In the aftermath of the abrogation of Article 370, it has become evident that the narrative peddled by a certain section of liberals is extremely conducive to Pakistani interests. Furthermore, it was revealed earlier today by none other than Abdul Basit, former Pakistani High Commissioner to India, that he had managed to influence Shobhaa De into furthering the Pakistani agenda in an article and advocating for plebiscite in Kashmir.

In an earlier article, we had demonstrated how certain sections of the political fraternity and media community appear to be working in tandem with Pakistan and undermining Indian national interests. Now, people have started questioning and have been indulging in speculations regarding why Abdul Basit chose that particular moment to give up someone who had collaborated with him.

The speculations above assume that Pakistan is a rational actor. There’s a significant reason to doubt that particular assumption, however, we have to concede that Pakistan does operate along rational lines at least at an extremely basic sense as far as spreading propaganda against India is concerned. Therefore, we have to ask ourselves the question here, why did Basit give up one of his contacts?

In a game of chess, there are only two reasons why one sacrifices one of his own pieces. Firstly, the piece might have become a liability. Or, the individual stands to gain more by sacrificing it. In this particular instance, the former appears unlikely although one has to admit there might be internal conflicts we may not be aware of. The latter, however, is an extremely likely possibility.

It is perhaps an unsaid threat to others who have collaborated with them in the past. Pakistan is isolated globally today and even the Muslim world appears to have abandoned them. Under such circumstances, some Indians who have collaborated with them in the past might have gotten the idea that they could pursue a hard bargain with Pakistan in exchange for their services. They were under the impression that they could take advantage of a desperate Pakistani establishment.

If that is indeed the case, the move by Pakistani is simultaneously reckless and effective. One hand, they have driven home the message that collaborators should not take them for granted and there were definitive ways in which they could still hurt their credentials. On the other hand, they have probably alienated some who were open to the idea of working with them for benefits.

All things considered, it does appear to be the move of a mafia that has its back against the wall and is desperate to retain the few allies that it already has. We have to entertain the possibility that there are numerous other significant people in Khan Market, with considerably more influence, who have collaborated with Pakistan in the past. Pulling the rug on Shobhaa De, who no longer wields any influence, was Pakistan’s way of sending a message to the rest. Thus, Pakistan appears to have made strategic gains by sacrificing one of its pieces.

For Indian authorities, it means that there are certainly big players in Khan Market who have been covertly undermining Indian national interests at Pakistan’s behest. Indian intelligence agencies, and the Home Ministry, certainly have their own ideas on the identity of these individuals.

Another aspect of things that the Indian government ought to consider is the possibility of Indian politicians collaborating with Pakistanis. On the basis of certain statements that have been made, it appears that some politicians consider power to be more important than national interests. More so than media personalities, politicians stand to gain significantly by collaborating with foreign interests. Therefore, it’s even more important that these individuals are identified.

Nevertheless, Abdul Basit’s statement is reason enough for the Indian government to initiate high-level investigations into Pakistani collaborators in India. It is important that Pakistanis moles are identified and prevented access to any significant authority within the government. Since 2014, the Indian government appears to have been fairly successful in doing that.

Politicians with a troubling affinity toward Pakistan have been exposed and their political parties have suffered the consequences in elections. Likewise, the media personalities no longer carry the same weight as they did prior to 2014. However, it might time to initiate legal proceedings against such individuals for undermining national interests and collaborating with a sworn enemy of the Indian state.