Editorial

Pakistan-India relations: Going nowhere?

In India and Pakistan, people are convinced of their separate morally correct assumptions to support any real change.

Editorial June 23, 2011

Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao arrived in Islamabad on June 23 for two days of talks with her Pakistani counterpart, Salman Bashir, and if you thought there was any chance of things moving forward this time, Indian Foreign Minister SM Krishna whispered from across the border: Don’t expect much. He didn’t have to say it: Pakistan is going through another spasm of instability at home because of al Qaeda and the US even as the two mainstream parties — PPP and PML-N — seen as stakeholders in normalising relations with India are at each other’s throat. They both tried to garrotte each other in Kashmir where pledges were made that are totally incompatible with the normalisation of Pakistan-India relations.

India has the Mumbai terror attack card to play because the public opinion in India is stuck on it and there is more jingoism in the media there than Prime Minister Manmohan Singh can handle, despite his helpful peace-seeking remarks. The heat is off Kashmir as far as Pakistan is concerned, even though India is hardly handling the trouble in the Valley any better. The Indian policy of bothering Pakistan in Afghanistan instead is working and Pakistan is taking the bait to further damage its standing at the global level. Being a revisionist state, Pakistan suffers vis-à-vis India if India does nothing. Pakistan says India is creating trouble in Balochistan but can’t procure any proof of this. Some Pakistani officials lump India together with the US and Israel and are blaming the ensemble for attacking the PNS Mehran base in Karachi.

India hides its policy of doing nothing on peace talks by harping on about the 2008 Mumbai attack by Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and asking Pakistan to cough up or punish the culprits. Pakistan is famously dragging its feet on the LeT trial in an anti-terrorism court and no longer even pretends that the world is not laughing over its prevarication. Instead, more scandals are surfacing about the Mumbai attack from a trial that has unfolded in the US against those who planned the attack together with LeT. Meanwhile, officers in the Pakistan Army are being apprehended, confirming the global fear that an increasingly unstable Pakistan is being undermined by its ‘rogue’ elements.

Pakistan’s relations with India are bedevilled by other factors too. Pakistan is alone in the region because last time it was dominant in Afghanistan it made the regional states suffer. Now everyone wants it to clean up its jihadi organisations lined up behind al Qaeda; and India is hiding behind this universal demand. Instead of asking the world to help it hunt down and eliminate these terrorist militias, Pakistan is trying to switch its enemies: The US is taking the place of al Qaeda, an organisation which is bad in the eyes of only 11 per cent of Pakistanis according to a recent poll. The media have projected to the hilt this new ‘strategic adjustment’ which favours India by isolating Pakistan.

Yet the Pakistan-India dialogue has been restarted under pressure from American and European diplomacy. Why is the West pursuing Pakistan-India peace? Because getting out of Afghanistan will be more realistic and peaceful if India and Pakistan stopped their confrontation in the region. The realisation that the Afghan crisis is nothing but another manifestation of the Pakistan-India proxy conflict is not new. The problem is that Pakistan is unwilling to abandon its old threat perceptions; and India is too willing to benefit from the fallout of the Mumbai attack and the rapidly deteriorating political and economic situation in Pakistan. The current pantomime is of no use. In India and Pakistan, people are too convinced of their separate morally correct assumptions to support any real change. What is to be done?

The ball is in Pakistan’s court because it can’t live with the current status quo, while India can. Economists on both sides thinks that the two should stop trying to resolve their disputes and take up the project of free trade and an integrated South Asian market allowing cross-border investments and communication arteries. This can be done without giving up Pakistan’s claim on Kashmir. Conditions of peace and cross-border movement will rescue Pakistan from its famine-threatening economic paralysis and encourage a grateful international community to give a helping hand.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 24^th, 2011.

