Nawaz’s quixotic thaw with India

Back to square one

In the present context, suspension of bilateral contacts between India and Pakistan is not at all surprising. The official reason given by New Delhi is that Pakistan’s High Commissioner to India Abdul Basit had the temerity to invite the Hurriyat leadership for consultations just before the foreign secretary level talks.

The secretaries were to meet on Monday in Islamabad for the much-awaited resumption of dialogue between the belligerent neighbours. Owing to the on-going pincer movement of Imran khan and Tahirul Qadri, in any case it would have been virtually impossible for them to meet in the Pakistani capital.

The cancellation of these talks is a personal setback for Nawaz Sharif. Indian intransigence at this stage is not only about hardening of its Kashmir policy under the leadership of Narendera Modi but also indicative of weakening of Sharif’s hold on power.

Ironically, developing strong economic and trade ties with India is a favourite hobby horse of the Pakistani prime minister. In 1999 his army chief had no stomach for his bus diplomacy welcoming Prime Minister Vajpayee to Lahore, which ultimately resulted in his ouster. General Musharraf instead launched the disastrous Kargil misadventure, throwing out Sharif in a coup in October the same year.

This time again, Sharif jumped at the opportunity to resume his quixotic pursuit to improve India Pakistan relations. When Modi invited all SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) leaders for his swearing in ceremony, Nawaz gladly accepted. Undoubtedly, at the ceremony he was the star of the show.

Modi was a good host. But under the thin veneer of bonhomie, the BJP hardliner prime minister was planning to make good his election pledge to deal firmly with Islamabad.

It was a Herculean blunder on the part of Sharif not to meet the Hurriyat leadership during his brief sojourn in New Delhi. In the past whenever a Pakistani head of state or government visited the Indian capital, the Hurriyat leadership was invariably invited to the Pakistani high commission for ‘tête-à-tête’.

The Pakistani prime minister not only ignored this precedent, but also adding insult to injury, chose to break bread with an Indian business tycoon. This did not go unnoticed in Pakistan. He was widely criticised in the media as well as by the opposition for symbolically ignoring the Kashmir issue.

Modi was a good host. But under the thin veneer of bonhomie, the BJP hardliner prime minister was planning to make good his election pledge to deal firmly with Islamabad.

The K word was not even mentioned in the Modi Sharif talks on the sidelines of the inauguration. Even more surprising was the fact that the Indian spokesperson briefing on the talks spelt out the Indian wish list quite clearly. The Pakistani side, on the other hand, chose to maintain a stony silence.

This could not have gone unnoticed at the GHQ. Hence, as per past practice, the Pakistani high commissioner met the Hurriyat leadership and in the process stirred up a hornet’s nest in the BJP camp.

Successive Indian governments had never raised any objections to the Pakistani leadership meeting the Hurriyat. In fact Kashmiri leaders were even facilitated to visit Pakistan.

The Modi government however has taken a different line on the issue. Pakistan’s stance is simple: Kashmir is a dispute that has to be resolved through dialogue. And of course India, Pakistan and the Kashmiris are three stakeholders in the matter who need to reach a diplomatic solution.

The recently elected Indian government, virtually shutting the door on the Kashmiri representatives, is indicating a shift in policy. In the past, as per New Delhi’s own interpretation of the Shimla agreement, Kashmir was a bilateral dispute to be solved though negotiations.

Now perhaps the new government considers it an integral part of India and hence non-negotiable except on its own terms. Not that the Congress led government was going to hand Kashmir to Pakistan on a platter.

Considering Jammu and Kashmir an ‘atoot ang’ (integral part) of India has been a consistent policy of successive Indian governments. Nonetheless, the process of negotiations for the sake of negotiations remained intact.

During the last year of Musharraf’s government an agreement of sorts to grant special autonomous status to Kashmir was also reached. It is claimed that owing to weakening of Musharraf as result of the lawyers movement to restore the ousted chief justice the plan could not be implemented.

The reality however was probably much different. The weak Congress government could not have got the agreement endorsed through the Indian parliament even if it had really wanted to.

There is no doubt that despite the exchange of gifts and double handshakes between Modi and Nawaz last May, the Indian prime minister is not going to budge from his party’ s hard-line stance on Pakistan. Modi is dealing a strong hand, whereas Nawaz Sharif, even if he survives the crisis at home, has been considerably weakened.

Successive Indian governments had never raised any objections to the Pakistani leadership meeting the Hurriyat. In fact Kashmiri leaders were even facilitated to visit Pakistan. 

Having been cut down to size, he is in no position now to take a relatively independent stance on relations with India. An increasingly assertive military leadership, especially on policy with neighbours, will be calling the shots.

New Delhi’s agenda is simple: it wants Islamabad to grant it most favoured nation (MFN) status, stop forthwith what it insists upon terming as cross border terrorism and, last but not the least, to bring the perpetrators of the Mumbai carnage to book.

It is unfortunate that the New Delhi is interested in a thaw with Islamabad only on its own terms. The newly inducted Indian military chief has also vowed to deal a strong hand to Pakistan. Hence it is not at all surprising that the number of ceasefire violations on the LOC has manifestly increased since Modi become prime minister.

Modi had also pledged during his election campaign for revoking Article 370 of the Indian constitution giving special status to the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The said provision has been already challenged in the Indian Supreme Court.

Under the provision, unlike other Indian state legislatures, J&K legislature has a six-year term. The state also has a separate flag. Elections are due in J&K later this year. It is quite likely that the BJP will use the extremist card to bag Jammu.

Naturally Pakistan, in turmoil within and facing external threats on its eastern and western borders, is not in an enviable position. With Nawaz Sharif’s future uncertain, a quasi-military or military backed government can possibly replace him.

The military is already engaged in an existential war against terrorists holed up in Pakistan’s badlands. Having to deal with possible threats both from India as well as post ISAF withdrawal Afghanistan, it will be spreading itself too thin.

Hence our squabbling politicians should resolve their battle for power turf through negotiations rather than by bending backwards to invite the ‘third umpire’.