‘Ghuskemarenge’ is a warning to our neighbours. Hot pursuit is recognized in law

Context

Defence Minister Rajnath Singh's recent statement regarding India's right to conduct hot pursuit operations across borders has sparked controversy and raised questions about its legal and ethical implications in the context of international law.

Understanding Hot Pursuit:

• Legal Framework: Hot pursuit, a concept deeply entrenched in international law, allows states to pursue aggressors across borders in response to ongoing attacks or imminent threats, based on principles of self-defense and protection of national interests.
• Military Strategy: Hot pursuit serves as a critical tool in military operations, enabling the neutralization of threats and safeguarding of national security interests by pursuing aggressors into foreign territory.
• Ethical Considerations: While hot pursuit is legally justified under certain conditions, it raises ethical concerns regarding proportionality, respect for territorial sovereignty, and the potential impact on civilians caught in the crossfire.

Criteria for Hot Pursuit:

• Immediacy: Pursuit must be initiated promptly in response to an ongoing attack or imminent threat, rather than based on past events or speculative threats.
• Proportionality: The response must be proportionate to the threat posed, avoiding excessive use of force or collateral damage that may violate international humanitarian law.
• Territorial Sovereignty: Pursuing forces must respect the sovereignty of the territory entered, refraining from unnecessary interference with the territorial integrity of the state.
• Notification: Ideally, the pursuing force should notify relevant authorities in the territory being entered, seeking cooperation; however, in urgent situations, such notification may not always be feasible.
• Termination: Hot pursuit must cease once the immediate threat is neutralized or once the pursuing force reaches a point of safety, to avoid accusations of unlawful aggression or violations of international law.

India's Policy and Examples:

• Context of Statements: Defence Minister Rajnath Singh's assertion of India's right to conduct hot pursuit operations across borders must be understood within the framework of self-defense and protection of national security interests.
• Historical Precedents: India's past actions, such as surgical strikes in response to cross-border terrorism incidents, align with the concept of hot pursuit, aiming to neutralize threats and protect national interests while minimizing escalation.
• Importance of Proportionality: India's responses to cross-border incidents emphasize the importance of proportionality in military operations, ensuring that actions are justified, measured, and respectful of international norms and human rights.

Ethical and Legal Considerations:

• Balancing National Security and International Norms: India's pursuit of hot pursuit operations must balance the imperative of national security with adherence to international legal and ethical standards, avoiding actions that may escalate conflicts or violate sovereignty.
• Transparency and Accountability: The government must ensure transparency and accountability in the planning and conduct of hot pursuit operations, adhering to legal frameworks and respecting human rights.
• Diplomatic Implications: India's assertion of its right to conduct hot pursuit operations may have diplomatic repercussions, necessitating careful consideration of international perceptions and engagement with neighboring countries to prevent escalation and promote regional stability.