After Prime Minister Narendra Modi met Saarc leaders, Foreign Secretary Sujatha Singh read out a statement. It described what Modi had said to various leaders he was meeting for the first time. To Bhutan’s leader, he said, India and Bhutan had “long standing historical and cultural linkages”. To the leader of Mauritius, that there was a “special and unique relationship between India and Mauritius”, and that the nations shared “history, common ancestry and kinship”.
Modi said Nepal was a country “with whom India shared history, geography and ancient civilizational ties”. With Bangladesh, he said, India had “shared struggle, history, culture and language”.
When Singh read out the statement on Pakistan, there was no such reaching out or softening and no acknowledgement of shared cultural ties. Her statement began: “In his meeting with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, the PM underlined our concerns relating to terrorism. It was conveyed that Pakistan must abide by its commitment to prevent its territory or territory under its control from being used for terrorism against India.”
To his credit, Modi added that the two countries “could move immediately towards full trade normalisation on the basis of the September 2012 roadmap”. However, the threat of terror attacks disrupting ties was sounded out to Sharif.
India’s governments have long claimed that Pakistan has stoked violence in India, particularly in Jammu & Kashmir (J&K). The fact is, however, that militant violence, particularly of the religious sort, has all but ended in India.
Terrorist violence in Kashmir peaked in 2001, when 4,507 people were killed, including 1,067 civilians and 590 security forces personnel. Following the attack on India’s Parliament, President Pervez Musharraf committed to shutting down cross-border militant activity and in early 2002, he banned four groups, including the Lashkar-e-Taiba. Since then violence in Kashmir has dropped down to its lowest since militancy began in 1990. In that year, 1,177 people were killed, including 862 civilians and 132 security forces personnel. The numbers of those killed rose every year and by 1996 (when Benazir Bhutto was in office for the second time) stood at over 2,900. After Musharraf took over, violence escalated and fatalities crossed 3,200 in the year 2000.
After the peak of 2001 and Musharraf’s pledge, deaths have dropped every year. Data from former Punjab policeman KPS Gill’s think tank shows that fatalities in J&K fell from 3,022 (in ’02) to 2,542 (’03) to 1,810 (’04) to 1,739 (’05) to 1,116 (’06) to 7,77 (’07) to 541 (’08) 375 (’09) 375 (2010) to 183 (’11) to 117 (’12) to 181 (’13) and 59 this year of whom 37 were militants.
If we are to accept that Pakistan was responsible for producing most of this, we must also conclude that Pakistani effort is reducing it. The fact is that India has not properly recognised this effort from Pakistan, particularly under Musharraf.
Outside Kashmir, there is very little religious violence in India. 2014 has so far seen only 1 death. In Pakistan, violence continues at high levels and 2013 saw 5,379 deaths and this year 1,718 so far.
Modi also pressed Sharif on the trial of the alleged perpetrators of Mumbai attacks and most observers will conclude that it is not going well. But Pakistan can also rightfully claim that India has been lax in prosecuting those who bombed the Samjhauta Express in 2007, killing over 60 people, mainly Pakistanis. The investigations, which seemed to be zeroing in on a group linked to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, are going nowhere, to say nothing of the trial.
India should press with its outreach to Pakistan on trade and other fronts on the assumption that it is delivering on terrorism to the best of its ability. Certainly the results would show that clearly.
The US pullout from Afghanistan and a looming Taliban takeover of the south of that country could change the situation in Pakistan and perhaps, also in India. It is to the advantage of both nations that they quickly move ahead on normalising relations before that happens.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 8th, 2014.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (38)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Pak: "@G. Din: So you agree to your occupation" I responded to your comment but the moderators do not think you are mature enough to read my response. Sorry!
@pak you are insisting on a UN mandated plebiscite,but are not ready to fulfill the basic requirements for it.by populating outsiders in POK and gifting a part of Kashmir to China you have sir burnt all your boats.
@Pak:Please study the whole K-imbroglio dispassionately & get familiar with harsh facts just to satisfy yourself. There is merit in what you say but emotions count for nothing in real world. My friend, some disputes appear to be folk-oriented but are rarely about people. It's about land & resources-be it water or minerals. Fancy phrases have been used by Indo-Pak for Kashmir but both atoot ang (integral part) and sheh rug (jugular vein) mean the same thing: Real Estate. Not Real People. Religion, culture & ethnicity is just talk to fool masses so that they are prepared for sacrifices even if it's a lost cause & hawkish army of both get more budgetary allocation. What MM Singh had said was correct: we can't alter borders but we can make them irrelevant (I am paraphrasing). And long term solution lies in thinking along those lines. Thank you for the conversation.