COMMENTS (21)

Malay | 13 years ago | Reply Pakistan can never be at peace with India. If it does then there is no Pakistan, because Pakistan was born as an anti thesis of India.

harkol | 13 years ago | Reply Article says: >The realisation that the Afghan crisis is nothing but another manifestation of the Pakistan-India proxy conflict is not new. Actually, Afghan Crisis has nothing to do with India. India didn't ask USSR to invade or for USA/Pakistan to conduct a Jihad by injecting the cancer of terrorism into Pakistan society itself! India doesn't hope to control Afghanistan the way Pakistan wishes to. India doesn't need 'stategic depth'. Having said that, i concur with this editorial. It more or less accurately sums up the zero-sum game being played. Pakistan can't get Kashmir by any methods in its control, so it is best for it to change its policy. By an antagonistic policy with India Pakistan will only harm itself. Kashmir is best left to people of Kashmir, who will in their wisdom decide their future course of action - Continued rebellion leading to separation at some point (slim chance of that) or reconciliation with India. Improving relationship with India can have a better benefit for Pakistan. Both in terms of economy, stability and more importantly that'll open the door to building of trust and a long term possibility of India agreeing to a mutually agreeable arrangement in Kashmir.

VIEW MORE COMMENTS

deep | 13 years ago | Reply There is so much bias in this editorial. why is it difficult to understand that India could have a relationship with Afghanistan that is not pakistan-specific. It is anti-extremist specific - that is all - are you equating pakistan with extremism and the taliban when you say that India's presence in afghanistan is harming Pakistan? why is mumbai looked on in isolation? Atleast journalists who have some historical perspective should understand where India comes from. Mumbai was the icing on the cake of terrorism that was perpetrated from Pakistani soil - camps in AJK, infiltration in Kashmir, the series of bomb attacks in mumbai and other cities, the attack on the Indian consultates in Kabul, the attack on the indian parliament, kandahar and finally Mumbai. If not any other country barring Afghanistan, India has every right to harp (in your words) about terrorism emanating from Pakistan.

Khan | 13 years ago | Reply This Pakistan India problem is just like our family problem ... My paternal uncles got all our property even though they were already rich and though we won the case in courts but couldn't take it back from them ... they were brave enough to come to our house and invite us to their weddings expecting us to forget what they did and the funny part was that my maternal uncles also were asking us to stop boycotting them as what is done can not be changed and always kept good relations with them. We had smaller family so all got our education while most of their children are illiterate businessmen but yet they are jealous of us. I guess we better let India do its atrocities (80,000 and counting) and let Kashmiris deal with it and instead focus on our internal problems like population control, education and economy.

Tony Singh | 13 years ago | Reply Where should they go, considering 57% Pakistanis consider Indians as their "Enemy No. 1"?

Feroz | 13 years ago | Reply It is time for people to be honest. The only thing that agitates Indians is the terrorism exported from Pakistani soil. As long as terrorist sanctuaries exist and the State protects those Assets, talks will not yield any satisfactory results in favour of either India or Pakistan. The credibility of the Pakistani State and failure of its Foreign policies is a result of the gulf between words and deeds. Pakistan is still in the process of deciding who should frame its policies, the Military establishment or Parliament. This adds to the uncertainty. India has no incentive to productively engage Pakistan as long as its basic demand is not addressed. They are more interested in building their Economic might as it will help them play a positive role in shaping the World. The concept of strength flowing from the barrel of a Gun is outdated, otherwise North Korea would have been a Super Power. In today's Technological World only countries that invest in their human resources will outpace the others. Rather than indulge in meaningless talks Pakistan must launch a massive program of internal clean up that will salvage its reputation and free the people from carrying the yoke of multiple militant groups hell bent on destroying it and making it a pariah state.

Frank | 13 years ago | Reply

The ball is in Pakistan’s court because it can’t live with the current status quo, while India can. Economists on both sides thinks that the two should stop trying to resolve their disputes and take up the project of free trade and an integrated South Asian market allowing cross-border investments and communication arteries.

