Indian Pyrrich Victory

So this is about something I was in a constant doubt whether to write or skip. Yesterday I finalized I might write. Why yesterday? Yesterday I saw a video of India and Pakistan junior hockey players giving high fives each other before the match. Two weeks are almost over since India lifted the Asia Cup trophy defeating Pakistan at the finale. Tilak Varma's knock secured to beat the latter for the third time in the tournament. But our discussion point is not India's performance or Pakistan's debacle; it is about whether India should have boycotted the tournament or not, and my answer is a big "YES" from the beginning of the championship. In this blog, I write about the why factors.

The reason there for the recent campaign for boycott, as you all know, is the Pahalgam terror attack and Operation Sindoor that carried out as retaliation. Considering what happened in Pahalgam as merely a terror attack could be a euphemism. We have seen plenty of Pakistan-based terror attacks across the country, but the distinctive factor in Pahalgam is non-Muslim tourists were pinpointed as the targets (though a Muslim was killed). Selecting Pahalgam, a relatively peaceful picturesque site for the attack, also reveals the maligned intention. Allegations that men targets were asked to unzip their pants is horrific, though apocryphal. A similar story is emulated by Rajdeep Sardesai while covering the Gujarat riot in his book "2014: The Election That Changed India." Reports also suggest the intruders passed jibes on Sindoor and Prime Minister Modi. Thus, it is clear the intention was largely to rupture the secular fabric of the country, which they cannot do anytime soon.

Only a few days before the attack, Pakistan Army Chief Asim Munir made a despicable divisive comment on Kashmir. He referred to Kashmir as a jugular vein of Pakistan and upheld the two-nation theory. He then went to differentiate between Hindus, which in my view is pure ostracization. Many scholars and experts reckon this as fuel for radicalization and separatism in Kashmir and might have also played behind the terror attack. Also note he was anointed as field marshal within days after the ceasefire came into existence and made nuclear threats against us.

Pakistan sponsoring cross-border terrorism is no more a novel phenomenon. Countries across the globe have identified it. Certain times stringent politico-economic measures like the Financial Action Task Force grey list (a body to prevent money laundering and counter-terrorism - placing under grey list means the country is not taking action properly against the earlier said objectives) and UNSC 1267 resolution (for designating terrorists and outfits under radar) have taken. A recent illustration of this dalliance was also found when army and government officials attended the funeral prayers of terrorists after the initial strike in 9 centers in Pakistan and PoK (Pakistan occupied Kashmir) during Operation Sindoor. In a state where globally wanted terrorists are wandering, making speeches, and ensconced, what else can or should we expect? Remember, Bin Laden was found just kilometers away from Rawalpindi ISI Headquarters in Abbottabad (serious questions about 9/11 still exist; we shall look into that another day).

Now we shall look into Operation Sindoor. I see many posts often in X (formerly Twitter) of Israeli handlers and Indian RW identifying themselves as brothers to each other in the fight against terrorism. Yes, it is true both countries fight against terrorism and extremism, but not surely in the same terms. Operation Sindoor was carried out on May 7 midnight. It was measured retaliation against terror centers which included deceived mosques and madrasas without unwarranted collateral damage. No kids, journalists, and aid workers were killed, clearing the air in between. No lines ever can be drawn between Israel and the Indian Army. Pakistan officials have alleged the Indian attack has resulted in civilian casualties, but no corroborating facts had been presented (some news reports suggets - not verified ).

Soon after the attack in Pahalgam, we held the crucial Indus Water Treaty in abeyance. The Indus Water Treaty is a water-sharing agreement signed in 1960. According to the treaty, water from three western tributaries of Indus (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab ) are for Pakistan's usage. India can only build run-of-the-water projects (meaning without disrupting the natural flow) in those rivers. To sum up, almost 80% of the water from Indus is for Pakistan, which acts as a backbone for agriculture, allied sectors, and water supply in Punjab and Sindh provinces. IWT is not free from contentions; some of our projects were purported as against the rules by Pakistan. We were also demanding amendments in the treaty as the rainfall pattern changes, heat stress increasing , water crisis burgeons, and population surges, thanks to climate change. Pakistan has used the suspension as a token to spew hate against India, alleging the latter pushing formers civilians into tough waters ignoring the legitimate reasons.

