The writer is an independent political and defence analyst. He is also the author of several books, monographs and articles on Pakistan and South Asian Affairs
The unsuccessful, if not failed, meeting between the prime ministers of Pakistan and India in New York City on September 29 is a diplomatic setback for Nawaz Sharif and a lost opportunity for Manmohan Singh.
The only success was an agreement to ensure peace on the Line of Control (LoC) in Kashmir. Was the head-of-government level meeting really needed for strengthening ceasefire on the LoC? Did they meet only for this purpose? The answer to both questions is no.
Both sides had two different priorities for the meeting. Nawaz Sharif’s main interest was the revival of the dialogue process suspended by India in January 2013, after India accused Pakistan of masterminding the killing and beheading of an Indian soldier close to the LoC. Manmohan Singh had a single-point working agenda of seeking Pakistan’s compliance with the Indian demand of taking firm legal action against the people under trial in Rawalpindi on the charge of involvement in the Mumbai attacks in November 2008. These cases have been going on in the first trial court since 2009. This and other terrorism issues were highlighted by India’s prime minister as necessary steps for the resumption of the comprehensive dialogue process.
One can argue that India shared Pakistan’s desire to resume the dialogue but it wanted Pakistan to undertake some measures to assure India that Pakistan is serious about curbing terrorism that spills over to Indian administered Kashmir or India.
The outcome of the meeting is a diplomatic embarrassment for Nawaz Sharif because he was an ardent supporter of dialogue and normalisation of relations with India. A section of Nawaz Sharif’s support base, the political far-right and Islamists, opposed his policy of friendship with India. He resisted their pressure and pursued his passion for improved political and economic relations with India.
Manmohan Singh’s insistence on preconditions for the resumption of talks has weakened Nawaz Sharif’s position vis-a-vis those who traditionally opposed a dialogue with India. In fact, it has weakened all those Pakistanis who advocated normalisation of relations with India, more visits and increased bilateral trade.
The major beneficiaries of India’s non-cooperative disposition are the people and groups whose influence and role India wants to contain. If India wants to contain the role of militants, it needs to be more forthcoming in resuming dialogue and improving relations with Pakistan. This will strengthen those favouring good relations with India.
The non-productive talks in New York are a lost opportunity for Manmohan Singh because it would now be quite difficult for Nawaz Sharif to seek another meeting with him during the remainder of his present term in office. Being the last year of his present term, Manmohan Singh could have created a positive legacy of improved relations with Pakistan.
Manmohan Singh may have made some immediate political gains in India’s domestic context by playing tough with Nawaz Sharif. However, this policy will not give any political dividend to him or the Congress party in the forthcoming state and general elections. A host of domestic issues rather than Pakistan-India relations will determine the fate of the Congress party in the general elections next year.
No Pakistani government can give a categorical guarantee to India against violent activities of militants based in Pakistan. The reason is that the Pakistan government cannot give a guarantee of security even to its own citizens against militant groups. Indians need to check how many Pakistanis have been killed and injured in terrorist attacks since the assumption of power by the new federal government in the first week of June.
Some militant groups were floated or supported by Pakistan’s security establishment in the 1980s and the 1990s. Now all of them have gone out of control, threatening Pakistan’s state and society. The militant groups focusing on Indian-administered Kashmir and India thrive on anti-India sentiments in Pakistan, especially in Punjab. The outcome of the latest prime-ministerial talks has strengthened these militant groups and the political far-right.
India is making the mistake that Pakistan made for years, that is, turning Pakistan-India relations into a single issue affair. Pakistan used to insist that no normal relations and trade could be pursued with India as long as the Kashmir problem is not resolved. Pakistan gave up this strategy and stopped insisting on the solution of the Kashmir problem as a precondition for talks on other issues.
Now, India has turned its relations with Pakistan into a single-issue affair. That is, Pakistan must satisfy India on terrorism, especially about the role of Pakistanis in the Mumbai terrorist attack. This approach is not going to help India. However, by the time India realises that it is a no-win approach, many years will be lost.