I am pretty sure some American, rather than a Pakistani, wrote this editorial. All of Pakistan's current problems are either internal (corruption, bad governance etc) or due to the American occupation of Afghanistan. They are absolutely nothing to do with Pakistan's opposition to the Indian occupation of Kashmir. And can you show to us how, rather than simply state, how a South Asian market will benefit Pakistan? And if it is really so beneficial can you explain what is stopping Nepal, Sri Lanka or Bangladesh from enjoying the fruits of such an arrangement?

Sukhjinder | 13 years ago | Reply pakistan cannot give claim for kashmir easily, it will get a very long time for them to accept the reality. but in any case trade should not be a problem for pakistan.

Pankaj | 13 years ago | Reply If Pakistan wants peace and friendship with India then Pakistan will have to CHANGE its attitude India Does NOT need Pakistan for its rapid economic growth of 8.5 % India can easily continue holding Kashmir AND also buy 200 Billion dollars of Arms in next 10 years Because Indian Economy is 1.5 TRILLION Dollars in size It is Pakistan which will have to give up its Kashmir OBSESSION which is the root cause of all its troubles

ashwin | 13 years ago | Reply Terror is used by Pakistan as Policy, hence Mumbai not the other way round.How would you like someone putting a gun to your head and negotiating for peace. Well it maybe for Pakistan loosing it's citizens to terror is common, it is not so for civilized countries like India.stop killing Indians please and please help us convict hose responsible for Mumbai, we Indians will have nothing to harp or hide behind as you put it.Dude Pakistan has failed in it's terror policy in fact has fallen victim to it's monster.Now clean up your house then try to manage your policy towards other nations in a legal framework.

Simon | 13 years ago | Reply Pakistan can keep on trying to square the circle for eons and the result will be same, remember Einstein's definition of insanity 'trying to do same thing over and over again and expecting different result'. Well, goodluck for your future!

Sameer | 13 years ago | Reply The best thing is for the Pakistani people to outsource their government and military to some private Indian outsourcing firm which will do a better job of running Pakistan than any government (in fact the Indian government and military should be outsourced too).

Babloo | 13 years ago | Reply Establishment Ideology 101 : If Pakistan wins 1 million dollars and India wins 2 million : Not good for Pakistan. If Pakistan wins 1 million dollars and India wins 1 millon : Not Good for Pakistan If Pakistan wins 1 million dollars and India wins 1 dollar : Not Good for Pakistan. Moral : Anything that benefits India, irrespective of how much good it does to Pakistan, is bad for Pakistan. Hurting India is the sole rational , everything else is irrelevent.

Shock Horror | 13 years ago | Reply @M Iqbal: It will not be the first time that Pakistan has retreated. It did so in 1971 when the country was split into two and 90000 members of West Pakistan forces surrendered, leading to the creation of Bangladesh. It did so again after the Kargil fiasco. After the Abbotabad incident retreating again may make it normal practice to retreat once every generation!.

Mir Agha | 13 years ago | Reply Pakistan's problems are internal no matter how much some insist it has to do with its foreign policy. The lack of a stable economy, corruption at every level, bad governance are the issues. If anything the current internal turmoil is because of Pakistan going along with what the 'international community' (name US, NATO, and others who support Afghanistan's occupation). Amateur analysis from ET. Shirking strategic responsibilities is not the way to go about it. Talks aren't going to go anywhere because the two countries' and their positions regarding core issues are diametrically opposed. Pakistan isn't and shouldn't act on the harpings of the media regarding mumbai. Fact of the matter is that the evidence is lacking. Water can and has to be taken care, there is a past agreement to draw from. Burgeoning populations in both countries will exasperate the issue even further. The solution lies within the respective countries for that. Working wholeheartedly to decrease the population growth and solutions with better water management. Kashmir is continue going to be an issue because the Kashmiris themselves want a political solution which recognizes their inalienable right to self-determination. What the two countries can do is to continue measures for better contact between Azad Kashmir and indian occupied Kashmir. Of course this won't be a solution for Kashmiris, but its a start. Prisoners should be released after their often lengthy sentences are served. They're a burden on both countries to keep in prisons. Better maritime security is the way to go, not taking in hordes of desperate folk looking to eek out a life.

