Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif is, of course, eager to have his government restart the dialogue that was suspended, first after the Mumbai attacks and recently again in January after skirmishes erupted along the Line of Control that resulted in deaths of soldiers on both sides of the border. On August 1, he reiterated his call for improving ties with our eastern neighbour and for resolving outstanding disputes with it and boosting bilateral trade, investment and business. While scepticism remains on what will be achieved at this point, with Indian elections coming up next year, the fact is that any progress would help, especially with regards to doing away with confusions regarding pre-conditions to talk. All this is important, given that the US pullout from Afghanistan next year is expected to reconfigure regional dynamics.
It is also clear that the push has to come from different directions to reach this point. Government-level talks are, of course, important, and in this context, the commitments made by prime ministers Sharif and Manmohan Singh, since the PML-N government took office in June this year, are encouraging. Both men have made it clear that they are eager to normalise relations.
At the same time, the peace process can also be aided by talks at the Track-II or ‘non-official’ level. This has indeed been acknowledged by Mr Sharif. Track II dialogues in recent months, including one in Bangkok earlier this month, where delegations from India and Pakistan, including parliamentarians, activists, former diplomats, retired military officers, journalists and policy experts meet, have raised various issues and given several important recommendations.
They have suggested, for example, that the functioning of the ministerial-level India-Pakistan Joint Commission, set up in 1983, be reviewed, so that working groups could meet regularly as laid down in the original plan. They have also stressed on the need to work together against terrorism, and for a stable, Afghan-led Afghanistan, after the upcoming US pull-out from that country. These are pointers government policymakers need to take on board as they resume the process of bilateral dialogue.
There are, of course, many areas of potential difficulty between the two states. These should not be allowed to impede routine affairs, including contact between the people of the two countries. To promote this, more effort to promote group tourism in line with previous discussions between New Delhi and Islamabad, and also more contact between students, legislators, journalists and others was suggested. For this, a more relaxed visa regime, with an easier visa protocol and permits that allowed multi-city travel are essential. It should be noted the visa issue had previously been discussed officially and agreement reached to make travel across the border easier. However, India, unfortunately, stalled on the agreement — hindering access to each other’s countries. Such backtracking needs, of course, to be avoided in the future, so that the iron fence which still stands at the border between the two nations can be gradually dismantled.
To ease this process and end a 66-year period of distancing, participants also stated that private airlines should be allowed to operate, mobile phone communications improved, trade expanded and human rights issues, such as the detention of fishermen crossing waters revisited. All this is, of course, important. Track-II talks can help build the platform for government-level dialogue, and PM Sharif’s statement that he plans to appoint an envoy to move the Track-II process further shows an awareness of this.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 4th, 2013.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (28)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@ashvinn: When you are quoting and discussing a particular sentence or paragraph in the article, please use the quote symbols (" ") around the particular sentence/paragraph. In addition to the quote marks, it would help the reader if you also italicize the particular referred section. Otherwise, the reader has to naturally assume that your referenced line is your own comment.
I am surprised a lot of posters here don't practice this essential and proper writing technique and end up confusing the readers.
In current situation, an independent Kashmir will be easily overtaken by Taliban & Al Qaeda. Inspite of presence of Indian army, Islamic fanatics could drive out all non Muslims from the valley. As long as there is a threat of Islamic fanaticism (& a definite reaction of Hindu extremists), India cannot risk total independence to Kashmir. Why did these Kashmiri people not protest when their leader Shaikh Abdulla agreed to accession to India in 1947? A plebiscite could have settled this issue till Indian constitution made Kashmir an integral part of India on 26 Jan 1950. Why did Pakistan not fulfill the preconditions for Plebiscite (withdrawal of troops)? Well, history cannot be changed. Kashmiris should define their demands (towards autonomy) and justify it. Some of them want a Islamic theocratic state, which means right to kill non Muslims ( including Shiyas & Ahmadis) in the name of Islam.India cannot agree to it.
