Optics not good at Nawaz-Modi talks
The recent Nawaz-Modi meeting was an excellent manifestation of diplomacy by India, if we look at what Daniele Varè, the Italian expat diplomat said years ago, “Diplomacy is the art of letting someone else have your way.”
This talk ever since has been repetitively discussed, debated, analysed and, most importantly, criticised in the media. This meeting has also gained international attention, with US Vice President Joe Biden declaring it an important step forward.
Domestically, while the government apologists have continually presented it as a breakthrough, the opposition and analysts argue otherwise. It is as clear to them that the recent talk was no breakthrough. Rather it was a highly “Modi”-fied session and not something to brag about.
“My opinion is that a meeting was arranged and international forces played a role in arranging the meeting on the side-lines of SCO summit,” said Shah Mehmood Qureshi, former foreign minister and the current vice-president of PTI, an important force in the opposition. “Because the international opinion was that the tension between Pakistan and India was reaching an uncomfortable level. So both sides were pressurised to calm things down.”
Damned if you do; damned if you don’t
It is interesting to see how different stakeholders analyse the same meeting.
“Well, it was not a forum where we had to get the Kashmir issue resolved,” Sheikh Waqas Akram of PML-N clarified. “It was just a bilateral talk, where premiers of many countries were there, India included. And there were talks on various important issues, terrorism being one of them.”
“There are two main components to it,” said Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri, another former foreign minister. “One being optics and the other being substance. Optics were definitely not well-managed in this recent meeting, and I feel they should have been well-managed, as optics do send a signal. I feel there was no proper preparation of the meeting and the foreign office was bypassed. It feels like the preparation of this meeting was done in a hurry, because if the foreign office were involved, it would have corrected the optics already. The second component is substance and I do welcome a meeting. However, Pakistan should realise that no progress with India can be made without Kashmir issue.”
Domestically, while the government apologists have continually presented it as a breakthrough, the opposition and analysts argue otherwise
“Coming to the substance and focus of the meeting, it was all India’s agenda that was there,” Qureshi expressed his concerns. “There were negotiations on Mumbai trial and its progress. There was discussion about exchanging voice mails, and the cooperation that was decided was on India’s terms. No matter what Mr Sartaj Aziz says later, it was totally in India’s court. And how it reflected later? The meeting called is of national security advisors and not foreign ministers. This step tells that the agenda will be precise and limited, and will be of India’s interest, rather than Pakistan’s.”
A talk with India was in halt for quite a while, and there is no doubt that not participating in the current opportunity would have earned Pakistani leadership a volley of critique both domestically and internationally. However, even participating did not earn much for Pakistan because of both its weak stature in the meeting, and the criticism domestically. For Pakistani government it has clearly proven to be a “damned if you do and damned if you do not” situation.
Concerns not addressed
Again, interestingly enough, different sides had a different stance on Pakistani concerns that were not addressed in the talk.
Akram, however, totally contested the critique being hurled the government’s way. “People need to realise that Pakistan coming off arrogant won’t get us Kashmir. Similarly, India being arrogant won’t give them Kashmir. So we need to stop debating the irrelevant,” he stated.
Qureshi however had a very elaborate view on what all Pakistan missed out during this opportunity.
“Now Pakistan has some important issues and no significant progress was made on any of such issues. First important issue is Kashmir. It was not there in the agenda, and has been decided to be handled through back-channel talks. And what was the implication. Syed Ali Geelani of Hurriyat, for the first time, refused to attend the Eid Milan Party arranged by Pakistani High Commissioner in Delhi,” he gave his opinion on the Kashmir issue.
“This shows the disappointment of Kashmiri leaders. And this also shows how Kashmir has been handled, or mishandled in the talks by Pakistan. Even in the aftermath, Indian newspapers talked about Kashmir being their atoot ang (inseparable part) and hence displayed their unwillingness to talk on this issue. This is on UN agenda, and they are failing to acknowledge it. A strong case should have been presented.
“Second important concern for Pakistan is that of water,” he moved on. “In the composite dialogue, that discussion is very limited and the scope is narrowed down to Kishanganga and Baglihar. However, Pakistan has serious reservations and the scope is much larger for Pakistan, especially it has serious reservations on the construction of dams by India on the western rivers. The issue of water, in full scope, has not been addressed by Pakistan in the meeting. The world has enough evidence that South Asia is in a scarcity zone now and will face serious challenges over water in the next decade. And since India is in the upper riparian, and we in the lower, this can be a serious source of tension. This issue should have been raised.
“Thirdly, we have serious evidence of Indian interference in our internal matters, and in Baluchistan and Afghan border,” he expressed another concern. “It is clearly evident that India is attempting to create instability and promoting elements that are involved in terrorism. This is a serious matter, and a strong case was not presented in this regard, so obviously Pakistani people are disturbed.
“The fourth important concern is regarding the peace talks between Afghan leadership and Taliban in Murree,” he stated. “The reconciliation process was through the insistence of international forces, like USA and China. It is decided that another round will be held after Ramadan. Now, Pakistan should have raised this issue in the meeting to understand India’s take on this matter, because the talks can fail badly if Indians try to disrupt those.
