Pakistan experts in India's media can be divided into two broad groups. The first are those who are seen by the other side as 'soft'. They advocate constant dialogue with Pakistan's government under all conditions. They think the military-politician rift in Pakistan is real and this rift affects India. It is in India's interest, according to them, to ensure that Pakistan's politicians are on the side of peace and progress. This means remaining engaged with them even when there is an irritant, such as the Pakistan high commissioner's talks with Kashmiri individuals and groups. This means remaining engaged when there is a genuine outrage, like the attacks by Lashkar-e-Taiba in Mumbai.
The second group is seen by the other side as 'hard'. It consists of those who think of Pakistan's polity as monolithic. Their belief is that the Pakistan Army will always dominate opinion and policy towards India. In this framework, the Pakistani politician is either complicit or irrelevant, and the assumption is that Pakistan will be permanently hostile towards India. Since this is the case, we should ignore Pakistan when we can, teach it a lesson when possible and avoid engagement at all times because there is no real benefit.
In the last two decades, the second group has dominated the thinking of India's establishment, and with a couple of exceptions (most notably in the terms of the Punjabis I K Gujral and Manmohan Singh), India has not had leaders who thought in 'soft' terms. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has been hard in its approach, though this has not produced positive results. In fact, it can be said that the BJP policies have worked against Indian interests in some ways.
Atal Bihari Vajpayee is thought to have been soft towards Pakistan till he was betrayed at Kargil. But the fact is that India weaponised its nuclear programme under Vajpayee, because his thinking was from the 'hard' school. It must be admitted that the second series of Pokhran explosions under Vajpayee has brought no real dividend to India. In fact, the opposite. It forced Pakistan to weaponise immediately and cost India the advantage it had in conventional terms. Under this nuclear umbrella, militant mischief continued till it was ended by former Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf. The data supports this. Fatalities in Kashmir fell from 4,507 in 2001 to 117 in 2012 of whom 84 were militants. The total numbers of those killed last year was 181 and this year 147. These are the lowest fatality numbers since 1990. This means that militant violence in Kashmir is all but over. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has said strong words condemning those who allow terrorism, but the fact is that Pakistan-backed violence against India has more or less ended. Unless we assume that all Kashmiri violence originates from Pakistan, we must accept that such levels will remain till we resolve the matter politically.
Modi, who is the leader of the 'hard' school of thought, broke off talks with Pakistan without thinking his steps through, in my opinion. He said tough things about Pakistan but this week he was embarrassedly forced to shake hands with an enemy, Nawaz Sharif, despite his decision on breaking off talks. But why was he forced? Because this was inevitable, as some had predicted, since Modi's policy was neither here nor there. It was merely posturing. Acting tough and inflexible when this was not affordable and was impractical. What benefit has this sulking brought us Indians?
Nobody in the BJP and none of its 'hard' supporters in the media can explain this. Defence Minister Arun Jaitley claimed he taught Pakistan a lesson through killing more of its civilians in border shelling than they killed ours. Assuming this was a lesson, and many Indians will disagree with this, can he guarantee that the shelling has ended forever? If he cannot, what was the point in not talking to Pakistan instead of working towards cooling things when they become heated?
The hard school of thinking has nothing substantial to offer and this has become clear over the last 20 years. The facts show this. India is not strong enough to muscle its way over Pakistan because the BJP has made the sub-continent a nuclear battleground. India refuses to have international mediation on Kashmir, and, at least at the moment, India will not talk to Pakistan. This situation will change and it is going to have to be India and the hard group that will have to bend.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 30th, 2014.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (26)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Pakistan will never use nuclear weapons against India since that will spell the end of its existence
Unfortunately if Pakistan were to be pushed into a corner in a conventional war,and that will end its existence anyway,it will have no choice but to use nuclear weapons.And it will do it massively and drop all of its bombs before India could come and destroy its nuclear arsenal.And off course,India will launch its in full force.Pakistan will lose its existence,and India won't have much of an existence. So bravado from both sides should stop,and they should work towards Peace.There is no other way.
@Bewildered "The biggest possible posturing, conventional and non-conventional, India could ever do has already been done in 2002, which turned out to be the biggest eunuch show ever staged in the history of mankind resulting in insurmountable embarrassment to India."
As a result of that, India forced Pakistan to sign the LOC ceasefire treaty of 2003. It also forced Musharraf to write a written statement that Pakistan wold not allow its land to be used against India. Additionally, it gave India to create the space to build the fence which has in turn has siginficantly reduced infiltration in India and peace and tourism are returning to the valley.
@darvesh:
It will happen at the time and place of India's choosing. Your two bit bravado blows my mind. Till then sleep tight.
@ All Indian commentators:
As someone wise said long time ago "wise learn from their mistakes, fools don't". The biggest possible posturing, conventional and non-conventional, India could ever do has already been done in 2002, which turned out to be the biggest eunuch show ever staged in the history of mankind resulting in insurmountable embarrassment to India. But, again, wise learn from their mistakes, fools don't.