One damage control strategy is that the two prime ministers should agree to resume dialogue on the eve of the next SAARC summit conference. The initiative for this has to come from India’s prime minister.
There is a need to question the handling of the prime minister level talks in New York City by Pakistan’s Foreign Office. Pakistan’s special envoy held one meeting with India’s special envoy long before these talks were scheduled and Pakistan’s foreign policy adviser met with India’s minister for external affairs in Bishkek. India gave strong hints of adopting a tough line on the terrorism issue in the subsequent statements. These meetings and statements should have enabled Pakistan’s Foreign Office to understand India’s disposition towards the proposed talks. Official circles created the impression in Pakistan that India would agree to resume talks despite its tough public posture. This was a self-cultivated delusion.
If the prime minister level meeting was not to produce any positive results, why did the two prime minister meet in New York?
Published in The Express Tribune, October 7th, 2013.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (35)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@naeem khan Manhattan,Ks: who has killed more Pakistani's in the last 66 years A. Pakistani Citizens(Taliban/Shia-Sunni-mojahirs etc blood thirsty zombies) B.USA(your landlord) C.India. Answer is A & B & you call India your enemy...get a reality check & stop reading the fiction your historians wrote in the school books & made you a puppet...
@Usman Aziz: You do not have a 'defense' budget. You have an 'attack budget'. If you stopped attacking India. You might have more left over for education and healthcare.
Dear ET and Authors, I would like somebody to write an article about 1. Bangladesh & India relations : Pakistan & India Relations btw 1971 and 2013; Only positives to be taken, only benefits for people to be focussed.
This would be a great read for Pakistan , India and Bangladesh.
@Editor, I was going to write a comment but then you only accept one out of 10 comments. Just look at the 30 or so comments. May be 3 out 30 may be considered explaining Pakistan case. Good job.
ET,where is my earlier post in reply naeem khan,manhattan.Was the reply factually too correct or heavy to let your countrymen know the truth.Let me tell you the day when Pakistan accept these truths and move on it will become a functional nation in every sphere..
> The unsuccessful, if not failed meeting between the ...
The author begins his piece with semantics ("unsuccessful ... if not failed) and it is little wonder that he ends up his piece on a hackneyed note with distorted nuances about Indian politics. For India, Pakistan is just a neighbour that poses a huge security problem and has transformed itself by perverted ideologues into a rogue nation (sorry, if I offend anyone but this is the view not just of India but much of the civilized world); Pakistan, according to 95% of Indians (and also many countries of the world, including the USA), indulges in denial and deception. Public opinion in India, unlike in Pakistan, matters a lot to any ruling party. All the statements made by Pakistani politicians and officials (and this applies, particularly, to the foreign secretary Mr. Gillani who changes his position every few minutes of his life like the proverbial colours of the chameleon!) are ad hoc remarks and nothing more than futile attempts to hold a dialogue which has no meaning. Any leader (whether from India or anywhere else) holding a dialogue with a Pakistani leader is bound to return home with a red face, wondering how he can explain his stupidity for agreeing to such a meeting, to his people. The solution for Pakistan to come out of its mess is simple: eradicate the terrorist network on your soil if you want to be accepted by the civilized world. Because if you do not, you will not exist in your present shape for long. Most of the leaders (including your army commanders) will flee abroad to enjoy the money hidden in foreign bank accounts, leaving the people in utter mess and misery. The first and most substantive tangible proof of your sincerity is to bring to justice the perpetrators of the barbaric killings of innocents in Mumbai. These criminals are running scot free. Hard and irrefutable evidence has been provided to Pakistan about their involvement. One cannot play silly games by resorting to semantics and calling these people "non-state actors". These are Pakistanis who operate from Pakistan. Bring them to justice, if you are in charge of your country, Mr. Sharif. Terrorism is a scourge for mankind and it has been nurtured and tended by Pakistan.
If ET pursues an objective and honest form of journalism, it will publish my comments.
Because, my dear Dr. Rizvi, there was a need to break the ice. That in itself is a major achievement.
