Indo-Pakistan relations

Living in the past benefits none

The nature of relations between these two countries took a downturn in spite of the fact that PM Nawaz Sharif is keen and has been so since his first election as the Prime Minister of Pakistan in the 1990s. He is doing all that is necessary to achieve the goal of normalising relations with India. Then why is it not working? Some of the reasons are well-known, like the perennial opposition of the establishment, both civil and military, which, for ambiguous reasons and unfounded fear, is opposed to better relations between the two countries. Some other reasons, not so well-known are apprehension of some sectors of Pakistani business community who believe that the grant of MFN status to India would mean destruction of our industry and exports. The history of three wars between the two countries, for which both blame each other, has sown a big seed of distrust between the two. The great and overwhelming problem of poverty, over population and filth are also old reasons.

But to these, two more have been added recently: 1) The dharnas by the two well-known politicians created an uncertain political situation in Pakistan; 2) the fear of Nawaz Sharif that he will soon be replaced by someone else. Some rumours went to the extent of suggesting that the establishment wanted to immediately replace Nawaz Sharif because he was adopting an independent foreign policy on Afghanistan, India, the nuclear issue and major powers, especially, the USA. God alone knows the truth, as the Persian saying goes: “Darogh ba gardan-e-ravi”. A major problem is that Pakistanis readily believe such rumours as true which seems to be their favourite pastime. Needless to say that the anchors of all TV channels, prompted by their owners, play a suitable role in enhancing this tendency.

Among these problems, one has to mention the problem of “deus de machina” i.e., something sudden and unplanned that throws a big spanner in the wheel of little progress that the leader may be able to make. A recent example of this was the unexpected, cold blooded and senseless attack by the Taliban at the Army Public School, Peshawar, in which some 132 children were murdered, besides others, including the principal and some security guards. This created a great commotion and distracted the PM from the important task of nation building.

It will be wrong, however, only to blame Pakistan for the perennial setback in Indo-Pak relations. All the factors mentioned above apply in equal measure to India. Let us take the Siachen affair, for example. All was ready for a final settlement between the two. Pakistan’s Defence Secretary had even flown to New Dehli to sign the agreement but a call from some senior person of the Indian armed forces to the Indian leadership scuttled the whole thing.

The spread of nuclear weapons in South Asia too could be attributed to India’s senseless desire to become a nuclear power or to defame Pakistan because it knew that it will follow suit, but being a much poorer country it will be internationally isolated. But by 1974, the year it conducted the nuclear explosion, its enemy number one, China, had already become a nuclear power, which meant that becoming a nuclear power after the 1962 border war with China was not of any military use. On the other hand its decision to become nuclear in 1974 provided a legitimate reason to Pakistan to follow suit, where all internal opposition disappeared — particularly by people like the Defence Secretary of Pakistan, Ghulam Ishaque Khan and Commerce Secretary V A Jaffery, both very influential bureaucrats, but opposed to it — replaced by nearly universal public support in Pakistan. The role India had played in the defeat and dismemberment of Pakistan in 1971 war was too fresh to be forgotten by the Pakistanis. So Pakistanis proudly supported Bhutto when he told Kissinger that we would “eat grass” but become nuclear.

However, Pakistan exploited its nuclear status during the Siachen war in 1999. It made it known to the world that it would use its N power if India was to attack it across international border, like it had done in 1965. Thus, by posing the threat of outbreak of a nuclear war in South Asia, Pakistan was able to prevent India from launching a massive retaliatory attack by conventional weapons, in which it was much stronger. Probably Pakistan would not have used its nuclear weapon in the Siachen war because of very damaging retaliatory strike by India, nevertheless it’s gamble had succeeded in preventing India from an all-out attack.

India’s decision to become a nuclear power had also forced it to relinquish its membership of NAM, of which it was emerging as the sole leader with great international moral authority. It would have possibly helped India become a permanent member of the UNSC which it has been seeking for the last 30 years but without much success. Today the Green Movement and the antinuclear lobby has become so strong that even the US President, leader of the nuclear world, is talking of a non-nuclear world. Although India has become a nuclear state but as both its neighbours, China and Pakistan, are also nuclear powers, it’s capacity to threaten them with a nuclear attack has disappeared along with its moral authority.

But India’s history of behaving irrationally is replete with many examples. For the creation of Pakistan itself India has been blamed by two of its most respected nationalist leaders, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, of the pre-Partition India and Mr Singh, Foreign Minister in the last BJP government.

Now India has served notice to PIA to sell its assets in New Delhi which means to close shop. We Pakistanis can understand India’s desire to weaken us but why India does not realise that it amounts to cutting one’s nose to spite one’s face. Pakistan, as an underdog, is not like the dreaded USSR. It has many powerful friends in the OIC and outside of it to bail it out. India cannot do to Pakistan what President Reagan had planned to do to the USSR during the Cold War: make it go bankrupt. It also seems to have forgotten the Urdu adage,“kawwa chala hans ki chal, apni bhi bhol gya”.

In the case of India, we Pakistanis become irrational: “better dead than be alive as a slave” to India. No one can defeat a person or nation ready to die. Afghan history is a living example of that. Three wars with three superpowers of their times, each has made it poorer but none has been able to defeat it. Secondly, we know the result of succumbing to extremists. The more you compromise, the more they become convinced of their cause being right. And then one day they turn against you with devastating effect, as in the case of Pakistan.

India is rightly proud of being one of the oldest and wisest civilisations. It is the inventor of “zero”, one of the greatest contributions to human knowledge. Therefore it is a pity that it is also one of the poorest today. I think that the real cause of poverty in South Asia is the irrational belief of its people. The internet and all related technologies of today have made it obvious that in today’s globalised world no country can live in the past. Unfortunately, India is, and Pakistan is not far behind.