The writer is a consulting editor with The Statesman and writes widely for several newspapers in India
However, this is not to say that it will happen. The Congress party is unable to take a decision when confronted with vocal opposition. And a prime ministerial visit to Pakistan has unfortunately been bogged in the mire of indecision, with the political opposition making it impossible for Prime Minister Singh to saunter across the borders without a specific programme and agenda. However, aware of the decided advantage of a relatively baggage-less government in Pakistan, Prime Minister Singh is once again talking of “good neighbourly relations” with Pakistan. He has also spoken of Prime Minister Sharif’s invitation to him to visit Pakistan (and vice versa) and while “no dates have been fixed”as yet, it is certainly not off the anvil.
There is some enthusiasm in India about the smooth democratic transition in Pakistan. The BJP is also not badly inclined towards Prime Minister Sharif, more because of his cordial relations with its leader and former Indian prime minister Atal Behari Vajpayee. So, speaking of today — in South Asia, the morrow always brings in a new dimension — Dr Singh can certainly move towards finalising dates for a state visit to Pakistan, without stirring the usual hornets’ nest. Of course, he might delay the decision, thereby opening it once again to circumstances.
A visit to Pakistan, of course, will achieve far less than it would have had Dr Singh been able to go there in the United Progressive Alliance’s first term in office, or at least at the beginning of the second term. However, in relations as twisted and fragile as between India and Pakistan, high level visits do soothe the environment and give new impetus to bilateral relations. It has been almost 10 years since a top-level visit to Pakistan, more stark, as the Indian prime minister has visited almost every country of import. It is, therefore, a matter of immense regret that strategic and political relations between two sovereign nations have been held hostage by vested interests on both sides, acquiring dimensions that make basic dialogue impossible. It is imperative in difficult times particularly, for governments to remain engaged and for heads of governments to ensure that tricky issues are discussed directly. After all, the visit to New Delhi recently by the Chinese premier, despite the bad blood over border incursions, went a long way in easing the strain and diluting the anger and hostility.
Dialogue is not the sign of the weak, but of the strong. It is only strong, secure governments that never hesitate to talk and create opportunities for a dialogue. Snide remarks and media wars cannot become a substitute for direct and sound diplomacy. It is thus important for Prime Minister Singh, regardless of the fact that he will not have much more time in office, to visit Pakistan and help institutionalise a dialogue that is more sustainable than what we have seen in the past. There have been several major changes in Pakistan that have started, and will start, impacting its strategic goals and choices and these will have to be factored in by us in India for what could be a new beginning.
There are strong lobbies on both sides of the border against improving relations with each other. But there are stronger, but less vocal, lobbies for peace. Governments can cower under threats from the first, or use the strength of the second to move forward towards better bilateral relations. In India, we allowed the first to coerce us into inaction, but it is time to break free and establish quick ties with the new democratic government that seems to be looking ahead with a strong mandate.
It remains to be seen whether Prime Minister Singh will have the courage and the foresight to strike while the iron is hot. Or whether he will allow opposition to cloud his desire and sit back at a time when a visit can still have a decisive and positive impact on relations between India and Pakistan.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 8th, 2013.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (46)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Rakib
Thank you so much. I am so relieved. I would rather lose an argument than causing discomfort to anyone, least of all to someone whose posts I have always enjoyed and admired, while doing nothing more than clicking 'Recommend'. To be honest, I was quite confident that this was a case of oversight. Thanks again.
@Rahul: Oh, no, it was my mistake & I am the one that owes apology to you. I ought to have paid closer attention to your first sentence. That must have been very annoying. Despite that you have shown incredible grace. You have set an example Sir!
@Rakib
I think something has gone terribly wrong here. Trust me, I bet on my life, I would never applaud a comment from any Indian suggesting an Indian Muslim to move to anywhere in the world, much less to Pakistan. And it is not on some compassionate urging, but firmly based on my belief in the inherently secular character of ancient India as sagaciously envisioned by the founders of the constitution as well. The comment I applauded came from, Naveen Jun 8, 2013 - 1:42PM @Strategic Asset: Oh hello Mr. loudmouth, India is........ And I believe you commended the same.(Ref: Rakib Jun 8, 2013 - 5:00PM)
I expressed an opinion, which, as opinions go, is limited by the information available with me and my ability to decipher them to arrive at a point of view. I have no claim to its infallibility. That said, I sincerely apologise if any part of my comment under reference has caused you even the slightest annoyance. It was not meant to.