@Nadir: it is really disturbing for me when people take our defence expenditure as a cause to our poverty, because it is just corruption and visionless, incapable leadership that are responsible for the present disaterous situation of the homeland. And India just want to weaken Pakistan and has been working on this Agenda, though we with our own policies are enough for destruction of our own country.
Neither Nawaz Sharif or any PM of Pakistan controls Foreign Policy or Security issues that have bedeviled India / Pakistan relations since Independence. Nawaz Sharif invited Vajpayee to Lahore, he did not plan Kargill. Zardari wanted to be friendly but was put in place with the Mumbai massacre. When Nawaz Sharif says he wants Peace it is absolutely meaningless, since he can deliver nothing. The Author too like all the rest know it but it is much easier to criticize powerless democratically elected leaders rather than the culprits who have the capacity to make you disappear.
There is a reason why India is reconciled to resolving border issue with china through talks. India is at a disadvantage due to China seizing a lot of territory of India (as it existed during 1947). But, India realizes there is no way to gain back that territory, even through a war. The same is true of china. It realizes a war with India at this stage is disastrous for its progress as a nation. Thus there is growing trade and other relations, even while the borders are frozen. There are some limited tensions at times, which are immediately resolved through talks.
No such luck with Pakistan. With Pakistan wanting to change the existing status-quo, change the existing borders, and not willing to settle for peace in liu of historic claims - India will not be able to forge a relation based on trade & cultural exchange.
For any meaningful progress to happen between India and Pakistan, both countries need to accept that the historic issues are either settled (or will be settled by future generations) and deal with the present needs.
Fact: India is willing to do that - Pakistan isn't.
What is the point in going around in circles to tackle a simple problem? Let me make it easy for all including the writer.
The problem is terrorism, right? So, terrorism must be stopped, right? Pakistan can and should stop terrorism in India, right? India cannot stop terrorism in Pakistan, right? Pakistan, therefore must stop terrorism in both India and Pakistan, Right?Where is the problem?
What should Pakistan do?
Simple! Just stop using its patented weapon named NON-STATE-ACTORS. Right?
Author: "Some militant groups were floated or supported by Pakistan’s security establishment in the 1980s and the 1990s. Now all of them have gone out of control, threatening Pakistan’s state and society".
Pakistan did create and support these groups. It is Pakistan's responsibility to stop these groups from attacking Indian targets. Instead of going after people responsible for 26/11 attacks in Bombay that killed 40 Indian Muslims and 124 non-Muslims from 12 countries, Pakistan government agencies made Kasab's family disappear.
It is the same Mian Nawaz Sharif that invited Vajpayee for peace talks in Lahore. Mian ji or his cronies stabbed Vajpayee in the back right after the so called peace talks by playing Kargil.
Mian Nawaz Sharif is talking about peace right now and Pakistani intelligence agencies are playing Kargil on LOC.
Author says "No Pakistani government can give a categorical guarantee to India against violent activities of militants based in Pakistan. The reason is that the Pakistan government cannot give a guarantee of security even to its own citizens against militant groups. Indians need to check how many Pakistanis have been killed and injured in terrorist attacks since the assumption of power by the new federal government in the first week of June"
Actually all indians would understand/emphathise with the above situation if the Pakistani government comes out and says so. Instead what we hear is there is no terrorism emanating out of Pakistan against India all these border incidences are figment of Indian army and Indian media imagination.
"..If India wants to contain the role of militants, it needs to be more forthcoming in resuming dialogue and improving relations with Pakistan..." It is amazing how pakistanis nonchalantly issue statements that reeks of blackmail. I guess, pakistanis have been blackmailing the world and and india for so long that it has become an instinct.
