All of them also hold Fernandes vicariously responsible for the laxity and complacency in the army that allowed Pakistan to penetrate up to eight kilometres into India along a 120 km front and build concrete bunkers capable of withstanding even aerial bombing on 16,000 foot ridge lines, without anyone having clue. This alone is reason enough for any self-respecting defence minister to offer his resignation, or be sacked. But there is an even more serious reason: throughout his defence ministership, Fernandes has acted in a manner that was either unbelievably inept and stupid or, if we concede that he is not a stupid man, was calculated to harm India's national interest.
This dark suspicion arises because as defence minister Fernandes ought to know that the isi, for all its autonomy, is a part of the Pakistan armed forces. He ought to know that ever since the beginning of the Afghan war, it is the isi and not the Pakistani army that has been handling the Afghan Mujahideen. He ought to know that the terrorists of the Harkat-ul-Ansar, Lashkar-e-Toiba, and the remnants of the Hizbul Mujahideen, who have been making their way into the valley in the past six years, have isi controllers. He should thus have known that his statement contradicted the Indian Army's repeated assertion that ridge lines have been occupied by Afghan and other mercenaries backed by the Pakistan army. For how would the Pakistan army find Afghan and other recruits if not through the isi? Fernandes' statement therefore blew into smithereens India's claim that this was an invasion mounted by Pakistan, and went a long way towards vindicating Pakistan's assertion that these were Kashmiri freedom fighters about whom it knew nothing at all.
Ironically, India was saved by western intelligence agencies who, at almost the same moment, were briefing newsmen in London that Pakistan had pushed between 400 and 600 Islamic fighters into Indian Kashmir. According to a report in The Independent of May 29, it was supporting them from 42 base camps established on its side of the LoC. The same agencies also made it known to the Sunday Telegraph that Pakistan was behind "a loose network of international terrorists" consisting of "Afghan, Kashmiri, Pakistani and British Muslim guerrillas" who had been trained to fight at high altitudes in remote valleys near Skardu, by instructors who were probably in the pay of the isi.These agencies also pointed out that most of the fighters belonged to a terrorist organisation called Al Badr, which was linked to Osama bin Laden.
But the reasons why Fernandes must go do not end here. This is not the first but the third time in just 14 months that he has done brutal damage through his statements (or the lack of them) to the county's vital interests. The first was his celebrated remark that China and not Pakistan was India's main adversary. As China's foreign minister took pains to tell Jaswant Singh in Manila last July, that one remark made Sino-Indian relations take a nosedive at the worst possible time for India.
The second time was between May 12 and May 26, when Fernandes chose not to warn the world about Pakistan's invasion of Kargil. On his own admission, by May 12 Fernandes knew that the intruders were dug in along 120 km of ridge line overlooking the Srinagar-Leh highway, and had already wiped out two army patrols. He knew that they had come in with the intention of staying, and so constituted an invasion of India. Why did he then choose this of all moments to remain silent?
He knew that the government was trying to decide on using the iaf. He knew that this would be the first time in 28 years that it would be used in an Indo-Pak conflict, and that if the airstrikes came as a bolt from the blue, the world community would regard them as a dangerous escalation of the conflict, especially when both countries have nuclear weapons. He also knew that other than the prime minister he was the person whose statements would be taken most seriously all over the world. When by speaking out of turn he could, for once, have done India some good, why did he choose to remain silent? Why did he also play down the significance of the incursion by allowing the army chief, General V.P. Malik, to go to Poland after the presence of intruders inside the LoC had already been established?
The effect of the government's silence, as we now know, was to make the world accuse India of having escalated the conflict. The Economist, in words that it should now be eating, went so far as to call it an escalation that amounted to aggression! One mistake can be forgiven. An exceptionally forgiving prime minister could attribute two mistakes to sheer bad luck. But what does one make of three 'mistakes' all of which point in the same direction? Whatever the explanation may be, India cannot afford to take chances with its defence ministers. Not only must this one go, but the entire file on his past associations must be opened and subjected to intense scrutiny.
