Foreign policy dilemmas
Pakistan must strengthen its diplomatic interaction with states other than India to strengthen its diplomatic clout
The handshake between Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi provided a happy ending to the 18th Saarc summit conference at Kathmandu on November 27. Perhaps, this was the first conference for regional cooperation where the leaders of two member states were not willing to have a formal bilateral interaction. The persuasion of other leaders led them to shake hands for the media. This does not augur well for the future of regional cooperation in South Asia.
Saarc is hostage to the strong desire of the ruling elites of India and Pakistan to play tough towards each other in order to make political gains in their respective domestic contexts. Prime Minister Modi wants to demonstrate that India is powerful enough to adopt a punitive disposition towards Pakistan. This helps him not only to mollify hardliners in and around the BJP, but it also expands his support in non- BJP circles.
Prime Minister Sharif was keen on fostering trade and economic relations with India when he assumed power, but this came into conflict with his main support base, which is the political right wing, which does not want Pakistan to appear weak under Indian pressure. Furthermore, Indian rebuffs to Prime Minister Sharif, through the cancellation of the foreign secretaries’ meeting and the subsequent violent incidents at the Line of Control (LoC) and the working boundary have made his task difficult. He also faces domestic difficulties because of the ongoing confrontation with Imran Khan’s PTI and Dr Tahirul Qadri’s movement that challenge his political credibility. The army establishment and a section of public opinion have reservations about the prime minister’s keenness for trade and economic ties with India at a time when that country is not willing to address any issue that is of concern to Pakistan. The chances of resumption of meaningful talks between Pakistan and India are minimal, if any, in the next couple of months. The major reason is that India wants to hold talks on its agenda and insists that Pakistan must satisfy India on terrorism as a pre-condition for holding talks.
A strong section of public opinion in India thinks that as India is on its way to becoming an active player in the bigger global power league, it should not let Pakistan become an obstacle to its drive for pre-eminence at the global and regional levels. Pakistan can be neutralised by putting strong diplomatic and military pressure on it either by carefully managed military activity on the LoC or by massive propaganda campaigns or by exploiting its internal dissensions and conflicts to India’s advantage. Given India’s strident approach, Pakistan should hold back its keenness to revive the dialogue. It should put this relation on hold till India agrees to a mutually acceptable agenda for condition-free talks on all contentious issues.
Meanwhile, Pakistan should pay attention to four issues on a priority basis: increased diplomatic interaction with other countries, especially with Afghanistan, Iran, Russia and the Central Asian states; control religious extremism and terrorism on its soil; streamline foreign policy management; and improve governance and salvage its faltering economy.
Pakistan must strengthen its diplomatic interaction with states other than India to strengthen its diplomatic clout. Special attention should be given to strengthening its ties with Afghanistan for adopting a shared approach for countering religious extremism and terrorism. Pakistan must offer financial and technical support for Afghanistan’s reconstruction and economic development. Similarly, economic and diplomatic interaction needs to be strengthened with Iran and the Central Asian states. It should respond quickly and positively on expanding relations with Russia in the fields identified during the recent visit of the Russian defence minister. This option should not be allowed to drift away.
Pakistan cannot develop a positive interaction with the rest of the world without controlling extremism and terrorism in the domestic context. In order to achieve this objective, the current military operation in North Waziristan and other tribal areas must be supported. However, the civilian government does not appear to be keen on building political support for the operation against militant groups. With the exception of periodic statements in support of the operation, the top civilian officials avoid taking a categorical stand in public on a regular basis in its favour.
There is a lot of confusion in foreign policy management in Pakistan. Several federal ministers make contradictory statements that cause confusion about the direction of foreign and security policies. The foreign affairs portfolio is with the prime minister but at least five people make foreign policy statements as and when they like. They are Sartaj Aziz, Tariq Fatemi, Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, Khawaja Asif and Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif (for Turkey and China). While the army chief was in the US on a trip meant to strengthen Pakistan-US security relations and assure US officials that the military was pursuing a security operation against terrorists in a non-discriminatory manner, Aziz and Asif made remarks that raised doubts about the credibility of the army chief’s trip. The prime minister should limit the number of his colleagues who can venture into foreign policy and they need to speak in harmony with one another and with the army top command.
The issues of the economy, especially shortages of electricity and gas, should get priority over the federal government’s high profile and media-oriented projects of building roads, highways, bus services, free distribution of laptops and giving vehicles to people on soft loans. Use all these funds to address the energy shortage, which will generate new jobs and thus reduce economic pressures on the people. Furthermore, the federal government cannot continue to sleep over the demands generated by Imran Khan and his party. This policy will in the long run hurt the prime minister badly. If the Sharif government and parliament cannot resolve the current political conflicts, both will become dysfunctional and irrelevant to problem-solving in Pakistan.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 1st, 2014.
