London: Noting that many countries, including Western governments and Russia, spoke about the need to combat terrorism in the wake of the Pahalgam terror attack, a leading London-based security expert said statements of sympathy with India were genuine.Dr Walter Ladwig, Senior Lecturer of International Relations at King’s College London, stated in an interview with ANI that successive US governments have sought to cultivate India as a key partner in the Indo-Pacific, in part to counter China. A conflict between India and Pakistan is therefore not in America’s interest, he added.“When it comes to India, we have successive US administrations going all the way back to George W. Bush that have been seeking to cultivate India as an important partner in the Indo-Pacific, in part as a counterweight to China,” Ladwig said. “It’s not in the American interest for there to be a conflict between India and Pakistan insofar as that distracts India’s attention away from bigger picture issues in Asia.”He pointed out that India’s economy is growing at nearly 7% annually, but needs to accelerate further to meet its development goals. “All of those things will be put at risk by a protracted conflict or stalemate with Pakistan, so that’s clearly not in America’s interest,” he said.Dr Ladwig also commented on the understanding reached by India and Pakistan to halt military action and firing. He noted that this was largely a decision between the two parties and was not the result of international mediation, contrary to past claims by leaders like former US President Donald Trump.India launched Operation Sindoor on May 7, conducting precision strikes on terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir in response to the Pahalgam terror attack. India also retaliated strongly to Pakistani aggression by targeting its airbases.Ladwig noted that India had previously carried out surgical strikes in 2016 and an aerial attack on a terror camp in 2019 in response to major terror attacks. The recent Pahalgam attack, which killed 26 people, drew widespread global condemnation.“I think many Western governments, Russia, and even China talked about the need to combat terrorism after the Kashmir attack. The sympathy with India was genuine,” Ladwig said. “You didn’t have Indian diplomats running around trying to get governments to say these things.”He contrasted the current US response with that of the Trump administration in 2019, which gave a “green light” to India after the Pulwama attack, but said the current reactions were standard international responses to South Asia crises—not a tilt toward Pakistan.Dr Ladwig also praised India’s military precision and strategic shift. He noted that India has moved from assembling evidence dossiers to holding Pakistan accountable for allowing terror groups safe havens on its soil—prompting direct military responses.“What stood out for me was the shift in Indian policy. Now, there’s a stance that failure to prevent terrorist safe havens is enough to justify military action,” he said. “The Indian Air Force’s ability to precisely strike a range of targets was impressive.”He further said India executed more successful missions and struck a wider range of targets than Pakistan during the recent exchanges. He also acknowledged the asymmetry in evidence presentation, with India providing more detailed proof than Pakistan.India and Pakistan agreed to cease hostilities following a call by Pakistan’s Director General of Military Operations (DGMO) to his Indian counterpart on May 10.
Source link