@Rahul: Naveen, to who I responded, was not referring to Pakistan. Subject was the Author, an Indian Muslim lady who was asked by a chap out of pique to move to Pakistan, for which suggestion he earned your applause. What you say of Pakistani "policy" is unimportant for me but it sure must be vital from your point of view. A Pakistani may hold a view diametrically opposite to yours. Or, may be not. That wouldn't impress me either. I have had enough of Thousand Cuts & Cold Starts!. And,who knows, or, more realistically, who cares for the truth among Indo-Pak even if known? Knowing negative traits real or imaginary would do. For an essentially dishonest enterprise of maligning a neighbour honesty as stock-in-trade is not needed; for viciousness greater justification than a warped imagination is not needed.
@Naveen
A very crisp and succint response @strategic asset. Bravo.
@Rakib
"However, it is not unusual among some to first unfairly demonise the adversary & then pay the ultimate compliment by imitating him."
I agree with the general import of your observation. It’s a very perceptive observation of a not so uncommon phenomenon among the people having either perceived or real sense of victimhood. However much we wish it was not there, but it exists in real world across communities and nations. Unfortunate part in all this is the fact that those who attempt to draw some kind of equivalence with their enemy by imitating them understand it the least. However in so far ‘unfairly demonizing the adversary goes’, things rarely happen in absolutes, there is always a point between ‘fair’ and ‘unfair’ where it is either somewhat ‘fair’, or, somewhat ‘unfair’. Accordingly, if the reference is to Pakistan, it is probably not so unfair to demonise an adversary whose declared policy is to bleed its neighbor with thousand cuts and leaving enough instances to prove its implementation on the ground.
@Lala Gee: Your link simply shows that census was planned in 2011. Here is a news story from ET that shows the problems in accuracy with housing census and also unwillingness of Gilani to give even a starting date for the population census.http://tribune.com.pk/story/319617/2011-housing-census-results-over-counting-in-sindh-undercounting-in-punjab/ Khattak said that the PBS had already sought the prime minister’s decision on when to begin the population census, but had been told that Gilani would only call a CCI meeting after having first met separately with all of the provincial chief ministers. The delay on the part of the prime minister appeared to create another problem: it is increasingly making the housing census irrelevant.
If you think I am wrong, please provide any link to census results from 2011 Pakistan census from any GoP source
@Gp65:
"Pakistan has not even had a census since 1998 . So do you even know what percentage of your rural population is deprived of electricity?"
Your statement that Pakistan did not conduct any census after 1998 is not correct. Pakistan, in fact, conducted last survey in 2011. The number of people without access to electricity in Pakistan, including rural and urban, is only 15 million.
@Lala Gee: There is no question that rural electrification in India has gaps, it is also true that the numbers you quoted pertain to 2001 census. But even now only 55% rural homes use electricity as primary source of lighting which is surely a major area of opportunity and there is no grounds for complacency.. At least the census gathers such numbers so that planners can work on it. Pakistan has not even had a census since 1998 . So do you even know what percentage of your rural population is deprived of electricity? You can keep on taunting but we identify our problems, openly discuss them and then fix them. If deflecting problems suits you better, good luck.
@Lala Gee: "“while 56 percent of households in rural India—some 400 million people—have no access to electricity at all.”
Indeed, Thanks for appreciating our urgency for building all those Hydro-Power Projects in Kashmir. In the mean time, I was wondering if Pakistan- the country which is overflowing with Electricity can donate some of its Power to India.
@Lala Gee: Unfortunately the real reason Pakistan has temporarily ceased it's India fixation at political level because of the internal mess the country is in. When people have upto 18 hour power cuts and terrorists bombing away at will it will be politically suicidal to focus on other areas.
@Polpot: Or imagine if boat load of Indians landing in Shangai and killing 165 chinese, do you think the Chinese premier will be visiting India in a similar situation!
@lala gee
They may not have access to electicity, but at least they are not landing up in karachi and causing mayhem. BTW, how is the load shedding going on ? Indian officials are in pakistan for talks to provide electricity. Looks like we may have to give you aid after all, which does not surprise me. After all, you are experts in extracting aid out of every one to the point of putting the gun to your own head. Think Saudi Arabia, India, USA, UK,...
