Let’s deal with the last question first.

Was the Gurdaspur terror attack a part of the Pakistan ISI’s plan to revive Khalistani militancy in Punjab as it had done in the eighties? May be ‘yes’. But the ground realities in India, particularly in Punjab, rule out the possibility of revival of militancy in the state in the foreseeable future. What, however, is worrying is the efforts to create environment conducive for the revival of religious extremism, an essential pre-requite for revival of militancy.

No doubt, Punjab chief minister Parkash Singh Badal has been steering the Akali Dal’s moderate political line and ensuring communal peace and harmony in Punjab. But some of his recent actions and pronouncements are contrary to what he has professed. For instance, he has been pressing the Centre for shifting the convicted militants from other states jails to Punjab. This will help the fringe Khalistani elements in Punjab, who keep occasionally voicing Khalistan demand, to reconnect with the convicted militants which will not be a healthy development for Punjab’s peace and communal harmony. The gravity of such a development should be assessed in the backdrop of July 30 hanging of the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts convict, Yakub Menon.

Claiming “some forces inimical to the progress of the state were bent on disrupting its hard-earned peace,” Mr Badal said on July 27 that “religion should not be misconstrued as communalism”.

But when politics is practiced by mixing it with religion which the Akali Dal itself has been doing, it does not take long for the extremist religious elements to become a driving force of politics by fanning communal sentiments. This is what had also happened with the Akali leadership during the militancy years.

Periodical introspections are imperative for the political parties to ensure their own healthy growth.

Now take other questions: Were the Gurdaspur terrorists non-state players? Did they have the backing of Pakistan’s political establishment or belonged to the army/ISI-backed terrorist outfits?

The history of India-Pakistan’s strained relationship shows that Pakistan’s top military brass has been using army and civil establishment’s elements disguising them as non-state players for terrorist actions in India. Among such major actions were the 1993 Mumbai serial blasts, Kargil misadventure and attack on Indian Parliament. But every time it failed to achieve its objective. The Frankenstein born out of such actions later became a threat to Pakistan’s own security and stability which has been keeping the army busy to fight the monster.

Another significant aspect of Pakistan’s such aggressive actions against India is that these are usually launched prior to India-Pakistan peace talks. The Gurdaspur terrorist attack has also taken place in the wake of Ufa joint statement for holding National Security Advisor level dialogue followed by talks between chiefs of border forces and then the heads of military operations.

The question is: Will India and Pakistan’s political leaderships continue efforts to restore normalcy and for peaceful coexistence despite the roadblocks often created by both sides’ hardliners? Though Narendra Modi and Pakistan’s ruling leadership have declared to resume dialogue between the two countries, much will depend on the attitude the Pakistani Army chief General Raheel Sharif adopts. In the background of the history of Pakistani Army chiefs playing the role of the country’s super rulers by eclipsing the elected political leadership, the fate of any effort by Nawaz Sharif to determine his country’s relationship, particularly with India, will be subject to General Raheel’s attitude.

The ruling leaderships of both the countries need to be reminded of what Atal Bihari Vajpayee and the Founder of Pakistan the late Muhammad Ali Jinnah had once said: “Our object should be peace within, and peace without. We want to live peacefully and maintain cordial friendly relations with our immediate neighbours and with the world at large” Jinnah had said.

Similarly, Vajpayee had famously said “You can change friends but not neighbours.”

The political establishments of the two countries will have to keep in mind the sermons of their countries two senior leaders while resolving the intricate problems India and Pakistan face.

It is too premature to deal with the question of the Gurdaspur attack having any connection with the ISIS’s reported plan to launch an attack on India. The activities of the extremist religious Muslim body are presently concentrated in the Muslims-dominated Middle East countries. Since Pakistan, an Islamic country, has already earned the stigma of being the capital of global terrorism and India has a sizeable Muslim population, the possibility of the ISIS extending its activities from Middle East to this region in the future cannot be ruled out. There has been a multiple growth of terrorist outfits in the Indian sub-content and the ISISI has already started efforts to take them under its canopy. (IPA Service)