Chandler | 13 years ago | Reply Pakistan's ideology can never let go of Kashmir. And India is not going to cede an inch of the Kashmir it has. So the status quo will remain for the forsee-able future. But the key point is that maintaning status quo will bankrupt Pakistan, whereas for India it is only a pinprick, like an ant biting an elephant.

humza | 13 years ago | Reply @M Iqbal: You are recommending retreat from Afghanistan border to look after internal front why not India easing up her borders for Pakistani forces to look after terrorism at home. If India is sincere in fight against terrorism or GWOT

humza | 13 years ago | Reply Certain incidents which determine perceptions :- a. Starting from plane hijack and killings outside indian national assembly, Indian media and politicians never waited for the findings of inquiry and straight away blamed Pakistan b. Just after Mumbai attack, complete indian media and politicians started giving their perception (without waiting for the outcome of inquiry) about Pakistan's envolvemnt. Also forgot about the insurgencies in her states and their possible envolvement c. 80% of the indian army including all stike corps are already poised towards Pakistan. Defence budget is increasing day by day along with emerging strategies llike cold start and proactive operations d. Perception about Pakistan's envolement in Kashmir and mixing up freedom fight with terrorism. On the other hand, Pakistan is maintaining army for response. She has never blamed India except in case of Balochistan where Bugtis and Balochis themselves admit that they get aid from Indians. The blame game is unending but to start with there should be a reduction of forces on each others' borders then settlement of Siachin issue followed by a solution to Kashmir. That would develop confidence and ease forces to take on the menace of terrorism at home. Then India and Pakistan will not fight for their influence in Afghanistan rather would be facilitating the government to stabilize for better peace and mutually benefitting trade.

AD | 13 years ago | Reply First focus on trade and other areas is also advocated by India. However, Pakistan top policitian are like broken record - Kashmire is lifeline of pakistan etc etc. Face the fact - Pakistan is not going to get the kashmir like it wanted. However as the article pointed out, it can make its people and Kashmir people's conditions better by taking small steps such as increasing people to people connections, local trade, maybe even joint water management project (indian PM has offered before), even get cheap electricity (no other country is in shape due to distance and clout to help pakistan elevate some of the power problems). The way it seems - pakistan has loaded all its egg in one basket and even the scope of discussion on kashmir is not clear. Are we talking about Kashmir, or we are asking Kashmir - what is it? The foreign secretary meetings will serve no purpose than showing Pak Army that we can get tough with India.

M Iqbal | 13 years ago | Reply Excellent analysis. The best thing for the Pakistan Army to do at present is to retreat from its current position on Afghanistan and deal with the internal issues. Its strategy of supporting Taliban to get an edge in Afghanistan is not only weakening Pakistan but also harming its prospects in Afghanistan. Moreover, the hot-headed Pakistan generals are playing right into the hands of the Indians. Indians do not have much at stake in Afghanistan, but whatever little provocations India offers in Afghanistan will be enough to keep Pakistan engaged and drain it of all energy. It is a simple strategy that suits India. For Pakistan the smart thing to do is to get the priorities straight: curbing extremism in Pakistan and getting the economy right. Should not take more than 10 years, but by the end of that time the country will be in a better position to deal with threats whether from India or elsewhere. And if retreating is a big deal, remember armies do retreat at times to gain a strategic advantage.

Cautious | 13 years ago | Reply The ball is in Pakistan’s court because it can’t live with the current status quo, while India can. That says it all - unfortunately xenophobia triumphs logic everyday.

Replying to X