‘Non-military’ raid: How India and Pakistan differ ... India and Pakistan both struck targets in each other's territory but were quick to assert that they were "non-military" targetsworld of difference between the two claim

TNN | 28 February 2019 | NEW DELHI: In the last 48 hours, India and Pakistan both struck targets in each other's territory but were quick to assert that they were "non-military" targets. But there was a world of difference between the two claims.

India struck a Jaish-e-Mohammed terror camp in Balakot in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa early on Tuesday, on receiving intelligence that the group was planning a series of suicide attacks in India. In its statement, the Indian government said, "This non-military pre-emptive action was specifically targeted at the JeM camp."

The Pakistani foreign ministry's statement on Wednesday morning said that it had struck "non-military targets" across the LoC in J&K to demonstrate its "right, will and capability for self defence". It further said, "PAF undertook strikes across LoC from Pakistani airspace. Sole purpose of this action was to demonstrate our right, will and capability for self defence."

India's rationale for calling the Balakot camp a non-military one was to distinguish between an attack on the Pakistani state as opposed to a pre-emptive strike on a terror camp. In addition, as the Indian statement clarified, the "selection of the target was also conditioned by our desire to avoid civilian casualties. The facility is located in thick forest on a hilltop far away from any civilian presence".

Pakistan did not have a similar target, so anything they targeted would necessarily be a civilian or military target. Islamabad's reason for describing them as "non-military" was to avert any reason for an Indian retaliation.

India rejected Pakistan's contention and in its demarche to Islamabad, accused Pakistan of attacking Indian military targets. This indicates that India saw Pakistan's misadventure today as an act of war.