Hit and miss

Accidental firing of a missile must be explained

The lack of transparency over the accidental firing of a missile by India that landed 124 km into Pakistani territory on March 9 begs many questions the government and defence establishment urgently need to answer. This is a bizarre development that raises the risks of escalation between two nuclear-powered countries that have not enjoyed the friendliest of relations in recent years. Within this context, it goes to the credit of both that a potential crisis was averted by cool-headed diplomatic responses from both sides, helped no doubt by the fact that there was, fortunately, no loss of life when the missile landed.

But now that the initial diplomatic crisis has been overcome, it is critical for the Indian government to do more to allay the suspicions of a neighbour that suffers chronic paranoia about India. It is worth noting that this incident has occurred just three years after the action over Balakot by the Indian Air Force and the subsequent air battle that ended in the capture, and subsequent release, of an Indian aviator in Pakistani territory. The “high-level” enquiry that the Ministry of Defence has ordered may well reveal how the error occurred and recommend appropriate action to prevent a repeat. But that exercise will take time. Although the government is right to reject the Pakistani demand for a joint probe, it is also important that the Indian and Pakistani public requires more immediate clarity on the incident, information that doesn’t need to wait for an investigative report.

So far, the Indian side’s three-paragraph statement admitted to a “technical malfunction” that led to the accidental firing of a missile. But the principal details of this misfiring missile have been provided by the Pakistani side. It claims an unarmed supersonic missile was fired from the Sirsa Air Force Base, which is 430-odd km from the border, and travelled in a south-westerly direction towards Rajasthan before abruptly changing course and heading north-west towards Pakistan before striking a wall outside an eastern city about 500 km from capital Islamabad. Approximately half the missile’s six-odd minute flying time was in Pakistani air space. The Indian government, however, has not revealed either the nature of the missile, nor the location from which it was fired, nor which of the services fired it. From the Pakistani description of the missile, the speculation centres on the BrahMos cruise surface-to-air missile, jointly developed by India and Russia and the centrepiece of India’s offensive capabilities. The defence ministry has refuted these claims, stating that all trials take place in the east or on the Andaman & Nicobar Islands.

The threadbare nature of the explanation from India is damaging because it leaves the country vulnerable to justified complaints from Pakistan that the explanations are “simplistic”. It also leaves scope for Pakistan, a client state of China, to shape the narrative on this incident without Indian inputs. This apart, India now participates in a significant grouping with the United States, Australia, and Japan in the form of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue and has conducted several joint exercises with these countries. Missile “malfunctions” and the lack of transparency around the incident are likely to raise concern among Quad partners. This is the last thing India needs, given the geopolitical shifts that are taking place as a consequence of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.