@Ali: Kashmiris will not be happy with Pakistan or India and that is the ground reality.time both nations woke up to this reality and stopped wasting their funds and scarce resources on this futile project.
@Toticalling: Your India shining comments have no relevance in this debate. Yes, we are far behind China. One reason being, we have wasted our precious energies fighting each other. To me, absolute rankings are less important than the rate & direction of change. At the time of partition, West Pakistan had much better indicators than East Pakistan & India too. By now, inspite of its historical baggage of problems & huge diversity, India has surpassed Pakistan in most indicators including per capita income. Yes, we have a long way to go but we are in the right direction. I am amused by your - ''Who attacked Goa militarily and conquered it? Who attacked Hyderabad? Jona Garh? '' People of these states have never complained, they always wanted to be part of free India. On Bangladesh, I shall not waste my time. Many Pakistanis have accepted the truth. You should listen to the views of Tarek Fatah, Hasan Nisar, Hamid Bhashani, on this subject. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzqHSrBz4Es&feature=endscreen&NR=1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDANKHiZaj8
@usman khalid: India magnanimously agreed to to an international agreement with Pakistan on sharing of river waters and follows it even during war with Pakistan. Pakistan had assured India, that she will not allow territory under its control for terrorist activities against India. Many Islamic fanatic organizations continue their terrorist training camps in Pakistani territory with active support from elements of Army + ISI & regularly push terrorists into India. Do you know: China is building huge dams in Tibet, diverting water flowing into India. China does not care about any agreement on sharing of waters. India & Bangladesh have almost reached an agreement on Tista waters. It is stuck because, Indian state of Bengal believes it is unfair to India & is strongly opposed to it.
ETBLOGS1987
@Toticalling - Do you see what is happening?
Now the talks were about to restart and what happened? http://tribune.com.pk/story/587152/five-indian-soldiers-killed-on-pakistan-border-claims-india/
Prior to that what was happening towards end of December 2012? India and Pakistan were making smooth progress on their dialog and some agreements on visa and trade liberalisation were to be announced. What happened? Indian soldier was beheaded and talks ground to a halt.
Prior to that in 2007 dialogue was proceeding smoothly and what happened 26/11?
BEfore that Vajpayee had overlooked Kargill and invited Musharraf to Agra in July 2001 and what happened? PArliament attack of December 2001.
Prior to that Vajpayee made the historic trip to Lahore and what happened? Kargill.
Doe you see a pattern here? DO you see why Indians are cynical? We have seen this movie over and over again.
@Toticalling: Surely you are kidding us bro!! You spoke somewhere about the "language" that Indians use... the same sentence you ought to apply to yourself also. And I don't get your point about reference to "Muslims, Christians and others" -- are you suggesting that these communities have views about Pakistan that are in variance to that of the majority community? Let me remind you that an overwhelming majority of people living in India (INCLUDING Muslims, Christians or "others" even in places like Goa, Hyderabad, Junagarh or whereever else) think of themselves as Indians first, then whatever else. It is not the same as the kind of parochial mindset we see in Pakistan often -- Shias, Ahmedis, Mujahirs, Balochis, Pushtuns, Deobandi, Barelvi, Wahabi etc etc... which is at the heart of most of your internal terrorism problem that happens on a daily basis. All this reflects poorly on your own Pakistani mindset that is at the core of the problem of attitudes vis-a-vis India. Look at your own school curriculum (esp the famous "Pakistan Studies") for one example. Nobody is suggesting that India does not have several problems that just refuse to go away, but the point is that we Indians don't have the culture of blaming them on some "conspiracy" that we see that tends to happen in Pakistan (the fact that even "Israel" or "Jews" are blamed is a case in point of the kind of paranoia that seems to afflict your mindset). And as for your statement that "It is better for India to have a stable and friendly neighbor than a nuisance. I assure you." -- that again is symbolic of the attitude problem -- too many nice words... but alas, actions on the ground suggest otherwise. Alas for India, in terms of actions Pakistan has neither been "stable" nor "friendly", but always a "nuisance" -- words are nice to hear, but ACTIONS is what really speaks. It remains to be seen when Pakistan (as a country, as a State apparatus) will one day "walk the talk" when it comes to relations with India.