@Deepwater:
"@Lala Gee 400 million only? Why such a low number?"
This is what the National Geographic on their website says on July 31, 2012:
"while 56 percent of households in rural India—some 400 million people—have no access to electricity at all."
@Naveen: (unless you wish to make a Pakistan out of India)
Well said. However, it is not unusual among some to first unfairly demonise the adversary & then pay the ultimate compliment by imitating him.
Pakistan must first remove religion from politics.
@Strategic Asset: Oh hello Mr. loudmouth, India is a democracy, Everybody is entitled to his/her opinion. You are just one among 1.2 billion here. Better stick to what 'you' believe in, instead of passing on fascist judgements on what kind of people get to live in India.
As for your reasoning of Pakistanis saying the same things about each other, that is their domestic issue, none of our business (unless you wish to make a Pakistan out of India). The smartest thing would be to learn from the good things done by Pakistan and make sure that we do not make the mistakes made by Pakistan.
@Gary and @GP65 - my comment was restricted to the article and the authors views which I thought were noble but not realistic.
Practical or impractical, My best wishes to anybody who promotes peace b/w the two people. However my recommendations would be- start from 2014 with a new Government at helm.
"the Indian prime minister has visited almost every country of import." ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ So what does that tell you about Indian perception of Pakistan?
Was it not Nawaz who supported unilateral Pakistani withdrawal from Siachin? ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Now let him show his courage of conviction.
I recollect there was great enthusiasm when Zardari took over as President. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ And gradually it dissipated into smoke. Ditto for coming years under Nawaz.
" After all, the visit to New Delhi recently by the Chinese premier, despite the bad blood over border incursions, went a long way" +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ A boat load of Chinese did not land in Mumbai and shoot 165 innocent people dead. Why does the author not understand that?
@gp65: I think you have it exactly right. India will have to wait and see if Nawaz is in charge or the army. The firing at the LOC does not bode well in this regard. Some commentators here think that what happens on the LOC is some tit-for-tat India versus Pakistan game. That is not so. It is really a Pakistan versus Pakistan game and till now the ordinary Pakistani citizens have been the biggest losers.
Pakistan is a duplicitous nation and hence cannot be trusted. Unless Pakistan hands over Dawood and persons involved in the Mumbai attack to show its genuine desire to have good relations with India, India should not take the first step.
@Parvez: "The impression I got from reading this is that you consider the bilateral dialogue more important than the Indian public’s reaction towards the Congress party and that to in the period just before an election. Is that being realistic ??"
The issue isn't if elections are coming. In 2009 when Manmohan SIngh tried to ignore people's anger about 26/11 at Sharm-el-Sheikh and act as though nothing had happened, people forced him to backtrack. UPA had just recently won an election with a bigger mandate at the time. Basically at any time, any PM from any party will not be able to indulge in unilateral giveaways beyond a point. It is not just Pakistan, in case of the sailor issue with Italy, in case of treatment of Indians in Australia, in case of Cinese incursions into India - the government tried to downplay each of these issues initially but had to take a strong stand because the people made themselves heard. Even US wanted to have India change its laws with repsect to liability of nuclear installations. But Indian government could not pass such amendments through the parliament.
No one (except some really really small fringe) in India wants war. But there is no appetite to be bullied or cheated either If there is a legitimate treaty possible that ensures peace in the neighbourhood - no Indian will be against it. But until the Pakistani civilians show that they are really in charge of foreign policy and security policy. no one expects Pakistan to follow through on any of the commitments it makes in meetings.
The author referred to BJP having a soft spot for Nawaz. She forgot to add what happened right after Vajpayee's trip to Pakistan including Minar-E-Pakistan. But people of India remember Kargill. People will wiat to see if Nawaz can control the army a bit better this time before pinning too many hopes on him.
Last time Nawaz Sharif was talking peace with India, we know how that turned out.
So when Vajpayee had gone to Pakistan did it solve all problems? Why then does Ms. Mustafa feel that MMS going will solve problems?
The truth is peace was derailed by Pakistan establishment earlier by doing Kargill. Even today it is Pakistan establishment which does not allow Pakistani politicians to take any substantive steps to reciprocate uniltaeral gestures of peace by India such as reciprocating MFN and visa liberalisation as well as some substantive action against perpetrators of 26/11.
