Foggy Bottom

We talked about some of the burning issues that confront the two countries. To that extent that we have contributed in a manner where the trust deficit is getting reduced as part of the Confidence-Building Measures." - Indian External Affairs Minister, S. M. Krishna.

"If India has limitations of mandate for talks, then we can wait. We are ready to engage and negotiate anytime and anywhere, but we are not in a hurry. We can wait till when they are ready." - Pakistan Foreign Minister, Shah Mahmood Qureshi.

Following the much awaited foreign minister talks held in Islamabad from July 14-15, the two counties are unable to dispel the notion that it was a failed endeavor. While, there were not many expectations from Qureshi-Krishna talks, yet one expected that the two sides after around two years of stalemate in their relations following the Mumbai terror attacks will at least come up with some tangible progress. If Kashmir remained an uphill task for resolution, the two countries could have at least reached some agreement on less contentious issues like Siachen, Sir Creek, easing travel restrictions and forging better trade relations.

Why cannot the two erstwhile neighbors, who also happen to be nuclear states, normalize their ties? If New Delhi and Islamabad were able to resolve some of their issues in the past by signing the Indus Water Treaty, 1962, Rann of Kutch agreement 1969, Simla Pact, 1972, Lahore Declaration 1999 and several confidence-building measures particularly those dealing with non-attack on each other's nuclear installations (1988), advance notification of each other's military exercises (1991) and banning chemical weapons (1992), why they are unable to deal with impediments which obstruct the resolution of conflicts mentioned above? How India and Pakistan can break the existing stalemate and follow an approach which is forward looking instead of retrogressive?

The complicated nature of Indo-Pak relations cannot be analyzed without mentioning four important factors which since 1947 till today continue to cast a deep shadow of pessimism and gloom. First, parochial and intransigent mindset held more by the state than by societal actors. That mindset is quite reflective in any crisis situation when the two sides release their venom and hate against each other. Whether it was the attack on the Indian parliament on December 13, 2001 or Mumbai terror attacks on November 26, 2008, the two sides embarked on allegations, charges and counter-charges against each other without realizing the fact that such type of a behavior only makes things worse in South Asia. Second, the lack of pragmatic and forward looking approach pursued by India and Pakistan caused not only stalemate and stagnation in their conflict-ridden relations but also jeopardized the future of more than one billion people of the two countries. By sticking to their rigid positions and not being flexible on issues which require moderation only led to the deepening of mistrust and suspicion against each other. Paranoia, effort to pull down each other, demean and humiliate each other merely augmented the level of hostility between the two countries.

Third, the failure of India and Pakistan to seize opportunities for the resolution of their conflict and peace. In October 2004, the then President of Pakistan Pervez Musharraf, presented ‘out of box' solution of the Kashmir dispute. Unfortunately, India missed that opportunity and failed to give positive response. The October 2005 earthquake, which also affected J&K was another opportunity to help resolve the Kashmir issue as the humanitarian catastrophe which struck Kashmir provided legitimate ground for softening the line of control and promote inter-Kashmiri interaction.

Recently, it has been argued by some quarters that the leadership of the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is another opportunity because of his cool minded and prudent approach on dealing with Pakistan. Unlike the BJP which acted aggressively against Pakistan following the attack on the Indian Parliament by mobilizing half a million forces along its eastern borders, banning Pakistani planes from its air space, suspending road, air and train links and downgrading its diplomatic relations with Islamabad, Manmohan Singh withstood enormous pressure after the Mumbai terror attacks and only suspended composite dialogue with Pakistan.

Finally, it is the failure of civil societies of India and Pakistan to compel state actors to pursue a wise and forward looking approach while dealing with unresolved conflicts. In both countries, under the false notions of patriotism and national interest, those at the helm of affairs are able to prevent a qualitative change in Indo-Pak relations. Within the fold of civil society of the two countries, there are hard line groups who oppose any positive change or flexibility on issues which continue to derail the peace process.

Despite all the efforts made under track-II and track-III dialogue, no major change has taken place to ease travel restrictions. Although, India can claim to have done well in terms of economic growth, boosting its foreign exchange reserves and industrialization, more than 400 million people in that country still live below the poverty line. Around one-third of India is facing home grown militancy in the form of Naxilite and Maoist movements. Communal tension and ethnic strife also challenge India's quest for a big power status.

Like India, Pakistan has also failed to improve the quality of life of its people and is facing large-scale violence and terrorism in different parts of its country. In its essence, the two countries have paid a heavy price of their conflicts; failure to seize opportunities for peace and following an intransigent approach based on paranoia, mistrust and ill-will against each other. Unfortunately, there is no realization on the part of the two neighbors that that time is not on their side and despite achieving the so-called nuclear status, majority of their people have marginal access to the basic necessities of life.

Sixty-three years, after gaining independence, it is time for India and Pakistan to critically analyze fault lines which still impede normalization in their relations and threaten peace in the region. The failure of India and Pakistan to live peacefully is reflected in the poor quality of life of people, large-scale corruption, the role of mafias who control areas where the writ of the state is not to be seen and their failure to excel in world sports, science and technology.

Where do we go from here? Instead of rhetoric and holding photo-sessions after every round of talks, India and Pakistan must now proceed for some practical measures which can at least prove their commitment and sincerity to the normalization process. Such measures could include removing travel restrictions, reopening respective consulates in Karachi and Mumbai, cessation of hostile propaganda and strict non-interference in each other affairs; and agreement and implementation on Sir Creek, Siachen and water related issues. Some real confidence-building measures should also be taken in Jammu and Kashmir, i.e. demilitarization, withdrawal of Indian and Pakistani forces from their controlled parts and the softening of line of control, building of inter and intra-Kashmiri dialogue leading to self-rule.

Till the time, bureaucratic obstacles and political expediency continue to obstruct the Indo-Pak normalization process, one cannot expect any major breakthrough for peace and stability in South Asia. It has been admitted by both New Delhi and Islamabad that mutual mistrust and lack of confidence make it impossible for the two sides to move forward for better relations. In that case, why India and Pakistan are unable to take serious measures which can at least enhance the level of trust and build confidence so that the future generations of the two countries are able to live peacefully?

The writer is Professor, Department of International Relations, University of Karachi and Director, Program on Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution. 

Moonis Ahmar is a Visiting DAAD Fellow at the Willy Brandt School of Public Policy, University of Erfurt, Germany. He is also Professor of International Relations at the University of Karachi and Director, Program on Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution.

Facebook | Twitter | Email

Comments (0)

Show/hide comments

Show/hide comment form