@ Editor
" ..... with regards to doing away with confusions regarding pre-conditions to talk."
Are you trying to say bringing perpetrators of 26/11 to justice as a pre-condition to talks would be 'clarified' if the dialogue process starts again? That is if the dialogue starts it would automatically mean India has 'moved on' from its position. --- Indian Policy makers please take note what is the general perception of these supposed talks, should they happen in near future.
Dialogue with Pakistan ? Something we never thought about in the last 68 yrs.. Thanks for initiating it 'new foreign secretary'. I guarantee, you are going to come back a Turkey.
ETBLOGS1987
@Toticalling: I have seen your comments in the past and they have mostly been quite reasonable. It is unclear how you came to the conclusion tha Indians hate Pakistan. India has never started any war with Pakistan. Your own retired PAF chief Asghar Khan admits that. India did not have a policy of strategic depth where thousands of religious warriors were sent into Pakistan but Pakistan did. You do not have any charities in India collecting money for religious wars from either our temples, mosques, Churches or gurudwaras but charity is collected by organizations supporting jihad in Pakistan.
You were offended by what @BlackJack said but the fact is that all that Indians want is to be left alone. No more jihadis, no more parliament attack, no more 26/11. When these events occur of-course Indians are up in arms - and not just Indian Hindus. Indian Muslims also get upset. It is Indian Muslims who refused to allow the 9 boys from Karachi to be buried in the regular burial ground.
Even so India does make unilateral concessions from time to time. They were not meant to be unilateral but end up being unilateral because Pakistan refuses to reciprocate as originally agreed.
While anti-India incidents maybe played up in Indian prss, no one in Indian media makes up false stories unlike in Pakistan. Examples are the lies that India is stealing Pakistani water when the truth is that even during wars India jhonoured Indus Water Treaty, India is behind TTP which is absolutely absurd when the well stated goal of TTP is to implement shaaria in Pakistan.
BAsically, if peace and trade and good relations are possible, that would be ideal. BAsed on past however that seems unlikely because your army will not allow the civilians to implement on things they agree in negoiations - something we saw time and again during Zardari's regime. In that case just letting each other be is what is needed. We each have enough problems of our own to solve.
The one thing Indians are not going to be okay with is to make more unilateral concessions to Pakistan in the hope that some day something will be reciprocated.
@ Ali: "We dont care about dams,we do care about Kashmir"
If Pakistan really cares for Kashmir, best will be to compete with India on the development front in the respective sides of Kashmir. Watch this Kashmir Train project video from Indian side;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDA9RgR2xUA
Will Pakistan respond with similar project on her side ? In next 20-30 years Indian side of Kashmir will have a massive rail network.
After reading some comments, all I can say to those talking with India: Good luck. You wlll be needing it
@Toticalling: "Whenever there is discussion on Indo Pakistan relationship in world press, Indians use language which is not fit to print."
Think of any country vs Pakistan relationship and you will hear nearly the same. Common things about Pakistan one will hear are; " International migraine, pathological liars, double game players and so on. Only country where you will hear sweet words is China and no where else. Look inside and you will get the answer. How can you have a friendly India when your scholars talk of Ghazwa-E-Hind ?
@Ali: "We dont care about dams,we do care about Kashmir" ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Ok so its clear why you are not building dams. What are you doing about Kashmir?
@Toticalling: "For India, Pakistan is an enemy and will never give concessions to an enemy." +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Restated: For India, Pakistan is no friend and will never give concessions to non friend.
Indo Pakistan relationship ...has this big elephant in the room +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ the Pakistani Deep state with a distinct Foreign Policy.