@Umar Sadique.: Why not? You guys do it all the time. . The problem is you expect us to play it fair all the time. Misadventures, adventurism with people's life is OK, but other people have to play fair? No, I don't think so.
@Strategic sset what a shame u telling your citizen to get other country citizenship what a shame man/wom
Ms. Mustafa is misinformed when she thinks that physical trips and photo-ops are the ones that resolve differences; send our PM to Pakistan and our two countries will magically kiss and make up - depressing naivete! If there is something substantial to discuss, it will surely be discussed long and hard at government-level before any such agreement is signed. If there is nothing to agree on (and it will be ridiculous for Manmohan Singh to travel to Islamabad just for MFN reciprocity after 17 years) then we should be cautious until the new govt finds its sea legs and we see if their mandate translates into foreign policy control. The previous civilian Pak government also made the right noises and even some steps on the ground to bridge the gap between the two countries - so the "baggage-less" PML-N government can only continue the good work. The advantage here, as the writer points out, is that the BJP also feels comfortable with Nawaz Sharif based on his chemistry with PM Vajpayee, so any credible action from Pak will be greeted with more optimism across the political divide in India. However, we believe that the Pak army still calls the shots, and any agreements with the civilian government will remain empty words and nothing more - that is the rub. So let us see steps on the ground to control, nay, eliminate terrorism - this is in Pakistan's interest as well.
@Parvez: "....Is that being realistic ??" what do you think? Looks like many subcontinent muslims suffer from intense truth allergies. High on self-delusion, low on reality...
As it is, the UPA is on its dying legs. The only thing stopping it is the BJP. especially the Modi-fan club and Advani. . I have never been able to understand, why for God's sake, the NDA doesn't drop its NMo fixation and promote a center right leader at lest for the election. If Sonia gandhi has proven anything, it is that one can run the center by remote. Why then doesn't NaMo for the interest of sanity nominate someone? Some people (NaMo) seem to have brawn bigger than brains. . Wishful thinking from you Maam. You have been a closet sympathizer. Hope you one day get the citizenship to the pure you aspire for,
"There are strong lobbies on both sides of the border against improving relations with each other. But there are stronger, but less vocal, lobbies for peace"
Please define 'peace' - To me killing our soldiers at LoC is not peace, pushing jihadis across LoC is not peace, failing to bring the perpetrators of 26/11 to justice is not peace. There is not a single person i India who would oppose this type of peace. If your notion of peace is unilateral give aways to Pakistan, that is a different story and you will find many Indians opposed to that. If you think the lobby for unilateral giveaways is larger, speak up and let us see whose voice is heard. Your claim that such a lobby is stronger will not be taken by any politician at face value.
" In India, we allowed the first to coerce us into inaction"
Not at all. India waived the legitinate objection it had to EU tax waivers for Pakistan, it unilaterally liberalised visas, it has worked on reducing non-country specific non-tarriff barriers at Pakistan's request. Pakistan however has not reciprocated on any of these issues though there have been many verbal commitments.
What a vacuous article! . Read my lips. Unless Pakistan is able to do justice to the victims of the Mumbai attacks (many of whom were Muslims), nothing substantial can be expected of Indo-Pak relations. . If MMS intends to make any overtures as you imply, he better get prepared to live on the other side of the border as he did when he was a kid. . Not even PC (who is from South India and far removed from partition and religious conflicts) is able to stomach the numerous subversion that has occurred in the past few years.
"A visit to Pakistan, of course, will achieve far less than it would have had Dr Singh been able to go there in the United Progressive Alliance’s first term in office, or at least at the beginning of the second term. "
The beginning of UPA term II was 6 months after 26/11. Except for ummah lovers like you, no Indian would have supported such a trip at that time. MMS was going to go there in 2007 but then the judges issues happened and Musharraf put the meeting on ice.
You have nicely and correctly expressed that it is in the interest of both countries to resume talking in order to establish a working understanding beneficial to both. The impression I got from reading this is that you consider the bilateral dialogue more important than the Indian public's reaction towards the Congress party and that to in the period just before an election. Is that being realistic ??
They have already begun with a friendly firing at LOC by killing an Indian soldier. wait for the next round now. Rest assured nothing will change. Competition of allegations and counter allegations will continue.