Truth behind Balakot

The commentary around the February 26 Balakot airstrikes continues to grow, stretch and confound. In the latest and somewhat bizarre spin, Pakistan has denied access — for the third time in nine days — to the international media to inspect the attack site, citing ‘security concerns’. Here was a golden opportunity, within easy grasp, to lay bare the truth by picking holes in India’s claims, and yet, Pakistan felt encumbered to hold itself back. If it has nothing to hide, and everything to show to put India down, why the reservations? Is it the fear of the truth tumbling out, or the embarrassment of its deception being found out?

Ever since the day of the airstrikes, there has been a heavy air of scepticism: suspicion over the toll, the damage, even whether the strikes were not really the wispy imagination of a machismo government. The nation should have spoken as one, but there was a scramble for facts. The Air Chief felt compelled to make a statement that the strikes were, indeed, executed and the targets hit. As for the ‘dead count’, it was not their business, he clarified firmly. The foreign media did its bit to fan the speculation with its observations that there was evidence in the form of satellite images, confirming the JeM facility was intact and ‘there are no discernible holes in the roofs of buildings, no signs of scorching, blown-out walls, displaced trees around the madrasa or other signs of an aerial attack’. Its credibility in question, the IAF provided the government radar imagery, showing that the targets were hit, causing ‘significant internal damage’.

In the new light, it would not be wrong to impute that the Western media moved too fast and is guilty of prejudiced reporting since reporters did not see the site for themselves — the first rule of objectivity. They ignored the fact that the munitions used in the attack do not destroy buildings, but cause damage once they enter them. The veracity of their reports is dubious. The foreign media now admits the ‘assessment is very limited’. It may have just bitten into an unpalatable humble pie.