@Arijit Sharma: Are you out of your mind? Have you lost all connection to reality or are you just some random troll?
@Rakib: I understand your point, but what does that tell you of the dealings of your state? You are reinforcing my point that your army is an occupational force. Your stance on Occupied Kashmir is absolutely wrong. Are you willing to risk the security of about 1.5 billion people for that? Because that is what WE stand to lose. We are at a perennial state of war because of that, you have an ill-principled stance. You must hold a plebiscite. You are not giving anyone anything, you are undoing the mistakes of your past.
Aakar Patel Esq.: Your statements . 1.If we are to accept that Pakistan was responsible for producing most of this, we must also conclude that Pakistani effort is reducing it. . The "Reduction" of Terrorists Attacks in India is not due to the "Restraints" exercised by Pakistan on its so-called "Non-State" Actors but by the Indians increasing their Security as well as all sane Countries have condemned these Terrorist Act perpetrated on India by Pakistani Resident and Harboured as well as Supported etc. etc. so-called "Non-State" Actors.
2. The fact is that India has not properly recognised this effort from Pakistan, particularly under Musharraf. . Thus India does not need to "recognize" Pakistan's Pakistani so called contribution to the reduced Terrorist Attacks by Pakistani so-called "Non-State" ACTORS! . Cheers
@Pak: ("So you agree to your occupation? As “enlightened” as you “liberal” indians are,do you see that as a positive?"). If I may interject: I understand your sentiments but do please note:- India will never give you on negotiating table what you tried but could not get on battlefield. Nobody does that. Everything is possible but giving you J&K on platter isn't. Also, read up on Principle in International Law called "Uti possidetis".It means:-"territory and other property remains with its possessor at the end of a conflict, unless otherwise provided for by treaty; if such a treaty does not include conditions regarding the possession of property and territory taken during the war,then the principle of uti possidetis will prevail." (Now, have a second look at post-'65 Ayub-Shastri Tashkent Agreement & exchange of territories won/lost).
@Pak ;You lost east Pakistan in a false pursuit of Kashmir and are on the path of losing Baluchistan and KPK.world can learn from Pakistan,how to shoot themselves on foot.
@pak.: I am surprised to note that you don't care about Indian Muslims but have all the tears in the world for Kashmiri Muslims. Not clear on what basis.
The madness initiated by Jinnah in association with Anglo-American enterprise can not be repeated again. It must be understood that borders cannot be altered just because of religious fanaticism. Pakistan has destroyed itself by obsessing with Kashmir and will disintegrate as it has not learnt it's lesson.
Two nation theory had crumbled with the birth of Bangladesh. Nations are never built on religiosity. Ethnicity is more important. There are arguments that Durand Line must be erased and FATA must be part of Afghanistan and Balochistan must be a free country. This carries far more weight than Kashmir.
Has India done ever any thing good with Pakistan in the past that will do good now?India left no stone unturn to harm Pakistan in any forms and manifestations and even now in the Modi's regime we Pakistani people even can never imagine any thing positive,constructive and fruitful from India the doing/practicability is so far for us......
@saad: I guess it is you who needs to understand the UN resolution that were passed over 60 years ago. While it was agreed that there should be a free and fair plebiscite in the riyasat of Jammu & Kashmir, it's implementation involved Pakistan vacating the areas it occupied in 1947/48. Pakistan has been dilly dallying on this for the last 6 decades. Moreover, the area to come under plebiscite is Indian held Kashmir, POK including Gilgit Baltistan, Shaksgam valley (1942 sq km) gifted by Pakistan to China. Pakistan has unilaterally separated GB from the riyasat and is now governed by a separate unit under Northern Areas.
The subcontinent has seen the silliest idea of separating people based on religion and we have seen the madness in 1947. We are not prepared to repeat those mistakes. If Pakistan was created based on Islam then all Muslims must go to Pakistan, which has not happened. Or the will of Indians and Pakistanis (Muslims & non-Muslins) must be considered for deciding the fate of Kashmir. Selective referendums will justify to separation of smaller communities like Balochistan, Sindh, FATA, KPK and Saraiki, Hibdko and Hazara areas.
@ Pak, Agreed ... the people of India will accept your argument and give Kashmir to Pakistan ... but in that case you Pakistanis will have to take all the Muslims living in India ... that will complete the two nation theory ... deal or no deal ... ??!!
