JOIN USPak's Kashmir obsession
The Pakistani generals who control their country’s security policies are consistent in their approach to India. They view it as an eternal threat and therefore as an eternal enemy. To meet this threat, they have chosen the path perpetual though calibrated, mostly simmering confrontation. For tactical reasons, they may go along with a period of intense engagement but they have never deviated from their basic approach.
It is India that has always desired normalisation and cooperative ties with Pakistan and for that purpose it has essentially pursued engagement even if that had to be at a low level for prolonged periods. On account of the contradiction in the Indian and Pakistani approaches, the former’s policies have been largely reactive and confused. This was especially so during the 10 years of the UPA rule. Prime Minister Narendra Modi is demonstrating the same inconsistencies in his Pakistan policy like his predecessor.
The most significant take away from the joint statement issued after Modi’s discussions with Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in Ufa, Russia, was the Indian prime minister’s acceptance of the invitation to attend Saarc summit which will be held in Islamabad next year. Will Modi be satisfied with only a routine Saarc visit to Pakistan or does he want it to be of a path breaking nature? If he wishes the latter, then there will have to be a full bilateral visit along with that for Saarc.
The question is if the Pakistani generals see this desire as a weakness and hence an opportunity to up the ante in cross border terrorism and firing along the international border and the Line of Control expecting a subdued Indian response.
Some indications will come during the forthcoming meetings of the two countries’ national security advisors (NSAs) and those of the director general of the Border Security Force and director, Pakistan Rangers, and the directors-general of the two armies.
The omens following the Ufa meeting have not been auspicious. Pakistan NSA Sartaj Aziz has indicated that Pakistan will go back on its commitment to expedite the Mumbai trial. It now wants, as in the past, India to provide evidence that will help the trial to be fast tracked. The fact is that the Lashkar-e-Toiba is an instrument of the Pakistan state and the army will never abandon it. It is, therefore, futile to expect that Pakistan will ever be serious in bringing the likes of Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi to book. No wonder, he is out on bail even if he is not being allowed to roam freely as is his boss Hafiz Saeed.
The Ufa statement does not contain a direct reference to Jammu and Kashmir and Nawaz Sharif has been severely criticised in Pakistan for this omission. In response, Sartaj Aziz has said that the issue will be raised. The fact is that the statement mentions that the two prime ministers were prepared to discuss all outstanding issues and those naturally include Kashmir. The statement goes further to indirectly assert that peace and development are linked to these issues being addressed. This is a standard Pakistani position.
Pakistani forces have killed an Indian woman in firing along the border in Akhnoor. Last year, Indian forces were given instructions to take deterrent counter action. The instructions given now are nuanced. Indian forces are to give a robust response but restrict it to the areas from where Pakistan is firing. There is an obvious desire to maintain the Ufa process. Of course, the Pakistani generals are not so committed. The Ufa meeting led to a decision to release fishermen in each country’s custody. This is a good decision and one in which Modi would have a special interest as most of the Indian fishermen are from Gujarat. However, a permanent solution needs to be found to address humanitarian issues concerning fishermen, prisoners and inadvertent border crossers. A start can be made by entrusting this matter to the National Commissions of Human Rights of the two countries.
Cultural contacts
Modi takes a great deal of interest in promoting cultural contacts and also visits temples, where possible, during his visits abroad. The decision to encourage religious visits is thus not surprising. It remains to be seen if Pakistani fundamentalist groups will allow a freer flow of Hindu pilgrims or an improvement in the upkeep of temples. Pakistani intelligence agencies who wish to meddle with Sikh pilgrims may also be wary of larger numbers of Hindus. Modi had correctly drawn red lines for Pakistan. A significant one related to Pakistan projecting the Hurriyat as third party by consulting them before official India-Pakistani meetings and briefing them after they were held. Former foreign secretary Sujatha Singh’s visit to Islamabad was cancelled last August because the Pakistan high commissioner in Delhi met the Hurriyat leadership before that visit.
Now, it is clear that red line has been blurred. Major powers suffer loss of credibility if they ignore the red lines they draw. Will Modi realise that inconsistency and confusion cannot be the basis of Pakistan policy? Indian officials are conveying in off the record briefings that India has not agreed to anything more than what is contained in the Ufa statement.
This seems to be true. It was necessary to clarify the Indian position as Sartaj Aziz said that the prime ministers agreed to begin a back channel on the Kashmir issue. Thus, for the time being, India has not signalled a willingness to resume the full dialogue process but restrict the bilateral engagement to the issues mentioned in the statement. Pakistan may attempt to smuggle in other issues but this attempt has to be resisted. Pakistan has not shown an interest in building a cooperative relationship. Instead, it continues to harp on resolution of outstanding issues, meaning Kashmir. This obsession will not change.
(The writer, a former diplomat, was Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi)