The Islamist terrorist attack on Mumbai sets the stage for another major war between India and Pakistan. To avoid it, statesmen will have to control inflamed public passion and manipulative politicians as well as confront the terrorists responsible for the heinous crime.
Diplomats know the act of mass murder spurs legitimate anger and rage. Mumbai's death toll reached 180 earlier this week, with some 240 people wounded. Most of the dead were Indians, but the list of victims included foreigners from at least 12 other countries, including the United States, Germany, China, Great Britain and Israel.
India's outrage has deep roots. Islamist terrorists likely connected to Pakistan have struck Mumbai many times, with attacks in 1993 and 2006 particularly notable. The July 2006 attack mimicked al-Qaida's March 2004 bombing of commuter trains in Madrid. 2008's massacre-by-gunfire tactically and strategically echoes the December 2001 assault by Islamist gunmen on India's parliament building in New Delhi. That attack killed 12 and chilled prospects for a 9-11-inspired India-Pakistan rapprochement based on combating terrorism.
With anger seizing India and fear of Indian attack gripping Pakistan, rhetorical belligerency is inevitable. Indian and Pakistani media reflect this war of words. Both governments have redeployed military forces, with the contested state of Kashmir the focus.
Mediating anger and fear requires intricate diplomatic judo. Rhetoric is fine, as long as it releases passion rather than feeds it. To paraphrase Winston Churchill, "jaw jaw" is preferable to "war war." Diplomatically structured troop movements are also permitted, where Indian and Pakistani commanders know the other side's moves. This dangerous theater buys time for cool-headed leaders pushed by politicians demanding war. "Quartet discussions" involving India, Pakistan, the United States and the U.N. Security Council are a diplomatic venue for directing this theater. U.S. satellite and electronic intelligence assets are good at tracking large-scale conventional troop movements and provide a trust-building "third-party eye."
The diplomats' goal is to avoid the strategic catastrophe of an Indo-Pakistani war -- thwarting what I believe was the terrorists' strategic aim.
The Pakistani government says it wants to "dampen down the discourse of conflict and work toward regional peace." Good. Ensuring peace between India and Pakistan ultimately requires defeating the terrorists, and that entails effective, coordinated action.
Austin Bay is the author of three novels. His third novel, The Wrong Side of Brightness, was published by Putnam/Jove in June 2003. He has also co-authored four non-fiction books, to include A Quick and Dirty Guide to War: Third Edition (with James Dunnigan, Morrow, 1996).
Be the first to read Austin Bay's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.
Rand Paul on NSA: “I Believe What You Do on Your Cell Phone is None of Their Damn Business” | Daniel Doherty