@usman khalid: "Shouldn’t we ask India to stop building dams on our rivers?" +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Mr Khalid it doesnt hurt to learn the facts: there is an Indus Water Treaty signed by India and your country which specifically permits India tp build dams on the rivers that you term as 'our rivers'. So thats that. On the other hand India has a valid claim on Giligit Baltisan and hence lobbied against the financing of the Diamer Bhasha Dam by International Financing Institutions.
@BlackJack: Your post reflects my view about Indians. So Pakistan is a nuisance? What I do not like is when you use the word 'we' Does it include all Indians? Does it include over 200 million Muslims, Christians and others? Your slip is showing. I respect Indian democracy but this attitude of talking to Pakistanis as if the 'master' speaks to a untouchable is not true, in fact wrong. Who attacked Goa militarily and conquered it? Who attacked Hyderabad? Jona Garh? Banghla Desh? The evil that I know does not reside on one side of the border, it is more prevalent on the side of it. And then this bit about India shining. Consider that India is still ranked, in a Thomson Reuters Foundation poll, as among the world’s worst places to be a woman (below even Saudi Arabia); second to last in the 2010 PISA tests on education quality; 94th in Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index (well behind China); and 184th out of 185 countries in the World Bank’s rating of ease of enforcing contracts. So come on, we accept you the way you are. Do not refuse a hand asking for your friendship. It is better for India to have a stable and friendly neighbor than a nuisance. I assure you.
@Toticalling: For India, Pakistan is an enemy and will never give concessions to an enemy. You are wrong. For most Indians, Pakistan is merely a nuisance. You will notice that Indians usually get along with Pakistanis when they meet in foreign countries (and vice-versa), as individuals without historical baggage. Indians have no agenda when it comes to Pakistan, we just want to be left in peace; we certainly don't want any territory of Pakistan that comes along with the people who live there. If Pakistan similarly has no agenda, we can coexist amicably.
Indians generally, government officials or ordinary ones, have a very negative opinion about Pakistan. I have noticed that with my contacts. Whenever there is discussion on Indo Pakistan relationship in world press, Indians use language which is not fit to print. But the bottom line is that both countries need to thaw the relationships. Terrorism has not helped to change their opinion. I say, talking, even when the chances of break thru are not bright is still better than not communicating at all. We know that Indian delegations in the past have not agreed to any agenda initiated by Pakistan. That means if anybody thinks talking means getting Kashmir back, he is not a realist. Idea should be to discuss all other issues. Kashmir should be left for future generations. For India, Pakistan is an enemy and will never give concessions to an enemy.
Why does Nawaz Sharif want any relations with a country which has not accepted the very existence of Pakistan. We are better off without india.
@usman khalid:
No, you are wrong,the number one priority is Kashmir
We dont care about dams,we do care about Kashmir
Shouldn't we ask India to stop building dams on our rivers? We shouldn't even think of making better relations before they stop this practice of diverting our water
Very good.
That is direly needed for this region's peace and development but will rulers of ninety thousand let it happen!
All this is important, given that the US pullout from Afghanistan next year is expected to reconfigure regional dynamics. ---> Yesterday there was Suicide attack on Indian Embassy in Afghanistan.India Should pakistan for efficiently killing Indians
However, India, unfortunately, stalled on the agreement — hindering access to each other’s countries. Such backtracking needs, of course, to be avoided in the future, so that the iron fence which still stands at the border between the two nations can be gradually dismantled.
Well if you behead Indian solider we will not invite to our country if you think we have done the same why do want any relationship with India.
private airlines should be allowed to operate No will lead to hi-jacking.
mobile phone communications improved No effective tool for terrorism
trade expanded Maybe if MFN is provided to India
human rights issues Internal Matter of respective Countries.
fishermen crossing waters revisited ok maybe if their is a proper effective mechanism
A very Large part of Indian Society is fed up Pakistan and it backward stone age mentality please spare us your we great muslim civilisation nonsense . if there places of worship which muslims want to visit in India we can provide visas to visit them, if there water issues we can solve via IWT , if there terror related issues their is always arm on both sides.Only thing that remains is may be some trade with border indian n pakistani states that is it , that too with humanitarian point of view.