The Indian and Pakistani governments have unprecedented political power, while Afghanistan has a resilient government. Modi won elections with a clear majority and would not be restrained in decision-making due to Indian coalition politics. He seems amenable to change, provided his concerns with regard to Pakistan are addressed. Nawaz became the first Pakistani prime minister to attend his Indian counterpart’s oath-taking ceremony, clearly signalling the intent to move forward. Afghan presidential candidate Abdullah Abdullah survived a suicide attack recently. Good India-Pakistan relations and bilateral cooperation to rebuild Afghanistan and enhance its security would reduce the danger of the country slipping into anarchy.
There are, however, reasons for scepticism. India’s relations with Afghanistan in the past have been a source of concern for Pakistan. Pakistan feels that New Delhi’s military support and intelligence cooperation with Kabul exacerbates its security challenges. Conversely, India suspects that the attacks on its personnel and infrastructure in Afghanistan are not entirely indigenous. There is also a concern that there may be a spectacular terrorist attack in India that may reverse the embryonic reconciliation process with Pakistan. Such an incident would test the Modi sarkar’s election promise that it would not exercise past restraint if the attack were linked to entities that are considered quasi-state sponsored. The former Afghan president was quick to blame the attack on the Indian consulate in Herat on the Lashkar-e-Taiba, suggesting that it could have been backed by Pakistan.
Afghanistan faces a myriad challenges. Its promising national security force, the ANSF, is well-trained and adequately equipped. However, it may be difficult to visualise that the ANSF would fill the vacuum that the Isaf’s withdrawal would create. Even the Isaf found it challenging to stabilise Afghanistan during the last 13 years.
The most critical challenge to stabilise the region would be to ensure that any movement across the Afghan-Pakistan border does not lead to a spike in terrorism in Afghanistan, India or Pakistan. The common goal would then be to continually ensure that the Taliban and other militant outfits are contained in their locations.
Terrorism is a regional concern and the acts of terrorism are not unidirectional. Bilateral Indo-Afghan intelligence cooperation should, at least, be trilateral and include Pakistan. The cooperation should involve intelligence sharing, as encapsulated in the 2009 Sharm el Sheikh statement after a prime ministerial summit between India and Pakistan. Effective intelligence cooperation would reduce the chances of destabilising terrorist incidents.
The prospective intelligence cooperation would remain ephemeral until there is consensus amongst the regional countries and other players regarding strict non-interference in the internal affairs of Afghanistan. This policy of non-interference would also imply that the Afghan territory has no scope for anyone using it to destabilise others. Such interference can be consequential, destabilising for the region and would run against the pre-election goals of the leaders who hold the reins in India and Afghanistan.
Until the three states fully commit to trilateral cooperation in stabilising Afghanistan, the times beyond 2014 would be a new Dickensian, ‘Tale of Three Cities’. These would only be the worst of times; it would be age of foolishness; it would be an epoch of incredulity. Afghanistan, India and Pakistan are the most populous region in the world and regional cooperation is the only panacea for 2015 and beyond. Being the larger states, the onus lies primarily on India and Pakistan.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 25th, 2014.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (14)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Gp65: I agree with both you and Strategic Asset that it will never happen, and so the idiocy continues. On the plus side, idiocy is not confined to the Sub-Continent. Incidentally, I did write a long missive on reunification but ET did not print it.,
@Sexton Blake: @Strategic Asset:
Agree with @Strategic Asset. Unlike the Germany situation there is no constituency for reunification in India and of course Pakistanis have been taught to hate India so none here either. If reversing partition was a goal India wanted to pursue, it had the best chance to do so in 1971 when its army was occupying Dacca. The fact is no one in India wants it.
@Sexton Blake: It should be obvious to a ten year old child that the Sub-Continent will eventually need to fall under one Government.
Are you seriously suggesting reunification? That train left the platform 67 years ago. I seriously doubt any Indian would be interested in this.
@BlackJack: Went through your comment, went through the article once again and even went through the Spark Notes of "A Tale of Two Cities" to refresh my memory. Sorry, but I am still unable to see what the tale has got to do with this article.
My original rant about the mention of "Tale of Three Cities" was that when the Dickensian novel is not about cities at all and makes little sense in this context, how could it be extrapolated to three cities?
@Abid: I want to ask you a simple question, when did human right violations in Kashmir start? Did they start before 1980s, or after 1980s when Pakistan backed Militants entered Kashmir valley? Every war has its causalities, what your army is currently doing in Waziristan, Indian army did in Kashmir without involving the Air force or American drones. And its funny you remember the human right violations in Kashmir, but forgot the ones in Bangladesh & Baluchistan.
A good article by Atia Kazmi. It should be obvious to a ten year old child that the Sub-Continent will eventually need to fall under one Government. If the Sub-Continent had one Government the savings would be tremendous, and the standard-of-living would rise. However, I cannot see it happening any time soon.
I don't know about Indians but Afghans can't live without Indians and Bollywood
It is Pakistan's lack of credibility, which prevents any country from coming into agreement on any matter. Pakistan should work very hard and with sincerity to regain the credibility to make it trustful again. Even China, Saudi Arabia do not trust Pakistan anymore. Till then, you can write many opinion pieces. Nothing will change on ground.
I don't think that India will ever be interested in intelligence cooperation. If it were interested, it would have actually implemented the bilateral statements on the issue. It has rather sold the terrorism narrative to good use in colouring the freedom struggle in Kashmir in bad light and hide its human right violations in that occupied territory. This article is too idealistic and India would have no interest in regional stability as its eyes are set only on power maximisation.
....acts of terrorism are not unidirectional... strong text
An observation from a Pakistani that is at loggerheads with it's 30 years history of one-way export of the same thing!
Why does Pakistan always dictate (or want to dictate) the level of engagement between two sovereign nations, India and Afghanistan? I don't ever remember hearing or reading about India insisting on defining the level of relationship between China and Pakistan.
"The Indian and Pakistani governments have unprecedented political power, while Afghanistan has a resilient government"
What political power Pakistani government has ? Big ZERO. It can not deliver on anything.
Terrorism is a regional concern and the acts of terrorism are not unidirectional.
You sort of lost me after this. When was the last time you head of an Indian terrorist do something in Pakistan? Never ever.
Trilateral cooperation shall remain a pipe-dream especially since 2 out of the 3 countries have deep rooted mistrust towards Pakistan.
Dickensian tale of three cities? Charles Dickens "A Tale of Two Cities" is a tale of justice and resurrection set during the French Revolution. The cities themselves are passing references and have no major role in the tale.