Here are my final points for the "YES" in the beginning. Our actions were assertive and aggressive but not inconsistent. Soon after peace was found, we clarified that no talks will happen before eradicating cross-border terrorism. Means if talks has to happen on trade, IWT, Sir Creek (water boundary dispute near Gujarat), PoK, Kashmir, or anything for that matter - terrorism should not transcend. Also to note, the peace terms were a ceasefire, and officials including PM Modi have clarified that Operation Sindoor is ongoing.

You might have noticed the mass mobs and democratic regimes falling in our neighborhood lately. Leaving India, British too had such an opinion that Indian democracy won't flourish. Winston Churchill, former UK Prime Minister, claimed India is just geographical expression which cannot run independently. But India, after seven decades of independence, is now not playing by the rules of its neighborhood, has a robust functioning democratic system with regular elections and an active constitution hitherto. The robustness was revealed once again during Operation Sindoor. All political parties and leaders gave blanket support and solidarity to the government. In the aftermath of the operation, an all-party delegation was sent to different countries to explain the Pahalgam attack and Operation, in the aim of isolating Pakistan for not taking credible actions. Summing up, Pahalgam was aberrant; so was Operation Sindoor.

While clashing with friends on whether India should play against Pakistan in the Asia Cup or not, the key point they raised was - Nithal, you have to keep politics away from cricket, and my sudden reply was, when was an India-Pak match is an arm's length away from politics; the answer is simply nowhere in history. I'm also a sportsperson; I love to watch and play cricket, but unfortunately, cricket in this matter and politics are intertwined. But this time I'm against India playing Pakistan. Why? I have elaborated the answers. Months after a heart-wrenching attack was held, and the government acted wisely, leaving no stones unturned trying to isolate Pakistan for cross-border terrorism and state sponsoring, how can we play each other?. it is like derailing efforts. Some other recriminations were if India stayed away from the Asia Cup, what will happen to the tournament and other tournaments in future ? And if cricket has to stay away, every other sport has to - equality. Without prevarication, I replied that when you have power, you have to showcase that (I might sound a bit like a realist). If there is anything we proudly and doubtlessly say India is number 1, that is cricket; we have that leverage. Also there is an added advantage - tomorrow if soe asks why did India back off we can proudly say that we prioritised nation first. i firmly believe that global cricket cannot move forward without India today. Also to note, it is not unprecedented to boycott. We did it in 1986 owing to the strained relations with Sri Lanka then; Pakistan did for the same reason with us in 1990 and 1993. We could have availed other options - maybe postpone or boycott this year's edition. My answer for the second counter was pretty simple. Do you think in India every game is given equal priority? Leave India; for that matter, very few countries consider all games on equal footing. Badminton was removed from the Commonwealth Games 2026; how many of you have heard that news? Why did no one protest against that? Equality, my foot.

When Surya Kumar avoided shaking hands and receiving the trophy with their counterparts and Pakistan minister respectively, it was justified as individual liberty. He also dedicated the initial victory to the army and Pahalgam victims. For someone who needs a boycott, what is there to comment on handshakes? I ignore. For good or bad, the same Surya Kumar shaking hands within closed doors with the same guys he avoided in public gaze was surfaced on social media platforms. Maybe the skipper forgot public gaze is not confined; we are in digital India.

Before leaving, let me make it clear. The game is over; we won. As any Indian, I'm also happy, but the objective of Operation Sindoor was to place Pakistan into a tough spot, achieve our needs and ensure national security. Every measure from suspending IWT to the all-party delegation was aligned with that objective. Now the world will ask, "You guys halt water for civilians but play cricket", that question place me in a tough position. Playing cricket has impaired the mission, at least a modicum.