, for the first time, just take the name of the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) or Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), but formally of the government and army of Pakistan, for retaliatory action. The Pahalgam attack was claimed by The Resistance Front (TRF), a proxy of Hafiz Saeed’s LeT. While Pakistan has claimed that he is in prison, there are reports that he lives in the middle of Lahore, protected by Pakistani forces and intelligence agencies.

India took a strong stand at the United Nations (UN), condemn­ing Pakistan’s continued support for terrorism. “The whole world has heard Pakistan’s Defence Minister, Khawaja Asif, admitting and confessing Pakistan’s history of supporting, training and fund­ing terrorist organisations,” said Yojna Patel, India’s deputy perma­nent representative to the UN. The biggest move the Modi govern­ment made was to keep in abeyance the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), a crucial water-sharing agreement signed in 1960 which is key to a major part of the agricultural input in Pakistan’s agrarian economy. Plans are now afoot to build dams along the river that were stalled on account of mediation. Pakistan has warned that any diversion of water would be considered an “act of war”. The Modi government has also suspended all visa services for Pakistani nationals. Indian citizens in Pakistan were advised to return home promptly. India also threw out three Pakistani military officers from the High Com­mission in New Delhi, declaring them persona non grata. Addition­ally, Pakistan’s diplomatic presence in Delhi has been reduced from 55 to 30 personnel. Many of these decisions were taken after the first meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS).

Even as anger and expectations mounted, Modi chaired a cru­cial meeting on the night of April 29. It was also the day Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar announced a “stone for a brick” response to India as tensions ran high. It followed Modi giving the Indian armed forces the long-awaited nod for retaliatory action against Pakistan. Modi gave them “complete freedom to decide on the mode, targets, and timing” of India’s military response to the Pa­halgam carnage. This was different from the decisions taken on the Balakot air strike in February 2019, targeting a JeM training camp in direct response to the Pulwama attack in which 40 CRPF personnel were killed by a suicide bomber. While the political authorisation was necessary, it was the armed forces that took the front seat and have carte blanche on the timing, mode of attack, and the very tar­gets. At that meeting, Modi, while empowering the military with complete operational freedom on every aspect of any retaliatory ac­tion, expressed his complete confidence in its professional abilities.

Later, Modi held back-to-back key meetings on security with the CCS, the Cabinet Committee on Political Affairs (CCPA), the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA), and a full Cabinet meeting on April 30, besides another meeting with the intelligence and security brass, including Shah and Doval. The CCS meeting was attended by Shah, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh, and Doval. The CCPA was attended by Rajnath Singh, Shah and Health Minister JP Nadda. The stage was set for retaliation against Pakistan. The armed forces’ chiefs had already pushed the hotline to Pakistan, warning their coun­terparts against any unprovoked firing on the border. A rattled Pakistani army was already preparing for action, even as its ally China appealed to both Delhi and Islamabad to exercise caution.

MODI HAD A vision for Kashmir quite early in his tenure as prime minister. Central to it was the scrap­ping of Article 370 which accorded J&K special status. The decision to revoke Article 370 was taken in Au­gust 2019 in Modi 2.0 and came into force later that year. This was not too long a period in a nation’s history, especially when it comes to a state as turbulent as J&K. But beginning with the abrogation of the special status and the determined push for development, the Valley was set to get emotionally connected with the rest of the country for the first time. As a direct consequence, incidents of stone-pelting ceased in 2020. If there has been relative peace and economic resurgence in the Union Territory since then, Modi has to be directly credited. What he achieved was something that few, even among his ardent admirers, had anticipated.

From being known globally as one of the most militarised regions, Modi’s move set the stage for a new dawn in Kashmir, or Naya Kashmir. The Centre’s focus was on infrastructure and logistics, both aimed at reviving and revitalising tourism, the eco­nomic mainstay of the Valley. One metric was the construction of all-weather roads to boost tourism; what followed were the construction of border infrastructure, the reopening of schools, holding elections that rang in the National Conference (NC) government in Srinagar, and reviving a sentiment of local gover­nance. Given this backdrop, Modi is keenly aware that any delay in reacting swiftly and forcefully will only embolden Pakistan. The neighbour has already achieved a measure of success through the Pahalgam massacre by reversing global perception. And this sense of satisfaction will likely grow and strengthen the likes of Asif Munir, Pakistan’s army chief, if India abandons its develop­ment push in Kashmir. Modi and India have to forge ahead. For that, he has to inspire confidence among the local population who have risked a lot by buying into his dream project. He also has to restore the confidence of the tourists who were acting as the most powerful ambassadors and representatives of mainland India. Sample this: 2.36 crore people, including 65,000 foreigners, visited Kashmir in just 2024—a place not so long ago described as among the most violent zones in South Asia.

That the type of retaliation is likely to be far more dramatic and effective than earlier is anybody’s guess. The constant carping that Pakistan is a failed state with crazies for generals who have their finger on the nuclear button and could go ballistic was the calculation of earlier governments wary of retaliation. That is no longer the case. The assertion that China will throw its weight behind Pakistan does not change India’s new plans to fight terror. With the world already too distracted by Trump’s unilateralism, there is unlikely to be anyone trying to mediate. Modi has a clear path ahead in settling this on his own terms. While his govern­ment has sought aggressively for support from all the important capitals and at the UN, he is no longer constrained by the fear of being seen as revenge-thirsty or reckless, especially with India already earning a fair amount of diplomatic success in isolating Pakistan as a serial offender on terrorism. None of the hesitations of previous dispensations will stop Modi from taking a hardline stance and stern action in the face of terror attacks.

Modi’s primary concern will be to insulate the larger population and the economy. Among his key considerations in any retaliatory action is also likely to be the safety of soldiers and how best to keep them out of harm’s way. But no war can be visualised or conceived as casualty-free. Modi and his team know it only too well. Just as in the case of Uri, when he stayed awake into the morning till the op­erations were over and every soldier had returned safely, Modi will be fully involved in the coming offensive against a rogue state. The prime minister knows that this action will be a distraction from his goal of turning India into a developed country, but that is a price he is likely willing to pay for the country’s defence and dignity. For Modi believes the making of a better India lies in stopping anyone involved in unmaking the motherland.

diplomacy and wargeopoliticsIndia-Pakistan relationsIndus Water TreatyKashmirNarendra ModiPahalgamRetaliationterror attack