@Dr Priyanka: Some infiltrators came in from "our side" and laid seige to kashmir, is that what they teach you? Yes im sure only the "kashmiri hindus" will be relocated. Naive much lady? Past is not past, we wont give up our right to kashmir. India and Kashmir arent going anywhere and we wont be changing our minds anytime soon.
@pak.: Our land? Pakistan was not even born when kashmir was Indian territory For thousands of years. May be you skipped history classes or took your lessons in Pakistani schools.
@pak.: Do some meditation every day, say for example deep breathing. This will take away the confusion from your brain and allow you to focus clearly. Kashmir is named after the Hindu sage Kashyap. Then some infiltrators came in from your side of the border and laid various claims. OK! now past is past. There is a plan in the pipe line to relocate the kashmiri hindus who were thrown out of their land, some were murdered and their houses burnt, occupied and what not. They have been living in camps and desperately want to go back to Kashmir. Indians are smart people. This is one of the conditions for the electing BJP to power. That article 370 should be repealed and each and every kashmiri Hindu gets his place in Kashmiri society. If anyone even dreams of harming them, they will be answerable. No chance of Kashmir ever separating from India. Recently some politician tried that gimmick. Modi laid out his relocation plan and made him eat his own words. I hope you got it.
Stop supporting cross border terror in Pakistan (FATA and Baluchistan)
@pak.: to anjaan "Occupied Kashmir is the only muslim majority area that hasnt been handed to Pakistan." And NEVER will be. So, don't hold your breath!
@pak - "terrorism will not decrease until India pulls out of Kashmir."
Even if India does so, the next issue raised will be Junagadh..and then Hyderabad and so on and even if all the Indians give away all the land and squeeze into the small islands of Andaman and Nicobar... you will still have a problem, because we Hindus are still existing. The crux of the matter is religious intolerance by the small sections of Pakistanis and Kashmiri Muslims. Do your namaaz and also do a few yoga asanas during the day and watch the hate dissipate.
Doubt it very much if even Yama, Mitra or even Varuna will be able to help help Lord Modi. Truly, he is maligned.
What India and Pakistan need is to leave each other alone for a decade or two and focus on developing their nations economically instead of trying to resolve geographical disputes.
India perhaps will continue to get mosquitoes arising out of the swamps in Pakistan, doing some attacks in India. However, India should resolve not to resort to overt military actions in retaliation. Covert actions are par for the course to take care of such groups.
Pakistan should rethink its positions on making Kashmir fundamental to its existence. If it wants to progress it needs to find an identity other than that of religion and should get control over its military & militants. Hopefully even Pakistani military has by now realized the futility of trying to win territory thru wars or covert operations. India is way too big to be browbeaten.
Given 20 years of good growth, the region will be entirely different and disputes of today will look absurd. Like China-Russia border disputes, it'll be easier to solve.
(When diplomats say something, it is just as important to listen to what is left out.)-Author. It should be fairly obvious that no understanding of India's policy towards neighbours, especially Pak & China, is possible without taking in to account views of the real extra-Constitutional authority behind the government. If it's Army in case of Sharif, it's RSS, for Modi. It is combo of Bhagwat/Madhav (RSS), Swaraj/Modi (BJP) that will take care of India's policy.. They will have their own good guy/bad guy routine scripted among themselves for public consumption but they will not work at cross-purposes since the masterly authority of RSS is unchallengeable. Not necessarily a bad thing.
@Ajeet
Exactly.
Muhammad Ali Jinnah's All India Muslim League presidential address delivered in Lahore, on March 22, 1940, said:
"The Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs, litterateurs. They neither intermarry nor interdine together and, indeed, they belong to two different civilizations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions. Their aspect on life and of life are different. It is quite clear that Hindus and Mussalmans derive their inspiration from different sources of history. They have different epics, different heroes, and different episodes. Very often the hero of one is a foe of the other and, likewise, their victories and defeats overlap. To yoke together two such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must lead to growing discontent and final destruction of any fabric that may be so built for the government of such a state".
Now either Mr. Jinnah is wrong (in which case Pakistan would not exist) or Mr. Aakar Patel is wrong. Since Pakistan exists, then Mr. Aakar Patel is clearly wrong, and also spreading a canard.
Its wonderful that Na Mo had come out of the Punjabi preoccupation of "shared freedom struggle, history, culture and language" and brought the Indian and Pakistan relations at more ground level
The pappi- jhappiness of the relations between the two countries should cease and talks should be held on pragmatic agenda
@Arijit Sharma i will like to advice you please do consult and read the UN resolution on Jammu and kashmir as UN resolution clearly state that kashmire people should be allow to choose their own destiny by holding out referendum which india doesn't allow because india is afraid that kashmir will choose to secede from india and join pakistan or have their own country.
