Parliamentarians in India
At the risk of being proved wrong once again, one may look at the latest sample with some optimism for the reason that the Pakistan Army is in a mood to relent with India in order to better fight the Taliban. The Pakistani delegation was a cross-party affair and one could hear certain variations on the theme even in what looked like a uniform strain of good will.
The more important representatives of the powers that be in Pakistan’s democracy were delegation leader Senator Jahangir Badar, Haji Adeel of the ANP and Khurram Dastgir of the PML-N. From the Indian side, the major interlocutors were Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Yashwant Sinha and Congress politician Mani Shankar Aiyar.
The main emotional thrust was behind the demand from both sides for the easing of a tough visa regime between the two countries. They repeated the same concessions leaders have voiced in the past — this was the fourth visit by the delegation — allowing cross-border travel in personal vehicles, discontinuing police reporting to avoid harassment of travellers and visa-free access to educationists and senior citizens. We know that plans for a liberal visa regime have been scuttled in the past by the Pakistani side, while India continues to make granting of visas more difficult through tough procedural measures. One way of not allowing any meeting to decline into the past jurisprudence of negative relations is by avoiding reference to the bilateral disputes that have emerged either from wars or have been manufactured to trigger more wars. But the conservative element in the Pakistani delegation had to touch base with the party line on India.
Mr Dastgir, who is easily the most educated man in his party, played safe by reiterating a view that may have been superceded by his leader Nawaz Sharif’s more open-minded approach to India. Mr Dastgir stated: “Besides the issue of visa regime, health, education, economy, trade, Sir Creek, Wullar Barrage, Kashmir, Indian’s infiltration via Afghanistan (sic!) were also discussed in detail.” Remember, elections are around the corner and you don’t want to lose the conservative vote. There is no doubt that the conservative PML-N will clinch the final peace with India. Aware of this, Mr Sharif took the brave step of recommending unilateralism on the question of Siachen amid a howl of protest from his supporters. The truth is that if you want to remain stuck in the rut of confrontation, try to front-load disputes in any discussion with India.
The West will call this exchange of delegations a confidence-building measure (CBM). It may fund such visits in hopes of getting India and Pakistan to agree to a process that has unfolded successfully in Europe after two bloody world wars. People in the West, who set a lot of store by CBMs among rival states, are bemused by the fact that they simply have not worked in South Asia.
The fact is that the so-called disputes have been created around the core issue of Kashmir to prevent a direct approach to dispute resolution. The accretions to the core issue have become so solidified that they have assumed a life of their own. It is, perhaps, too late to adopt a disputes-first approach. The freshly added dispute over waters, earlier reflected in the Wullar Barrage quarrel, can only be resolved if India and Pakistan first become close through free trade and treat the water crisis as a regional crisis, not a bilateral dispute.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 28th, 2012.
COMMENTS (16)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1732271743-0/diddy-(45)1732271743-0-165x106.webp "article")
Refering to ur lines, "One way of not allowing any meeting to decline into the past jurisprudence of negative relations is by avoiding reference to the bilateral disputes that have emerged either from wars or have been manufactured to trigger more wars". Why should we Pakistanies avoid refering to the disputes. While they have been imposed on us by a belligerent neighbour who even today denies our existance. This approach by the ET is unlike a national newspaper and more like a child who is doing and fooling outside the house to get fame. Look we have certain outstanding issues with them unless those are not settled how can we talk of other things:for your kind informaton this economy, trade etc first and bilateral disupes has been an Indian line since 1947 and you are towing this. I doubt how a Pakistani Newspaper can write like this. Please have a incisive look in your ranks, i am as a Pakistani very suspicious of your line of arguments on most of the national issues. And the last who says within these dispues certain had been manufactured to wage wars, these are real issues which have been created due to Indian hagemonic postures and stubborness of Indians not to let us live on our feet. Wake up ET. Shame.
The going is indeed tough and the tough alone shall get going when it comes to Indo-Pak relations. The word tough does not signify a hardliner approach but a move that shall not be easy but full of challenges. Efforts have been steadily going on with regard to improving bilateral relations between India and Pakistan with a rather low rate of success in other words there have been positive outcomes but not in proportion to the efforts made. The Parliamentarians from Pakistan have covered yet another milestone towards progress in diplomatic relations and certain new sectors too have been mooted during the course of discussions besides the old issues of Kashmir and the Wullar Barrage which is a development rather encouraging to note. The easing of Visa norms as well as talks on developing trade and commerce is the issue that can change the old paradigm of bilateral relations. There are all probabilities that old outstanding issues turn obsolete or get gradually phased out with the growth of economic relations between the two neighbours. India being given the MFN status by Pakistan can be a booster which can change the future of Indo-Pak Relations. This will be a case study not just for the citizens of the two nations but perhaps for the entire world especially the Asian continent where many other nations do not share very cordial relations with their neighbours.
@Mirza: I've been reading your comments for quite a time and you are always spot on and I am very curious to know your nationality.
“all eyes in the room welled up”"" ++++++++++++++++++++++ Eyes tell the truth: Pakistanis are not arabs...they are ex Indians. Khuda Hafiz.
@antanu g: it's already strange enough that you act more indian than actual indians,instead you should worry about your bangladeshi's plight in assam when BJP comes into the power.
@antanu g: infact, people like him and me, are becoming order of the day.....let the time pass, and our tribe is sure to grow in india. and yours, is to increase.
First be a Muslim country like Turkey, Malaysia and not a Islamic sharia following country.
"People in the West, who set a lot of store by CBMs among rival states, are bemused by the fact that they simply have not worked in South Asia" ... I think it is we (South Asians) who should be "bemused" indeed flummoxed by the logic those in the West use -- I mean seriously, what on Earth makes them think that whatever works for one simply MUST work for anyone and everyone else??? Do they actually believe that they are in the possession of ALL the necessary "silver bullets" ? Different animals here... very VERY different.
It is an emotional moment but the deep state is not going to allow that. It is that very reason people like S. Rashid Tulli are so vitriolic against the elected govt. They call it traitor and liable for murder. The rightwing would never allow this dream to materialize. Once there are easy exchanges among people the truth would come out and the hate mongers would have no ground to stand on.
As you said, its all just "emotional hyperbole". Don't expect anything from India, it would be political suicide for any Indian political party to not respect the sentiments of the vast majority of Indians (which is to let Pakistan stew in its own self-made problems).
No peace can be built upon bad intent and bad faith. If so built ,inevitably, it will unravel at some point in time. You tried both of those, engaged in duplicity and double-cross with America and now US-Pakistan relations have come unraveled. You have not tried those with us because you know -as I have said earlier- "we know your innards better than you know them yourselves". Try changing the tack. Negotiate in good faith and don't cross your fingers behind your back when you are making promises, small or large. Deliver on promises you make. You may discover it to be a much fruitful avenue. Do not expect to be appeased nor the "me-small-brother-you-big-brother" approach. Carry yourself with "ghairat" as any normal adult would. Give no ground and expect no ground! Negotiate as you would a business deal, keeping in mind that there must be something in it for both parties! This is no rocket science.
"the Pakistan Army is in a mood to relent with India in order to better fight the Taliban". I am having difficulty digesting this PR Spin.
Pakistan Army is in a mood to relent with India in order to better fight the Taliban.
SO Pakistan wants SUPERFICIAL PEACE talk with gullible India ,
OUTRAGEOUS ,If India is going ahead with this Farace ,Naive India should learn from PAST.
Nothing will come out of these talks. We all know that.