Now the real problem. As long as India, the biggest democracy/terrorist state, deprives Kashmiris of their fundamental democratic right of self determination, as promised to them, there will be no peace between Pakistan and India. No matter what. If you strangle someone by neck then you can't blame the other for a punch. But Indians are such a shameless scum of earth, they exactly do the same, repeatedly, and blame the others for their own crimes.
Mr. Aakar Patel You have gone mad, Mr. Modi was not forced to Hand shake , but it was Nawaz who was forced to hand shake with Mr. Modi by the SAARC countries and also forced to sign the electricity deal. It was pak who have been corned.
"The hard school of thinking has nothing substantial to offer and this has become clear over the last 20 years" The last 10 years out of 20 have been with the soft school have they not? What did they give? A string of terror attacks in mainland India culminating with 26/11? Beheading of our soldiers? Unimplemented agreements?
Vajpayee was pragmatic. Neither soft nor hard. He went to Lahore to try peace but gave a strong response wh en Kargilll was forced on India. He once again tried a peaceful approach by inviting Musharraf to Afpgra for talks but in response to Parliament attack, took firm actions which have yielded ceasefire agreement which also allowed India to create a fence at the LOC. it is this fence and better vigilance of LOC which has reduced jihadi activity.
So, 10 years of soft Manmohan, 6 years of pragmatic Vajpayee and 1 year of soft Gujral and you describe this period as 20 years of hard thinking?
Also both countries becoming nuclear does not change India's conventional superiority. It was evident during Kargill.
@Author MMS soft talk got Indian Mumbai Attack. Vajpayee soft talk got Indian Kargil. India became Nuclear under Indira Gandhi in 1974 and Pakistan became Nuclear around 1984-86. Both India and Pakistan Nuclear explosions in 1998 were preplanned. Nuclear explosion of 1998 was planned by Narsimha Roa and has nothing to do with Vajpayee or BJP. Yes the terrorist attacks sponsored from Pakistan are all time low, but many terrorist still reside in Pakistan and supported by its establishment.
@Rangoonwala: Which Minorties are scared? India is not a secular country. Being from minority I am not unhappy in India, but feel that this is the golden period of India to become a secular state.
@Parvez: You are correct. Before 1976, a number of countries conducted relatively low yield 'peaceful' nuclear tests - i.e. supposedly for non-military applications. India too conducted a test in 1974 and termed it as such. @Darvesh: India is a signatory to the Simla Agreement which states that the sanctity of the LoC is to be maintained and "neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations". So will not cross the LoC in peace times despite conventional superiority. @Karachi mirchi: We have a no-first-use policy, which means that India will use nuclear weapons ONLY if attacked with nuclear weapons - my comment on a retaliatory second strike is mentioned only because the author refers to the implications of going nuclear in his op-ed. Actually Modi mostly talks about only economic development, infrastructure, jobs for the youth, social consciousness to drive cleanliness, and reforms to aid delivery of benefits to the poorest sections of society.
Agreed.Nuclear equation has brought Pakistan at par with a conventially stronger India.As long as the nuclear equatIon exist,India cannot impose its will on Pakistan like it did in 1971.
@BlackJack Forgive me for saying this but Indians are suffering acutely from the 'Conventional superiority complex syndrome'
Let me add again posturing by bjp is a partition symptom. We can also remember jag pravesh chandra born in 1916 gujranwalla pakistan, six decades congress leader, bachelor. Served congress from ward leader, to vidhan sabha leader, to advisor to prime minister. Famous for Sadak bazaar campaign, bring commodity at cheaper prices. Very well appreciated by jan sangh, etc. agressive politics by bjp or jan sangh leaders is because their forefathers were left with the only clothes on they had. They know what it means to be successful yet destroyed in name of religion. Even though you have contributed like Sir Ganga ram in lahore.
Bjp party, and it's origins jan sangh especially in delhi, punjab , Haryana, Up was initiated, started by refugees from Pakistan. They had nothing to begin with, street vendors in Connaught place, Karol bagh. Notable among them sikandar Bakht, delhi BJP muslim leader. Madan lal khurana delhi bjp chief minister, jag Pravesh chandra refugee congress leader, coming to arun jaitley ex refugee, manohar lal khatar Haryana chief minister - ex refugee. there are other bjp leaders in Sikh community , which I miss. Partition thoughts cannot vanish. They will surface in form or another. The point is refugees in delhi did not see muslim, Sikh, hindu. They were uprooted , killed and wanted to restart in another country from footpath.
@BlackJack:
"India and Pakistan became nuclear weapon states because their nuclear program was declared to the world in May 1998 – but it is extreme naivete to assume that Pak cooked up nuclear weapons in a week after India decided to cross the nuclear Rubicon. "
India's first nuclear test was in the 70s, under the guidance of the father of India's atomic bomb Raja Ramanna, under the leadership of Indira Gandhi.
Pakistan acquired nuclear weapons by stealing technology and smuggling technology and borrowing them.
There is no hard talk by Modi just insists that we talk as equals . No bending over backwards like in the MMS era .
