The 5th Indian National Security Advisor, Ajit Doval, is alleged is be the chief architect of Indian state-sponsored terrorism in Pakistan, particularly in its north-western belt, as well as across the continents. The evidence does not only comes from the secondary sources, but also Doval himself has admitted the involvement of India in Balochistan via its proxy networks alongside the direct involvement of RAW agents. For instance, during a speech at SASTRA University, he said, “Do one more Mumbai, You may loose Balochistan”. Multiple times, he has publically claimed that he had been spying in Pakistan for more than 7 years.
Since he took charge as NSA in 2014, he engineered “Offensive Defensive Doctrine”. Purely, it was directed against Pakistan. From the Indian perspective, it was designed to curb the rising incidents of terrorism in India. But, it was a covert attempt to bandwagon against the dominant international theme: terrorism.
Following this doctrine, the Indian army made several changes in its posture. For reference, for the first time, following the so called Uri attack in 2016, India carried out surgical strikes in Azad Jammu & Kashmir. This was a novel incident given that a third-world country violated the article 2(4) of the UN Charter and denied the probability of Pakistan’s self-defense under article 51.
Also, India tried to establish a neo-normal: attack on a territory of a sovereign state in retaliation to the terrorist attacks that is not proportionate and violates international legal norms. When asked about evidences, every time India projected jingoistic, emotional behavior. Neither it accepted Pakistan’s offer for an independent inquiry by a neutral forum nor did it justify the rationale of the incidents despite the heavy military presence in the area where the alleged attack was committed.
The similar attitude has been followed after the Pulwama and Pahalgam attacks. Experts also suspect these incidents to be false-flag operations. On the one hand, it showcase how it is weaponizing non-state actors to pursue its hegemonic designs, and on the other hand, it is trying to curb the development of CPEC. Domestically, the threat of Muslims being terrorists and existential threat to Hindus is being sold to gain political leverage.
Beyond this, there are multifold impacts of Doval Doctrine. The projection of Pakistan as an unsafe country has resulted in decreasing the foreign direct investment, international trust on the institutions of Pakistan, and eroding the operationalization of regional connectivity projects, with Pakistan as a central state. The impact of this state-sponsored terrorism is not restricted to Pakistan. Instead, it goes beyond South Asia. For instance, the former Canadian PM Justin Trudeau publically accused India on September 16, 2023 over the murder of Nijjar Singh in Canada.
A year later, RCMP Commissioner Mike Duheme blamed Indian diplomats of being involved in terror related activities. He warned India about dozens of credible evidences. Canada even expelled 6 diplomats over the misuse of their authority (using persona non- granta). Moreover, US DOJ indication charged New Delhi of plotting the murder of Sikh-separatist leader Gurpatwang Singh Punnam in November 2023. The similar indications were also referred by the former U.S security advisor, Canadian foreign minister, and The group of Five Eyes.
It shows how Doval-driven policy has become a permanent tool of India’s foreign policy: weaponizing and sponsoring non-state actors on the one hand (following Sun Tzu’s spy philosophy) and playing a victim card to depict assertion (Chanakya’s Dand theory).
Time and again, Pakistan has provided documented proofs of Indian sponsored terrorism in Pakistan. For instance, in November 2015, it submitted three dossiers to the United Nations’ Secretary General, highlighting Raw’s involvement in Balochistan, FATA, and Karachi. The then Pakistan’s representative to the UN, Maleeha Lodhi well-presented the case and drawn the global attention towards Indian hypocrisy. Also, in January 2017, Pakistan presented an updated dossier to Antonio Guterres, where India’s submarine incursion, Kulbhushan Yadhav’s conviction, and Raw’s organized terror network in Balochistan were exposed.
Importantly, the most comprehensive dossier was presented in front of media in 2020 by the then foreign minister and DG ISPR. It revealed undeniable facts about India’s involvement in Balochistan. For instance, Pakistan showed two interlinked transitions to TTP militants, with one directly in the Punjab National Bank’s account (of worth $28,000) and the other through the account of Afghani national named “Manmeet” (of worth $55,851). Another letter highlighted the transition of $8,20,000 to the banned groups.
The evidences of indirect funds to TTP ($ 126 million), and to MQM fractions ($3.23 million) by Raw’s “anti-CPEC cell” was also showcased. In terms of operations, ISI intercepted a terrorist group consisting of 700 members dedicated to sabotage CPEC. Ajmal Pahari, the arrested militant, also acknowledged the presence of terror hideouts and training camps (88 in total) in India (Haryana, Dehradun) and Afghanistan.
Moreover, the former DG ISPR Babar Iftikhar referred to CTD’s interception of audio-taps from the Indian Major Rawindar Rathore and Inspector Singh directing the Pakistani militants. The similar dossier was then presented before OIC, UN, international community, and other relevant organizations where India failed to counter the documented proofs by Pakistan. Recently, after the Pahalgam drama, DG ISPR also provided data to international media addressing the similar issue.
In conclusion, one must say that there are various documented proofs provided by Pakistan and the other victim states to the UN that showcase that the Indian government is involved in the trans-border terrorism. Its doctrine is directed and architected by Ajit Doval that serves dual purpose: India plays victim card on the one hand, and assets its offensive-cum-defensive posture on the other hand. Not to mention its bandwagoning attitude that directs its foreign policy: institutionalizing the already dominated theme at the global level in order to gain international sympathy.
