There were promising signs on Tuesday when US Secretary of State John Kerry reportedly asked Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to "prevent all terrorists" from using the country's territory as a safe haven.
During a meeting in New York, Kerry also reportedly raised concerns about the Uri attack and called for restraint in the development of Pakistan's nuclear weapons programme. But this has been America’s modus operandi for years—condemn acts of terror but do nothing to impose sanctions on Pakistan or sever ties.
In their initial response to the Uri attack, no major global power has directly blamed Pakistan. Without specifically mentioning Pakistan, only France called for “decisive action to be taken, in accordance with international law, against the terrorist groups targeting India, particularly the Lashkar-eTaiba, the Jaish-e-Mohammed, and the Hizb-ul-Mujahideen”.
All three terror outfits are known to be based in Pakistan. Although many global powers are aware of the India predicament, no one wants to be seen taking sides. Given this scenario, New Delhi will have to present a water-tight case to prove Pakistan’s involvement in the Uri attack.
Reports indicate that New Delhi has sought Washington’s help to decode data from GPS devices and satellite phones carried by the perpetrators of Sunday’s attack. But experts suggest that this may not be enough.
For the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, India had presented clear evidence of Pakistan's role. Despite the evidence available for the Pathankot attack, China vetoed India’s attempt to have JeM chief Masood Azhar listed as a terrorist by the UN Security Council’s 1267 committee.
Within South Asia, India can bank on the support of Afghanistan and Bangladesh. Both nations have also been suffered at the hands of Pakistan-sponsored terrorism. “If the Pakistani security establishment is to get the message that the benefits of peace outweigh hostilities, it should be made to bear most of the costs that India seeks to impose,” says Brahma Chellaney, a noted scholar.