The idea of a no-war pact between India and Pakistan was first floated by former President of Pakistan Ayub Khan. However, the idea was rejected by India and later by Pakistan when the former made the proposal. Now, both countries are vehemently opposed to it.
Consequently, they have fought 3 full fledged wars, twice as conventional weapon states and once as nuclear weapon states and are constantly fighting on the frozen heights of Siachen, where general winter, to quote Mani Shankar Ayar, is killing more of our young soldiers than each other.
In spite of the futility of these conflicts, the mindset in both countries, dominated by the civil-military and military-civil bureaucracies, remain unchanged. Consequently, the threat of a new outbreak of war between them hangs heavily in South Asian air and has become a huge stumbling block in the normalization of relations between these twins and in impeding the progress of cooperation among SAARC countries.
So what is the solution? If a bilateral no-war pact between India and Pakistan is not possible, can a multilateral SAARC no war pact be contemplated. Although, every SAARC member feels helpless in the face of the seemingly implacable enmity between India and Pakistan, I believe that a multi-lateral SAARC no war pact is not only possible but offers the only prospect of economic cooperation and greater prosperity for the people South Asia.
The question is: what is my optimism based on? After all, if these two countries are unwilling to sign a bilateral peace treaty, which sounds eminently sensible, why should they sign a multi-lateral SAARC peace treaty?
These apprehensions are not without foundation, but one should remember that the creation of SAARC also took place several years after it was first proposed by Bangladesh and in the beginning was opposed by Pakistan. Therefore, an initial negative reaction from India and Pakistan is to be expected. However, that should not deter other SAARC countries from making such a proposal.
It should be obvious to any one that if only such a multi-lateral treaty could be signed by the members of SAARC, it would electrify the environment of South Asia and immediately produce multidimensional benefits for all of them. For example:
1) This would end smaller countries fear of invasion by a larger neighbor and reduce overall tension in the region. 2) The present situation in which all other SAARC members have to do a tight rope walk between India and Pakistan for fear of upsetting one of the two will diminish to a great extent. 3) Close bilateral cooperation with India and Pakistan, outside the SAARC frame work, will not be seen by the two with suspicion. 4) The need by the two rivals to create strategic depth in other SAARC countries would no longer be required leading them to dismantle the spying network that both have built in smaller SAARC countries. This would lead to huge savings in their expenditure. 5) This would automatically lead to greater cooperation amongst them in fighting the common enemy of terrorism. 6) As such the political and security cooperation among SAARC countries will improve, as after all, apart from Pakistan and India, a kind of tension also exists between Bangladesh-India, Sri Lanka-India and even Nepal-India.
Hence, a SAARC peace treaty would almost automatically give an impetus to both bilateral and multi-lateral cooperation and from that stage onwards the path of SAARC towards a EU and Asean type regional organisation will become much smoother.
After a knee-jerk reaction, over a period of time, India and Pakistan will come around to the idea and realise its benefits. First of all, such a proposal by one of the smaller SAARC country will not be seen by either of the two as an attempt to hoodwink the other or score a political point.
Secondly, both India and Pakistan will be afraid of being isolated, in case rest of the SAARC members decide to sign a SAARC peace treaty to end, once and for all, chance of an intentional or accidental outbreak of war between them.
Thirdly, a SAARC peace treaty would eliminate the US excuse to keep its foot in South Asia to prevent a nuclear conflagration. Today, the most fearful thing for the entire world is the prospect of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan.
Thus, a SAARC no-war pact would bring an end to their awful apprehension and also allow the world to breathe more freely. Although it does not mean that India and Pakistan will move in the direction of denuclearisation, at least it will reduce, and may even bring to an end, the costly and dangerous arms race, conventional and nuclear, between the two poorest countries of the world.
Some may ask whether a SAARC No-War Pact would not encourage the terrorist and extremists in India and Pakistan to intensify their attacks and plunge them into a deeper abyss of tension. After all, it is the prospect of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan, caused by another attack similar to that of December 2001 on the Indian parliament or November 2008 in Mumbai, that keeps the US and even China and Russia engaged in the affairs of South Asia.
This argument is only plausible on the surface. In reality, the terrorists and even the Establishments in the two countries will see no more benefits in stoking the winds of war between India and Pakistan, once such a wind dies down with the signing of a SAARC no-war peace treaty. Moreover, the political leadership in both countries, which want normalisation of relations, would no longer feel subservient to their establishments, and become bolder in seeking more cooperative relations.
Thus a no war pact would create only a win-win situation for the two perennial rivals, other SAARC countries and even the world at large.
The writer is a former Ambassador of Pakistan.
