Pakistan and India: Improving ties

While scepticism remains on what will be achieved, with Indian elections next year, fact is any progress would help.

Editorial August 03, 2013
India’s new Foreign Secretary Sujatha Singh has hinted at initiating dialogue with the new PML-N government. PHOTO: AFP/FILE

It is clear that, for the sake of their own people, Pakistan and India need to work together to create a stable, tension-free region. Without this, there can be no real hope of an escape from desperate economic woes, militancy and other problems, which blight the lives of people in the two countries. Islamabad and New Delhi are inching closer to holding talks, with India’s new Foreign Secretary Sujatha Singh hinting at initiating dialogue with the new PML-N government in Islamabad. What is welcome is the stance that India’s neighbours would be her immediate policy priority.

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.


truthbetold | 10 years ago | Reply

@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.

Thinking Indian | 10 years ago | Reply

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.

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