@Arijit Sharma: I AGREE WITH ONLY FIRST TWO HIGHLIGHTED LINES...about remaining... what a wishful thinking to get entire Gilgit Baltistan to resolve Siachen Issue..?? UN resolution??? plz read it again.. And my dear sir, to reduce your military expenses the boundaries need to shrink not expand... please take some lessons before posting such comments.
Why outreach to Pakistan on trade? In Sept 2011 India withdrew its objections yo Pakistan specific duty waivers in WRP on return of agreement that Pakistan would give India MFN status. Then Pakistan said agreement was 'in principle' and actual implementation wold require until dec 2012. It missed the deadline and then an Indian soldier was beheaded. In the aftermath, MFN was delayed. There was one more attempto reive this by sending Shahbaz to India. India offered yet more concessions to Pakistan but when ime came to implemen,(under the name Non doscrimnatory market access), once more Pakistan failed to follow its commitment. Pakistannow first needs to implement things it has already committed to. Only after that, there is any meaning in having fresh talks.
@Author: thanks for the data. As you can see, there has been a spike in 2013 since Nawaz Sharif came to power. Maybe coincidence but just wanted to point out in light of Kargill experience under Nawaz.
Secondly, i do not agree with your conclusion that 'If we were to accept that Pakistan was behind most of this, then we must accept that they have reduced the force. There are other reasons possible i.e. The lighted fence on LOC, the heavy deployment on LOC, the investments in counterinsurgency and intelligence in the aftermath of 26/11, the reduced support for these merchants of hate within the residents of the valley who suffered economically. Now that tourism is returning in wake of peace, they do not want the jihadis to disrupt it.
Thirdly, your belved Congress tried all the things you suggest but there was no progress because he civilians it was dealing with had no power to implement any agreements. It is time to try a different approach. Treat Pakistan just like a normal neighbour instead of unending dialogs that result in nothing and keep the focus on LoC to reduce infiltration and focus on Integrating J&K into India and improve prosperity within India which increases pride of being Indian within all including people in J&K.
@ Pak Those in Pakistan who argue that as per the two nation theory Kashmir being a Muslim majority pocket, must go to Pakistan ... well, this would be perfectly acceptable to the Hindus of India, only if Pakistan agrees to also take back all the Muslims living in India ... deal, or no deal ... ??!!
**Short answer is "NOTHING", except "moral, financial and political" support to brave Baloch brothers to get even with Pakistan on Kashmir. After all Pakistani establishment still thinks that India is actively supporting Baloch insurgency with funds and arms. Nothing is going to change the perception of Pakistan.
I know as and when India (specifically Modi) does start this project, it will take the matters to a logical conclusion as Indira did in East Pakistan**
@author: " ... It is to the advantage of both nations that they quickly move ahead on normalising relations before that happens. ... "
All Pakistan has to do is - end its occupation of areas designated Pakistan Occupied Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit Baltistan as per the UN Resolutions on Jammu and Kashmir. Once the withdrawal is completed, and Indian Forces take control, Siachen will cease to be an issue automatically. Imagine the savings for both India and Pakistan !!
The fate of 1.5 billion people who are mostly desperately poor and uneducated rests solely in the hands of Pakistan. For the sake of humanity, I appeal to the hawks in Pakistan to please implement the UN Resolutions on Jammu and Kashmir.
Dear Aakar Ahmed, What culture do hindus and muslims share? They are the exact opposites.
The reason for this is simple ... using terror as instrument of foreign against India never worked ... and now India has figured out the way to deal with it, which unfortunately is the only way other than all out war ... therefore, there will be no rewards for Pakistan partly closing the tap on terrorism ... state support to terrorism has to be stopped once and for all ... in the India Pakistan context, there is no genuine desire yet to give up terror as instrument of foreign policy ... and cosmetics are bound to fail ...
terrorism will not decrease until India pulls out of Kashmir. The Pakistani just wont have it any other way. Pakistan was wronged in Kashmir. It is an issue that threatens the ideology of the state, Pakistan will not hesitate in adapting radical methods. Aiding and abetting mujahideen will continue unless the issue is addressed in earnest. Kashmir is a muslim majority area that under the 2 nation theory should go to Pakistan. That theory forms the backbone of the territorial integrity of both nations. Unless this issue is solved any attempts of friendship will be built on faulty foundations that will shatter at the slightest strike.
I think the media needs to give this subject a much needed REST.