Saarc is hostage to the strong desire of the ruling elites of India and Pakistan to play tough towards each other in order to make political gains in their respective domestic contexts. Prime Minister Modi wants to demonstrate that India is powerful enough to adopt a punitive disposition towards Pakistan. This helps him not only to mollify hardliners in and around the BJP, but it also expands his support in non- BJP circles.
Prime Minister Sharif was keen on fostering trade and economic relations with India when he assumed power, but this came into conflict with his main support base, which is the political right wing, which does not want Pakistan to appear weak under Indian pressure. Furthermore, Indian rebuffs to Prime Minister Sharif, through the cancellation of the foreign secretaries’ meeting and the subsequent violent incidents at the Line of Control (LoC) and the working boundary have made his task difficult. He also faces domestic difficulties because of the ongoing confrontation with Imran Khan’s PTI and Dr Tahirul Qadri’s movement that challenge his political credibility. The army establishment and a section of public opinion have reservations about the prime minister’s keenness for trade and economic ties with India at a time when that country is not willing to address any issue that is of concern to Pakistan. The chances of resumption of meaningful talks between Pakistan and India are minimal, if any, in the next couple of months. The major reason is that India wants to hold talks on its agenda and insists that Pakistan must satisfy India on terrorism as a pre-condition for holding talks.
A strong section of public opinion in India thinks that as India is on its way to becoming an active player in the bigger global power league, it should not let Pakistan become an obstacle to its drive for pre-eminence at the global and regional levels. Pakistan can be neutralised by putting strong diplomatic and military pressure on it either by carefully managed military activity on the LoC or by massive propaganda campaigns or by exploiting its internal dissensions and conflicts to India’s advantage. Given India’s strident approach, Pakistan should hold back its keenness to revive the dialogue. It should put this relation on hold till India agrees to a mutually acceptable agenda for condition-free talks on all contentious issues.
Meanwhile, Pakistan should pay attention to four issues on a priority basis: increased diplomatic interaction with other countries, especially with Afghanistan, Iran, Russia and the Central Asian states; control religious extremism and terrorism on its soil; streamline foreign policy management; and improve governance and salvage its faltering economy.
Pakistan must strengthen its diplomatic interaction with states other than India to strengthen its diplomatic clout. Special attention should be given to strengthening its ties with Afghanistan for adopting a shared approach for countering religious extremism and terrorism. Pakistan must offer financial and technical support for Afghanistan’s reconstruction and economic development. Similarly, economic and diplomatic interaction needs to be strengthened with Iran and the Central Asian states. It should respond quickly and positively on expanding relations with Russia in the fields identified during the recent visit of the Russian defence minister. This option should not be allowed to drift away.
Pakistan cannot develop a positive interaction with the rest of the world without controlling extremism and terrorism in the domestic context. In order to achieve this objective, the current military operation in North Waziristan and other tribal areas must be supported. However, the civilian government does not appear to be keen on building political support for the operation against militant groups. With the exception of periodic statements in support of the operation, the top civilian officials avoid taking a categorical stand in public on a regular basis in its favour.
There is a lot of confusion in foreign policy management in Pakistan. Several federal ministers make contradictory statements that cause confusion about the direction of foreign and security policies. The foreign affairs portfolio is with the prime minister but at least five people make foreign policy statements as and when they like. They are Sartaj Aziz, Tariq Fatemi, Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, Khawaja Asif and Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif (for Turkey and China). While the army chief was in the US on a trip meant to strengthen Pakistan-US security relations and assure US officials that the military was pursuing a security operation against terrorists in a non-discriminatory manner, Aziz and Asif made remarks that raised doubts about the credibility of the army chief’s trip. The prime minister should limit the number of his colleagues who can venture into foreign policy and they need to speak in harmony with one another and with the army top command.
The issues of the economy, especially shortages of electricity and gas, should get priority over the federal government’s high profile and media-oriented projects of building roads, highways, bus services, free distribution of laptops and giving vehicles to people on soft loans. Use all these funds to address the energy shortage, which will generate new jobs and thus reduce economic pressures on the people. Furthermore, the federal government cannot continue to sleep over the demands generated by Imran Khan and his party. This policy will in the long run hurt the prime minister badly. If the Sharif government and parliament cannot resolve the current political conflicts, both will become dysfunctional and irrelevant to problem-solving in Pakistan.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 1st, 2014.