Great article, Your comment that the hard school of thinking has nothing substantial to offer, I am seeing neither the soft school thinking, moreover because of the soft school militancy was brought to Kashmir.
Hey AP as usual. Zebra can't hide its stripe.
"Enmity" is most sale able product across the borders in our part of the world. Apart from a few people, every Indian/ Pakistani takes it as his national duty/ patriotic obligation to malign other country in disputed issues without rational thinking. Sometimes I console myself when compare these both nations with the Germans who were highy rich cultural heritage and superior education than us but became mad/ senseless for wars in early last century. When Indra Ghandi initiated nuclear exposing in early 70s, our Zulfiqar AIi Bhutto reacted strongly with the pledge that Pakistan would be a nuclear state on the cost of “eating the grass". Unfortunately the both were not right wing religious minded. The writer narrated accurately that "India weaponised its nuclear programme under Vajpayee, because his thinking was from the ‘hard’ school. It must be admitted that the second series of Pokhran explosions under Vajpayee has brought no real dividend to India." In fact that was very clever move by the shrewd Vajpayee. He assessed that Pakistan would react definitely therefore immediate imposition of international sanctions (particularly form USA &Japan) would be imminent which put more adverse impacts on fragile economy of Pakistan .He might be rightful in his plan . But it was not the ruling elite but the poor across the borders that was the ultimate losers /victims who has to face the music due to consequences of that move. VERY SAD
@BlackJack: In 2014 India & Pakistan should not be talking about who can beat who in nuclear warfare. We should be working on providing decent housing, potable water, health facilities, good nutrition, good roads, and quality of life for our people. It's unfortunate that we are good at flexing muscle and showing off false bravado at each other while our people are way down at the bottom of human development index in the world. We both have our fanatics, and we are letting them win, by being childish, obstinate, and intransigent. This is why the Poet of the East had said:
Watan ki fikr kar naadaan, museebat aane wali hai Teri barbadiyon ke mashware hain aasmanon mein Na samjhoge to mit jaaoge aye hindustan walo Tumhari dastaan bhi naa hogi dastaano mein
And, before my Pakistani compatriots become overjoyed with Iqbal's exhortation to "Hindustan walo," he was talking about all of us collectively.
@BlackJack: "meanwhile India’s conventional superiority holds, which has been demonstrated quite effectively even in the low-intensity conflict over the LoC in the last couple of months."
Really?. Why don't they take advantage of that superiority and cross over to loc after all its disputed territory isn't it?.
Pakistani establishment is far more smarter and experienced than its counter part across the border to play Tom and Jerry with politicians irrespective of boundaries.Modi and his team are most welcome.They are most definitely going to be sandwiched between Pakistani establishment and Indian voters.
Quote " This situation will change and it is going to have to be India and the hard group that will have to bend." unquote.
not necessarily ... this is the author's personal prediction and there will be few takers in India for his prediction ... For India, it is time to change the rules of the game and up the ante.@BlackJack: Please correct me if I'm wrong but India's first nuclear test ' Smiling Buddha ' was on 18th May 1974.
It is as usual, the well informed esteemed author has done it again. Exposed a another sordid chapter in the on going BJP saga. The story of Modi Of Gujrat. The new Bharat is like a neighborhood bully taking, destroying, badgering, intimidating it's neighbors. Destroying peace and harmony,...good will and respect the world had for Hindustan is in tatters, shambles, gone, kaput. A vibrant secular Bharat turned a dark unhappy place, full of scared minorities. All of this within months of BJP reassembling Bharat into it's own image, a malevolent unhappy and dire Frankenstein. All thanks to Modi of Gujrat.
As nothing lasts for ever, India's Pakistan boycott of talks will end and end soon I hope. It is not a case of who bends first, but wisdom dictates that both sides become serious and move forward, conceding some and gaining on some issues. President Musharraf approached the Kashmir issue wisely but ran out of time. India and Pak should take up from the point where MS and Gen. PM left.
The Hard Teach Them A lesson Party is on the rampage. The latest assault of the party of communalism, hate and disruption is on Aligarh Muslim University. It was just a matter of time. Finally, it is done. How can a revered Muslim institution be left alone by the BJP street mobs? No Way. This is Babri Mosque...er...Babri university. Chapter Two. The rage against Muslims continues " Secular" Bharat.
The question to be asked is why the 'hard school' has so much traction? Is it because of 'hard' truths based on experience of many years with no evidence to the contrary? Modi shook Nawaz Sharif's hand because their is no personal animosity or rancor involved here - he probably wants good relations but does not have the equity to guarantee it. Second, it is extremely foolish to state that India has lost the conventional advantage. India and Pakistan became nuclear weapon states because their nuclear program was declared to the world in May 1998 - but it is extreme naivete to assume that Pak cooked up nuclear weapons in a week after India decided to cross the nuclear Rubicon. Both countries were nuclear even before. Pakistan will never use nuclear weapons against India since that will spell the end of its existence - meanwhile India's conventional superiority holds, which has been demonstrated quite effectively even in the low-intensity conflict over the LoC in the last couple of months.