Image credit: Twitter
An article published on The New York Times website on March 11, 2019 has the following paragraphs:
“From the outside, Mr. Modi was widely criticized as being willing to risk war for even the chance at a political boost. And when an Indian pilot was captured in Pakistani territory — and was then quickly returned in a good-optics moment for Pakistan — some international analysts thought Mr. Modi’s military adventurism had backfired.
“But that’s not how it has played out within India.
“Political analysts say that Indians are rallying behind Mr. Modi again, and that he seems to be making crucial gains among independent and undecided voters.
“The fact that India’s airstrikes probably missed their targets, and that a fighter jet was shot down by Pakistan, doesn’t seem to matter to most Indians. Their country was hit, and Mr. Modi hit back.”
The article was earlier titled, ‘In India’s Election Season, an Explosion Interrupts Modi’s Slump’. But after an outrage on social media for calling the terror attack as explosion, the word ‘Explosion’ was replaced with ‘Bombing’.
This is how the writers, Jeffrey Gettleman, Vindu Goel and Maria Abi-Habib, interpret the February 14 terror attacks on CRPF jawans in Pulwama and the 26 airstrikes by the Indian Air Force on Jaish-e-Mohammad terror camps in Balakot, Pakistan. Wondering what is their agenda?
- They want us, the Indian voters, to believe that the world viewed the airstrikes as a military adventurism by Narendra Modi to win the election. But we, the Indian voters, have seen how powerful nations stood behind India after the Pulwama attack, and how not even one country condemned the airstrike.
- They want us, the Indian voters, to believe that the airstrikes may have not killed any terrorists. But we, the Indian voters, have seen the most credible proofs that the airstrikes caused an immense collateral damage to the terror camps, prompting Pakistan’s Air Force to attack military installations in India and Masood Azhar’s brother to call for a jihad on India.
- They want us, the Indian voters, to believe that Pakistan won the battle of perception by handing over Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman. But we, the Indian voters, have seen the doctored video with 20 cuts.
- They are silent on the F16 fighter jet shot down by Wing Commander Abhinandan himself. They are silent on the two pilots who ejected from the crashed F16.
- They are silent on the application moved by the US, the UK and France in the UNSC to designate Masood Azhar as a global terrorist.
- This paragraph should make their intention clear – “Congress’s leader, Rahul Gandhi, is determined to swing the election discussion back to domestic issues.”
Perhaps, The New York Times and these writers think we, the Indian voters, believe whatever appears in the Western media. Of course, we have some politicians and a segment of intelligentsia, who keep peddling their narratives. And they did that the whole week after the airstrikes.
But folks, on Pulwama and Balakot, your narratives have passed by the expiry date.