@Chacko Cherian: You talk about terror emanating from Pakistan, my question to you is what Indian security outfit is doing in Kashmir. People of Kashmir has been terrorized by Indian security personal for the last 2 decades and it is so easy for people like you to blame every thing on Pakistan and never stop spewing venom at Pakistanis and Pakistan. Indian security forces has killed more than 100,000 Kashmiris and thousand of their women folks has been raped in the last 10 years. These are the facts and why are you people so afraid to allow International Press in Kashmir so the whole world should know the real face of Indian and report who is terrorizing who. If I could say to Mr.Sharif that Pakistan has survived 66 years despite India's animosity and IT WILL SURVIVE ANOTHER 100 YEARS REGARDLESS WHAT INDIANS THINK OR DO. It is not 1971 any more, Pakistan is fully capable of retaliating any belligerent moves on Pakistan's territory by India in the future. Pakistanis don't need cheap Indian goods, they could send those to Afghanistan and Central Asia via by air and Pakistanis must not allow them to fly over their territory.
And all RAW agents are angels they dont do nothing in pakistan they runs NGOs ....
so many indianos visits our civilized well informed discussion forum unless Times of india and Hindustantimes are like trash of bad neighbourhood.
"Epicenter of terrorism" - PM Manmohan Singh describing Pakistan!
Embarrassment for our Prime Minister or the country? Dear writer, when our PM left with his entourage, he left his country burning under the fire of terrorism calling its perpetrators as "stakeholders" and Baluchistan being hit by another earthquake leaving behind a trail of death and destruction. Any other self respecting leader would have cancelled his trip and returned home to his/her people. Not our Prime Minister, he had to go and address the UN Assembly, rub shoulders with global leaders while his people were being massacred by terrorist or pummeled by mother nature! Priorities Mr Prime Minister!
@Prakash: To begin with thousands of pakistanis, civilians and soldiers have been killed by the terrorists(as opposed to a few hundred indians) Now the groups operating on IOK are not necessarily the same outfits that carry terrorist activities inside pakistan but they is a considerable overlap and the fluidity of terrorist organizations means that our security apparatus isnt as enthusiastic about supporting militant groups in kashmir as they once were! There is no denying the fact that violence in Kashmir has been reduced considerably which would have been impossible without Pakistans support while actively supports the insurgency in Balochistan! There are always going to be people in Pakistan advocating militancy and opposed to pakistans peace overtures to indians and vice versa but you cant hold the entire population of these two countries hostages to the extremists and let them perpetuate the current dominant narrative of South Asia!
Pakistani policy makers and op ed writers should emulate a model between the better half of Pakistan (now called Bangladesh) and India. When Bangladesh PM came to India she was told point blank to stop terror camp in her territory and we will meet most of your demands. The wise lady PM accepted the challenge and handed over nine gems (bad guys) and in exchange got loan, territorial swap, electricity, water and all other goodies. Is Pakistan ready to hand over its nine gems (bad guys) from its Darbar? Obviously not and the reply from India is go fly the kite.Previous agreements were also not followed through e.g. Lahore deceleration, MFN, relaxed Visa regime to name few. Zardari government's tenure was full of promise on Mumbai trial with no outcome i sight. This has led to trust and credibility deficit. So instead of focusing on PR for a change why not walk the talk.
In the 1990's and earlier, we in India used to believe what you just wrote about talking to the civilian government so as not to strengthen the anti-india forces in pakistan. After Kargil, I believe India has finally realized there is no such thing as strengthening the forces friendly to India. There is no such group in Pakistan and if we can twist the proverbial arm to getting the country to act on cross border terrorism, so be it. Unlike the 1990s and earlier, we have very very low expectations from the pakistani establishment.
@Alann: You've said all there is to say!!! Took the words right out of my mouth... before I could even utter a word!
This author and other Pakistani commentators are missing the finer nuance about Indian elections and internal politics.
Mood amongst Indian general public is very anti-Pakistan since Mumbai 2008. Mutilation of our soldiers recently has rekindled this intense animosity. Any politician shaking hands with Pakistani prime minister, hugging and smiling will have their party's image go down. However, it is a big mistake to assume Indian elections are fought about Pakistan. This is an absurd notion.
