Will the two countries ever end their tussle?
For all practical purposes, a regional approach will benefit both India and Pakistan greatly. Despite the numerous problems that the two can solve if they put their heads together, the two nations continue to spar against each other. India has the obvious advantage; bigger economy, better development and more influence in the global sphere. The question is where should Pakistan go from here?
“Indo-Pak bilateral relations have been a historically complex narrative starting from the partition of sub-continent in 1947,” said Hadi Hussain, a social activist from Lahore. “The situation continued to get complicated over the last six decades under the influence of direct and indirect patronage of nationalist and military jingoism. There is no end to countless accusations and counter-accusations going on between the two nations who are unfortunately nuclear powers too thus having a potential of ending up in a major human disaster,” he added.
Hadi feels like the two nations seem to be on the perpetual brink of letting bygones be bygones, but historically the brink is where they remain. “Most of the policies that the two come up with are ‘in retaliation’ to the policies developed by the other. Instead of thinking of what is more appropriate and viable for the whole region. Both nations should start thinking from the people’s point of view to achieve a peaceful co-existence,” he said.
Pakistan currently needs to focus more on solutions rather than differences with India. This includes “common issues of terrorism, religious extremism, illiteracy, poverty and many more,” Hadi asserted.
Prasenjit Bhattacharjee, a corporate manager based in London, is a non-resident-Indian (NRI) and follows relations between the two countries closely. “While I don’t believe India has a hand in Balochistan or any terrorist activities, I do think that India has created huge pressure on Pakistan in all other aspects,” he said.
“Firstly, I think in 1947we got two bourgeois states in this subcontinent. The partition resulted in Pakistan whose western part was more martial and east was more civilian. After the eastern part was gone, I guess the western martial bourgeois were really looking for some revenge.
“Meanwhile, India under Indira Gandhi came up as very strong bourgeois power with autocratic views, while remaining socialist during the transition. This outlook started to erode because of corruption and rise of the middle class. And this middle class did not want to be like Japan or Korea ie developed but a welfare state, rather it wanted to be like US or UK,” Prasenjit explained.
Pakistan currently needs to focus more on solutions rather than differences with India. This includes “common issues of terrorism, religious extremism, illiteracy, poverty and many more
On the other hand, Pakistan was a different story. “Pakistan, for revenge or deterrence, started 4th generational unconventional asymmetric wars like Khalistan, Kashmir, etc. The aim was to bleed India dry, and India did bleed but it healed due to economic development that stemmed from the middle class.
“I feel that both your establishment and our rising bourgeois live through their nationalistic views. For example, Hindu bourgeois think Delhi is theirs so they are okay with undermining Lahore or Karachi, which does not belong to them anymore. While GHQ feels like Lahore is theirs but undermining Delhi’s rising is not a problem. It’s an eye-to-eye situation,” he said.
In his opinion, both countries need to think of the bigger picture and start considering the region. “Both of them lack supra-nationalistic perspective, or a broader view that the whole region is theirs so they should care for both Lahore and Delhi. Europe already went through this phase,” he stated.
While some believe that the problems are mutually shared and can only be mutually resolved, Mayank Jain, a journalist in Delhi, believes Pakistan needs to clean up its act before it does anything else. “It might be really hard for Pakistan to bring focus on anything apart from terrorism when it comes to India now that the issue has a global context backing it. And at the same time, it needs to do better on solving its own internal separatist problems before perceiving countries such as India as a threat,” he said, speaking about the widespread belief that India is behind separatist movements and terror groups targeting Pakistan.
“Putting up a brave face in negotiations might be diplomatically right but countries on both sides of the border need to tame their own demons before burning the other’s house and passing a verdict,” he added.
Mayank feels that the only way forward for Pakistan is to work on economic ties. “The countries need to start with economic ties; for instance, share water in an amicable way and keep terrorism on the backburner before hundreds of other issues of importance are sorted out.”
Khurram Chaudhry, an educator from Lahore also addressed the notion that India funds chaos within Pakistan. “I think India may be in some way helping groups that reach out to them and they most certainly may have moles in place. However, that can be said with any country with a sizable budget for intelligence activities. What Pakistan needs to understand is that India may only be taking advantage of a situation that already exists but is in no way the cause of such issues in Pakistan. Pakistan, on the contrary, has been the cause and reason for the radicalisation of Indian held Kashmir.” he explained.
A cooperative and multinational border control regime, where all counties trust each other and share intelligence, can develop a full throttle offensive that helps ending militant bases
Pakistan’s next steps need to revolve around finding those involved in attacks on Indian soil and dismantling and purging their training camps, according to Khurram. “Pakistan needs to understand that India will take it to task and never trust it if it tries to accommodate those Islamists who focus on the Kashmiri jihad”.
The country also needs to learn how to play nice with other neighbours. “We need to end militancy and make friends with Iran and Afghanistan. Our lack of cooperation with our neighbors allows these groups to function and allows other powers to flex their muscles and play their games.
“A cooperative and multinational border control regime, where all counties trust each other and share intelligence, can develop a full throttle offensive that helps ending militant bases,” he stated.
In terms of terrorism Khurram believes that wondering about India’s role in terrorism in Pakistan is akin to ignoring the elephant in the room. “Those madrassas we allow to manufacture the type of thinking that helps blow things up in Pakistan, where does that fit in?” he questioned.
Sabeen, an educator from Karachi, went back to the roots of the problem. India’s hostility has a reason, and Pakistan has given it to her repeatedly. “I think the basis of India’s reaction toward Pakistan can be traced back in history. Pakistan’s infiltration in Kashmir and Pakistan’s policy of war and militancy toward India has shaped India’s hostile foreign policy toward Pakistan,” she said.
However, at this point in time, hostility is not helping Pakistan, and it certainly is not that grand a strategy for India either. “Both countries need to overcome their differences for regional strength. They need to sort their issues out through dialogue. There are plenty of common interests and benefits that both can form a consensus over,” Sabeen explained.
Of course that is easier said than done. Sabeen does not think idealism is very useful in this situation. “There are years of hatred and hostility behind the current situation and they continue to play a large role in creating problems for Pakistan. Furthermore, there are interests of militaries on both sides, which demand that a pseudo threat be maintained to justify military budgets,” she lamented.
It is clear that cooperation between the two in the only way to move forward, but who will take the first step, that is the million-dollar question.