More than sending a signal to the Pakistan rulers, Modi sent an implicit message to the countrymen that look here is a government who for protecting the sovereignty and prestige of the country can go against the defined political and diplomatic norms. It was the frosty version of LK Advani’s hot pursuit. Frustrated with the dirty maneuverings of Pakistan, which turned especially the Indian urban middle class skeptical of the NDA government’s capabilities to take on Pakistan, Modi had to utter these words.

Alienation of the urban middle class ahead of the 2019 Lok Sabha elections certainly does not augur well for the RSS and the BJP. Already his adversaries have tightened their belts and have embarked on the mission to mobilize the people. In such a scenario sitting pretty idle was not in the interest of the party. This statement ought to be seen as an exercise to keep intact the macho image of the leader. The statement was like “catching fish but not ready to enter into water”. Modi sent the message India would take on Pakistan but would not aggravate the crisis. It was a signal to Pakistan that India would also launch the campaign for internationalizing the issue of violation of rights in these provinces of Pakistan, the game so far Pakistan has been playing against India on Kashmir.

How far India will succeed in its mission is quite uncertain as the success of this strategy depends on the support extended to by the USA. With Barack Obama relinquishing the office in November, the new incumbent would take his or her own time to take a position. Of course in America, it is the state policy that has to be given priority by the president. The move of the next American president would depend on the feedback he or she gets from the administration.

The most crucial point which ought to be not missed is the stand of Russia and China. The manner in which Russia is being treated it might not prefer to play a proactive role in favour of India. China will always prefer to cast his support to Pakistan. The stakeholders have their own compulsions and preferences and Indian imperatives are unlikely to prevail on them.

Naturally in this background Modi would have to face real diplomatic challenge. Modi’s remarks have already invited the ire of Pakistani rulers and the establishment. So far they were accusing India for extending support to the Baloch activists and their movement but now they would put Modi’s words before the world as the proof of their allegation against India of supporting anti-Pak forces active in that country. Modi risks getting India bracketed with Pakistan as interfering in another nation's internal affairs.

This was the first time an Indian prime minister referred to the Baloch struggle against Islamabad from the ramparts of the Red Fort. Modi in no uncertain words told Islamabad that New Delhi too could target its integrity and unity the way Pakistan does. This has implications beyond the regular Indo-Pak war of words.

Modi's focus on Balochistan underlines a significant departure in Indian stand from the 2009 Sharmel-Sheikh joint statement where Pakistan forced through a reference to Balochistan which was vociferously opposed by Indian Parliament, forcing Manmohan Singh to disown the statement. Seven years after the joint statement Modi put it back on the agenda by mentioning Balochistan in his Independence Day address to corner Pakistan on human rights violations in its own backyard.

Modi's comments came after a slew of provoking remarks from Pakistan. The crisis was aggravated by its high commissioner Abdul Basit who dedicated Pakistan's Independence Day to Kashmiris' freedom. In a war of minds where the prestige and images of the leaders are more at stake, these types of statements, as uttered by Basit simply motivates to adopt a radical posture.

As expected Modi’s remarks drew an angry reaction from Islamabad which claimed “this only proves Pakistan’s contention that India, through its main intelligence agency Research and Analysis Wing, has been fomenting terrorism in Balochistan”. Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's foreign affairs adviser, Sartaj Aziz referred to Modi's comments as proof of India’s involvement in Balochistan.

Balochistan's chief minister, Nawab Sanaullah Zehri, too hit back, saying: 'The government and people of Balochistan vehemently reject Modi's statement on the situation in the province.' In fact Pakistan for a decade has been preparing a case against India. A year back it had arrested a former Indian navy officer, Kulbhushan Jadhav, and accused him of assisting Baloch separatists. India has denied the charge and said he was possibly abducted from the Iran-Pakistan border by Pakistani agencies.

This reaction simply helped Modi and the Sangh to consolidate their space and bolster their image. Three days ago, Modi told an all-party meeting on Kashmir that Pakistan “bombs its own citizens using fighter planes” and the “time has come that Pakistan shall have to answer to the world for the atrocities committed by it against people in Balochistan and PoK”. It reinforced the belief that both the countries are nearing a point of no return. But this was certainly not the case.

While India has always said the entire Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of the country, it has rarely in the past raised the human rights situation in Balochistan or PoK or Gilgit-Baltistan. India has maintained utter restraint. Engaging the groups in occupied Kashmir has always been an option available for India, but one which New Delhi did not choose to exercise. In fact nationalists from these provinces were not too happy with India maintaining silence.

Though the Congress party has given its thumbs up to Modi’s strategic move, it is yet not clear how far it would help Indian cause. As is explicit the government would raise the issues of violations of rights in Balochistan, the way democracy and democratic dissent is being stifled, in bilateral and international forums, but Modi must not use it as an offensive posture to position the government in political safe zone and raise the ultra nationalist passion. (IPA Service)