Also this author's main thrust of argument is India is pursuing a no-win approach by insisting on the terrorism issue. India has pursued very naively what it assumed to be a win-win approach for 67 years, and what did India get? 4 wars, several mini-wars, relentless terrorism from Pakistan. In other words dialogue, diplomacy, etc have been useless. Thankfully across the Indian political spectrum there is consensus about the futility of "dialogue" with Pakistan.
why this threatening language "it will be too late for India"....Too late for what? You do what you can, and we will do what we can to defend and take care of India's interests.
Finally, we REJECT whole-heartedly, unabashedly, without any reservation your claim that Pakistani government is not responsible or cannot be responsible for all terrorists operating from your territory. This is the latest iteration of state sponsored terrorism. We simply cannot afford to accept it.
..."Now, India has turned its relations with Pakistan into a single-issue affair. That is, Pakistan must satisfy India on terrorism, especially about the role of Pakistanis in the Mumbai terrorist attack. This approach is not going to help India. However, by the time India realises that it is a no-win approach, many years will be lost." -- in effect (reading between the lines), it clearly says that India will have to FIRST get used to what Pakistan has to endure i.e. terrorist attacks that kill and maim thousands of lives per month, and essentially put the country on the path of self-destruction (like Pakistan has already) ... in other words, get accustomed to bombs going off every now and then, putting the country's (i.e. India's) very existence at stake much like Pakistan. Basically, either "talk" (and resolve issues, as per Pakistan's wish) or face a perennial bombing campaign from whoever and wherever it may come from! If this is not terrorist blackmail, I don't know what is.... very clever stuff coming from even seemingly well-meaning "doves" from the "Citadel of Islam" !!
@Author We Indians would appreciate anyone including politicians, journalists or media from Pakistan to honestly admit that cross border terrorism is going on with the active help of your military till date. It is no coincidence that a massive infiltration of 30 to 40 militants took place in Keran sector just five days before the two PM's meeting in US and simultaneously a fedayeen attack in Sambha killing seven people including a Col of the Indian army. Keran sector operation is still ongoing for the last 14 days but your military denies of any incursion having taken place by keeping their eyes and ears completely shut as they could not hear even a single shot being fired in this place during this long period. You may be also be aware that there is heavy deployment of troops on both sides of the border therefore no infiltration can take place without the knowledge of either side until they keep their ears and eyes closed. To remain in continuous denial is the easiest way, but it is not going to bring peace between the two countries. Nawaz Sharif, who appears to be pretty sincere in improving relations and wants immediate talks with India, should instead hold serious discussions with his own military and convince them to abandon their decades old policy of exporting terrorism which has not benefitted Pakistan at all, but proved to be self-destructive and also acting as a major obstacle in holding peace talks which could bring prosperity to both countries. Hope ET publishes this as an appeal from a common man from India who really wants peace with Pakistan.
"India is making the mistake that Pakistan made for years, that is, turning Pakistan-India relations into a single issue affair. Pakistan used to insist that no normal relations and trade could be pursued with India as long as the Kashmir problem is not resolved".
Dear Author - Isn't there a huge difference between asking for resolving "Kashmir problem" first and asking for bringing Mumbai attack perpetrators to justice. The former is a highly complex issue, with no easy solutions, whereas the latter is a clear law and order issue (catch and prosecute). Equating the two as being equivalent seems naïve, my apologies, to me.
@Author, I do agree with your observation that the hype built around the talks' was self cultivated delusion. But blaming India for adding preconditions, why is it unreasonable? Is it that tough for a democratically elected civilian government to reign in part of its establishment & terrorists launched from its forte i.e. Punjab? 170 +- people lost their life, 40 of them Muslims, in 26/11. That's too much to ask?
@author,If India is bothered anything at all from Pakistan it is the terror emanting from your country specifically in the form of infiltrators(your mujahideen) against Indian troops and kashmiris in J&K.You cant wash off hands as India has specifically given the location,the masterminds of terror network but Pakistan prefer to look the other way around.You army regard them as strategic assets giving a false hope of taking over the Indian Kashmir.Then you want these hollow talks.Globally nations talk and take actions and relations develop.That is not the case with Pakistan and the entire world know this.Finally if Pakistan cant provide security to its own citizens let me tell you the such a government and its army is a sham!! I can tell you that India is not one and cant take such excuses.Learn how civilised world works..
