There is a famous quote by Sun Tzu that ‘the supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting’. This aptly describes the effort in the on-going Indian hybrid warfare against Pakistan.
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization has comprehensively defined hybrid warfare in their annual report titled Hybrid Threats: A Strategic Communication Perspective. It says hybrid warfare is a ‘type of warfare that combines conventional, irregular and asymmetric activities in time and space’.
Hybrid warfare is not a new phenomenon. It is as old as the history of mankind. It has been practiced in various forms and orientations. It is also known as the grey zone, asymmetrical or new generation warfare. It aims at influencing the diplomatic, political, military, economic, information, intelligence and legal aspects of a state. In addition, it strives to control the narrative through the use of irregular militias, clandestine support to secessionist movements, and economic morass. It has also been associated with the use of cyber-attacks to delegitimize governments, defame the adversary’s leaders through malicious campaigns and the propagation of narrative construction through false information.
One of the longstanding narratives constructed and spread through targeted misinformation has been that Pakistan is a state sponsor of terrorism. The campaign has been carried out, in large measure, by India. It accuses Pakistan of carrying out terrorism both internally and externally. The allegations are conspicuous in the statements of Indian leaders, diplomats and media industry.
Bullets cannot win the battles of ideas. Nations only become stronger by being inclusive and promoting dialogue and understanding
At the external level, Indian parliament bombing in 2001, Mumbai mayhem in 2008, Pathankot attack in 2016 and Pulwama incident of 2019 have all been blamed on Pakistan in a highly consistent manner. The claims have been based largely on circumstantial evidence. The narrative has been reinforced using India’s diplomatic clout across the world to label Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism and to present India as its victim.
At the internal level, India supports many disgruntled voices in Pakistan by building false narratives. The emergence of the Pashtun Tahaffuz Movement is being viewed in Islamabad as yet another instrument of hybrid warfare.
The nature of the threat is evident in the seriousness with which military’s external relations wing, the Inter-Services Public Relations, has taken to address it. In combating slogans like Yeh Jo Dehshat Gardi Hai, Iss Ke Peechhay Wardi Hai (behind the terrorism, is the [military] uniform) the ISPR is aware that the misinformation campaign is a direct threat to its objectives. The ISPR has emphasized that such slogans are intended to support the Indian position vis-à-vis Pakistan. This amounts to an attempt to demoralize the armed forces responsible for defending the territorial integrity and independence of Pakistan.
Social media platforms Facebook and Twitter have been extensively used by the Indian intelligence agencies and the PTM to launch their propaganda campaign and narrative against the armed forces of Pakistan.
Senator Mian Raza Rabbani stated on May 14, 2019, that ‘this is a hybrid war. We need to understand it correctly.’ In hybrid warfare, the purpose is not to always achieve an immediate victory sometimes the purpose is to demoralize it over time.
Hybrid warfare is all about winning hearts and minds. Therefore, the government can be seen adopting an all-inclusive approach to deal with the PTM leadership and its followers to sort out their problems. The ISPR director general has acknowledged that there are certain issues that can be addressed adequately, via dialogue and inclusive engagement of stakeholders. The state should not abandon its citizens in the hands of the enemy. Ahsan Iqbal, the former minister for interior, has aptly described the situation. He said: “Fifth-generation wars can’t be won by first-generation [warfare] tools. Battles of ideas cannot be won by bullets. Nations only become stronger by being inclusive and promoting dialogue and understanding.”
Therefore, use of force to shut up the dissenting voices can prove counterproductive. Ignoring the threat and not giving it due attention is also dangerous, especially taking into consideration the wider geopolitical scenario. The government should exercise extreme care to maintains an adequate the balance between upholding fundamental human rights on one hand and maintaining the legitimacy and the writ of the state on the other.
The writer is a research affiliate at the Strategic Vision Institute, Islamabad. He can be reached at musawar @thesvi.org