Opinion

Devising a new framework for Indo-Pak peace

Raza Rumi July 14, 2010

Today the foreign ministers of Pakistan and India will meet. This major development should be welcomed. Sceptical noises of distrust in both countries have been heard and the Kashmiri leaders have issued rejectionist statements.

Subcontinental leaderships have time and again floundered peace. Sometimes it is the recklessness on the Pakistani side and at other times the Indian officialdom chants the trust-deficit mantra. But this must end. Media wisdom about the BJP and the Pakistan military making a durable peace deal has not withstood the test of history. Democracy and peace are interlinked despite the compulsions of playing to the jingoists for electoral gains. In Pakistan, martial rule is over and a BJP government is unlikely in the medium term.

It is time for the two governments to take stock of their fast changing societies and economies. Unlike the mediatised versions, Pakistan is a transformational society. The old governance structures are decaying and power is now distributed among multiple centres, not unlike India. This is why the foreign ministers should negotiate the lifting of media restrictions and let the two countries and their people understand each other.

The next 12 months are critical: an Afghanistan settlement has to take place, the water issue needs to be explored and Kashmir back channel negotiations have to be fast tracked. In spite of the hostilities, Pakistan-India trade exceeded $2 billion recently and the unofficial figure is even greater. There is a clear path ahead: keep talking and doing business for mutual gains.

The Pakistani state is battling against militancy on many fronts. The Indian state is dealing with the nightmare of Maoists and Naxalite insurgencies in addition to what it calls ‘cross-border terrorism’. Concurrently, the two democracies have to deliver public goods and fight poverty. They need to be resolute and develop a new framework for peace. Such a framework should involve the Pakistan Army. Our eastern borders are always a priority in our military mindset. India’s troop reduction will give confidence to the national security apparatus. The second plank of this new framework should build on the Kashmir CBMs increasing the flow of people and goods backed by [in]formal diplomatic engagement. The babus in New Delhi and Islamabad will continue to twist the files and shuffle the papers.

The third component should be exclusive focus on trade and economic cooperation. This would require exempting visas for bona fide business concerns. Across the borders, we have ready-made markets. This cannot happen in isolation unless the visa policy is creatively revised. Finally, more journalists from both sides should be allowed to break the hold of jihadis, Bollywood stereotypes and Wagah-ites from popular imagination. The information deficit is even stronger than the trust deficit. The overarching agreement should be to continue talking. This is not the time for point-scoring but redeeming our bitter histories.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 15^th, 2010.

COMMENTS (6)

Zainab Ali | 14 years ago | Reply India and Pakistan in every era continued trade, even in the days of war. This shows that people to people contact always remained on a healthy level.

Sakib Ahmad | 14 years ago | Reply Amitabh, On reading my reply to your comments you may have felt puzzled by its brevity and lack of clarity. The reason it doesn't hang together is because it has been censored by The Express Tribune.

VIEW MORE COMMENTS

Sakib Ahmad | 14 years ago | Reply Amitabh, I think you have possibly misunderstood what I have been trying to get across. Far from seeking a “confrontation” with India, I am actually advocating a dignified stepping back. I am saying Pakistan’s role, in the context of the great injustice done to Kashmiris, should take the form of backing up their protests with moral and diplomatic support. Qureshi should have gone to his meeting with his Indian opposite number with copies of Amnesty International’s reports on India’s brutalities in Kashmir. I doubt if this man even knows about them.

Amitabh | 14 years ago | Reply Sakib, I respect your efforts to continue shining a light on the condition of the Kashmiri people, who without question have suffered a great deal in their recent history. And let me concede, only for the sake of argument for the moment, that India's position and actions in Kashmiri have been fundamentally unjust. But your position -- and I fear that it is more common in Pakistan than is Raza's -- effectively amounts to holding all of Pakistan hostage to the Kashmiri question. While I appreciate that this is a highly emotional question, ultimately the math for Pakistan is brutal: no small country growing economically at 2 percent with a gigantic neighbor at 10 percent, and with its national budget essentially earmarked for military spending and debt financing, should be preparing for a long-term confrontational stance built on an assumption of parity with that large neighbor. It's suicide. I am not saying that Pakistanis should become comfortable with some status as a satellite of India. But they should start to get comfortable with the idea of hitching their collective tonga to India's economic horse and riding the coming wave of South Asian prosperity. I know that Bangladesh is in a different historical position than Pakistan vis-a-vis India, but for a while it looked like even there the religious extremists were gaining the upper hand and were blocking further engagement with India. Today that position is reversed, and Bangladesh is stepping up trade, cultural, and other ties with India through a variety of bilateral agreements -- to the country's benefit. I'm not sure where the Pakistani "polity" or the civilian leadership stands on this issue, but I'm not going to count on the Army to lead this effort any time soon. In their minds, notions of Pakistani superiority over the Hindus may have been shaken by various events over the last decade, but my hunch (maybe I am wrong) is that the sense of superiority has given way at least to a continued desire for parity in all things -- especially military-related. It is a major psychological obstacle. Regardless of how unjust India may or may not be, Pakistan needs to look out for its own self-interest based on cold, hard logic. I fear that over time Sakib's path puts the very survival of the Pakistani state in danger.

Farukh Sarwar | 14 years ago | Reply Increasing economic ties would greatly help both countries to solve their differences. A peace deal is badly needed, because both the countries need time to solve their internal issues.

Sakib Ahmad | 14 years ago | Reply Pakistan has probably lost the moral right to speak for Kashmiris, who are subjected to murder, rape and torture by India's army of occupation numbering 700,000. In recent days 17 youths have been mercilessly murdered for protesting against the forcible occupation of their land. All Pakistan can do now is to respect the wishes of Kashmiris and offer them full moral and diplomatic support. At the moment India is neck-deep in terrorising Pakistan - a subject I have covered in my latest blog: http://sakibahmad.blogspot.com/2010/07/terrorising-pakistan.html To negotiate with India at the present time would be utter lunacy. Before a worthwhile dialogue can begin India must withdraw its forces from Kashmir and cease its terrorist activities across the border from Afghanistan.

Replying to X