ET put it through if you are unbiased and want to let the readers know the truth.
The author has written an emotional article as it always happens whenever India Pakistan relations are discussed. After all, we still believe that we have brotherly relationship. But we should understand that both India and Pakistan are two different sovereign nations and our relationship now depends upon each others actions be it state or non-state.
Any Pakistan PM has to show that he can reign in powers that try to take advantage of any unsuccessful talk. Then only, the talk will move forward emotions not withstanding. Kashmir issue was diluted by Pakistan only when they understood that India reigned the terrorists acting on Indian side of Kashmir. Pakistan cannot play victim card again and again but earnestly try to reign in non-state actors before trying any peaceful talk with neighbours including India. Thanks
India's & Pakistan's stances changed over the years due to the 'diplomatic' changes in the world environment. US needed Pakistan for their "war on terror" and to have a certain influence in Middle East & Asia. Then Pakistan had backing of US which used to pressurize India whenever Pakistani politicians protested behind closed doors in Washington. Pakistan used to play double games with India for long time but then they did the mistake of double dealing with US too. This blackmailing and the killing of US soldiers stationed in Afghanistan by militants living inside Pakistan as well as the growing influence of China prompted US to side with another rising regional power, India. With India developing significant relations with many western countries as well as even with countries in Asia-Pacific region, along with the fact that most militants accused of causing some major recent blasts around the world were linked to Pakistan, India's standing among the world community rose whereas Pakistan started becoming isolated. Pakistan realised it could not play the Kashmir card for long and with Pakistan's current economic/social situation with rising extremism, now it stands at a point that it NEEDS India for its own internal development. India still has a long way to go, but on the world stage, it is being already recognised as a major diplomatic power and India's protests and suggestions are taken seriously. With many developing countries looking towards India as a leader who puts forward their problems in front of the developed world, it already enjoys a large support equally among the developing as well as the developed world. Times changed, world shifted towards India. Before, India would try to deal with Pakistan with patience. It does so even now, but now it has become emboldened enough to demand certain commitments from Pakistan. All Pakistan do in current scenario is try to work together with India and fix the problem of terrorism emanating from inside its borders, before expecting any peace. And Pakistani leaders (and Army) has realised they are so in deep trouble currently from within, that they cannot continue double dealing with India anymore. Peace with India is the only option left, for a peaceful region and to get Pakistan back on track of prosperity. But Pakistan's leaders know, they cannot make demands anymore, they can only accept the terms India dictates and try to appease the Indian government by showing they are serious about eradicating extremism from their land. Only then can there be peace, or else, with an already rapidly downward spiralling economy, Pakistan's future is bleak.
Author assertion that Pakistan is itself affected by terrorism is correct but the terrorism emanating from Punjab should not spill over across the border to India and must be challenged by the Pakistani state within its border. This is not happening instead people like Hafeez Sayed,Hamid Gul and Dawood Ibrahim is getting patronage.
Author like most Pakistani's ignores the elephant in the room. The civilian govt has no control over Pakistan's military which has a long record of using terrorist to further their strategic goals. What's the point in negotiating with someone who has no control over the issues that India considers essential?
If the prime minister level meeting was not to produce any positive results, why did the two prime minister meet in New York? Just because Pakistan PM seeked a meeting with Indian PM. Soft natured elderly Indian PM did not want to say no.
The fact that they met is a sort of success for both countries. The exchange of ideas, grievances, challenges, concerns and feelings in itself is a good thing and encourages progress. So Mr Author, do not write these meetings off.
What was everyone expecting was going to happen?
The only success was an agreement to ensure peace on the Line of Control (LoC) in Kashmir.
The "only" success? Really, between two poverty ridden nuclear states who capture pigeons for spying you think that ensuring peace is worthy of an "only"?
So foreign leaders should only speak to each other only if this leads to sensational outcomes?