Transcription
Well, we've been looking very closely at the situation between India and Pakistan, all the military action that's taking place. Where is this all headed? I'm now joined by a very special guest, Michael Rubin, one of the world's foremost commentators on international security issues. Thanks, Mr. Rubin, very much for being with us.
Um, as you know, there have been several drone attacks on India. They've been trying to probe our airspace, do a lot more. Um, India's also knocked out a Pakistani air defense system in Lahore. How do you see this amidst the tensions between the two countries?
Look, it seems that India is playing a very careful game. And while I've been critical of the time which elapsed between the terrorist attacks and operation Synindor, the fact of the matter is India is acting very deliberately, very precisely. Uh, Pakistan seems to be flailing, and this shows that India has prepared carefully, both in the wake of the terrorist attack but more importantly, uh, in terms of its military doctrine over the past few months and years of relative quiet. Been two rounds where Pakistan has attempted to attack several military bases in north and west India; most of these attacks, in fact all of them, have been foiled one way or the other. Again, where do you see this in the escalation matrix?
I do see this as on the path of escalation, and certainly the Pakistanis, having started this, are now desperate to save face. But what I'm also reminded of is a broader point that I see all the time as a military analyst: that often times when there is a corrupt government or a flailing government, they believe that if they only have top-shelf military equipment, that that substitutes for a poorly trained army or um a corrupt military. I see this in the Democratic Republic of Congo, and now I'm seeing the same thing in Pakistan, where the Pakistani National Defense University, the Pakistani military, the army, the interservices intelligence agency must have understood how corrupt their military was. And they believed that if only they had the top-end drones, that would substitute for training, that would substitute for doctrine. And it never works. What they're doing is spending a lot of money. Unfortunately, the international community, through the IMF and others, seem to be subsidizing it, and yet instead of taking care of their own house, they want to burn down everyone else's.
Do you see India continuing this operation in trying to hunt down terrorist bases in Pakistan?
The answer to that, both questions, is yes. Certainly India should be working behind the scenes, for example, through uh, acting national security adviser Marco Rubio in the United States, to convey the message to Pakistan that this escalation will not end well for Pakistan. Uh, Pakistan is seen as the aggressor, and it's up to Pakistan to to basically re-enter talks, to learn how to de- to to figure out how to deconlict. That said, I strongly believe that we can't simply have a pattern in which Pakistan strikes out with its proxy terrorists, diplomats scramble for quiet, the terrorists regroup, and then we have another cycle in this terrorism. That's the cycle that led to the disaster in Israel on October 7th, 2023. I do think that Prime Minister Modi needs to take a playbook out of the late Golda Meir in Israel's hands, which was after the 1972 Munich Olympic massacre. The Israelis quietly, over subsequent years—it took another seven years—went out anywhere in the world to eliminate the terrorists who were responsible for that operation.
Look, Pakistan can't have it both ways. They can't say that they are um ignorant of these terrorists, that these terrorists are operating independently of them, and then try to avenge those terrorist deaths. If Pakistan truly wants to maintain the fiction that it is not a terror sponsor, it needs to stand down right now. It needs to close the terror camps, and it needs to extradite every terrorist that exists inside Pakistan, even if they wear a military uniform.
When Pakistan threatens India using uh, you know, on a potential use of nuclear weapons, do you believe that this is nuclear blackmail, that this is something which is nothing but a bluff?
Absolutely. That's what the Pakistani defense minister has been doing. He's come off as blustering; he's come off as unstable. It doesn't necessarily contribute to Pakistan's image. And of course, this is why the rest of the world is is concerned about any conflict. And it was the same thing back in 1999. The the issue is, however, that Pakistan simply can't expect everyone else to self-deter and continue on with its terrorism. As there are back-channel negotiations, and there will be eventually if they're not already occurring, through the United States and others, the demand that India should make is a complete dismantling of Pakistan's terror infrastructure—Lashkar-e-Taiba, um, I would even say Jaish in in Bangladesh which Pakistan has been supporting and so forth. The fact of the matter is Pakistan started this conflict, and they they are going to be the clear losers in this conflict, their attempt at nuclear blackmail notwithstanding.
I think the larger worry is that what if there's another terror attack? Would India have the option of using a military option over and over again? Well, what India has shown very carefully with operation Synindor is a willingness to both escalate and be precise. Look, everyone, not only in Pakistan but in the rest of the world, noticed that India did not, um, in its initial attacks, did not target Pakistani military facilities. That was an open invitation to Pakistan to take an offering. But ultimately what we saw with regard to the Gaza Strip, for example, Israel for for years used the analogy mowing the grass: that because the cost of going into the Gaza Strip would be so high, what they would do in the wake of a terrorist attack would be to try to degrade the bomb-making factories, the missile-making factories, going after specific terror cells, and that would buy quiet for a few more years. Then the grass would grow, and they would have to do it again, and ultimately that led to October 7th when they decided they could no longer afford to mow the grass. They would have to uproot the lawn. I would urge India not to go into that pattern, because if you kick the can down the road and ignore the chief issue, which is Pakistan's terror sponsorship, then thousands of people are going to die because of that terrorist sponsorship. It's not going to go away. The chief demand India should have made, often and repeatedly, to the United States is that Pakistan needs to be designated a state sponsor of terrorism. And if Islamabad complains about this to Washington, then the answer to this should be uh, what the answer was given to every other state sponsor of terrorism: Stop sponsoring terror, and then we will reconsider our designation.
A final question. Um, Israeli technology has played a huge role in for India. Uh, Israeli Harop drones were responsible in the destruction of a Pakistani um, radar site, an air defense site. In fact, um, a lot of the other technology we use is of Israeli origin, including surface-to-air missile systems, sensors. How significant is that partnership?
Look, the relationship between Israel and India is hugely important. Both are democracies. Both are being attacked, attacked um, by different countries harboring much the same ideology. Now what I'm curious about is the technology also which Pakistan was using. Is it using Turkish drones? Is it using Chinese drones? And in that situation, especially if it's using Turkish drones, that's a message which many other states in Western Asia are going to be analyzing in the um, in the weeks and months to come, especially as India increases, I'm sorry, especially as Turkey increases its drone and military exports throughout Africa and the Middle East.
All right, Mr. Rubin, great speaking to you. Thank you very much for joining.