“And last but not the least is regarding the economic corridor between China and Pakistan,” he explained another interest of Pakistan. “India is opposing it, while the whole region benefits. Now, this issue should have been raised and India’s reservations should have been probed. This was not done.”
Kasuri also expressed his concerns on the issue. “This has been felt that many important issues important to Pakistan have been put to back-burner. Maybe the Pakistani side was feeling that all issues cannot be handled simultaneously, as there are many issues like Kashmir, trade, nuclear security. But this is a wrong approach. All issues should have been carried on simultaneously. Yes there can be different velocity of each, but zero mileage should not be attributed to one of the issues. I am surprised on this, since when I was the foreign minister a lot of progress was made on the Kashmir issue. It should not be ignored now. And Pakistan should definitely not be scared. All issues of concern to India and of concern to Pakistan should be discussed and resolved.”
Hence, it is evident that Pakistani prime minister did not definitely make a strong case of Pakistan.
What of Pakistani stature?
Another very important criticism in this regard that the government faces is the weak stature and the cold reception given by Modi to Nawaz, the argument being the clear breach of diplomatic norms by the Indian premier.
“Well what would opposition do if they won’t even criticise?” Akram expressed his views on all the fiasco going on. “Saying stuff like Modi did not come to receive and all does not prove anything. Diplomatic norms are important, and India asking itself to talk to Pakistan is a breakthrough is a big achievement. Another important aspect is the international appreciation that Pakistan received has got us an edge over India.”
Qureshi, being a former foreign minister, had a different take on diplomacy.
“I myself have been a foreign minister and I understand the diplomatic norms very well,” he quoted from experience. “Now the courtesy extended to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was undetermined. Mr Modi did not come to receive him, while generally you receive the other heads of state yourself – at least you walk to your door. And then the body language said a lot. It was cold, and a very cold and calculated message was being channelled.”
Kasuri too gave his views. “Optics should have been better managed, and their power should not be ignored. This was a grave mistake, and this makes me feel foreign office was not given proper space, otherwise this would not have happened in the first place,” he stated. “Two mistakes of this sort have been made by Pakistan in the recent time. One was when the PM went to Delhi on Modi’s swearing in ceremony, and the second one is this incident. Mr Sartaj Aziz explained that we did have discussion on Kashmir, but then he should have announced right away like Indians did.”
“When President Musharraf went to Indian prime minister and shook hands, it was celebrated and called a great diplomatic step,” Akram however pointed out a past incidence. “Now same people are criticising the government for not coming off strong in the recent meeting. This is all just an act, and that’s all the opposition can do.” He clearly negated the importance of any hue and cry raised by the opposition regarding this matter.
“This is all cosmetic talk intended to fool people,” Qureshi had a different opinion. “And the government should be doing some serious talk.”
Optics were definitely not good, and Pakistan should have taken care of this. Pakistan is a nuclear power and it should make a batter case of itself in the international comity
No matter what explanation is provided and what is said in order to nullify all the concerns and critique, it is evident that Indian side treated our head of the state as someone not-so-important. This has a lot to say about our significance and importance when seen through India’s eyes.
However, Akram had a different take on the comparative stature of Pakistan and India, in the light of recent events.
“Well as per US-Iran deal and the geopolitical alliances in the region, we cannot say that India has totally overpowered or isolated Pakistan. The way they are dreaming of becoming an economic giant — and they have become to quite an extent — they won’t be able to afford any terrorism in their territory. Pakistan’s economy has borne the brunt of terrorism and India definitely would want to cooperate,” he was confident that the ball wasn’t totally in the Indian court even now.”
When fear was expressed on the issue that India’s membership in SCO has nullified any advantage of Pakistan, Mr Kasuri negated this. “I do not see it like this. Both are big countries and nuclear powers. And both are UN members, does this fact nullify the UN itself? Similarly SCO is not a military alliance, unlike NATO and Warsaw Pact. So this is not a valid argument,” he expressed his opinion.
If Pakistan had made efforts to better manage the optics, then a better message about its stature would have been channelled to the world. It is a nuclear power and should behave as such.
All in all
This much-debated event carries a different connotation each for different stakeholders.
“Now how do you call it a breakthrough, since all the issues of importance to Pakistan have been put in the back-burner?” Qureshi questioned. “I would call it, at best, a meeting under international pressure, which was cold and calculated.”
“Well, as per the recent meeting it was definitely important,” said Akram, “but I do not consider it a big milestone. All I would say is that the process was in halt, and it has resumed.”
“I think Pakistan has a great opportunity due to Chinese initiatives,” Kasuri opined. “We have the option of becoming an economic hub, if the whole Eurasian region is connected, and Pakistan’s importance will be magnified. These opportunities should be capitalised.”
The simultaneous agreement on the recent episode hence remains: Optics were definitely not good, and Pakistan should have taken care of this. Pakistan is a nuclear power and it should make a batter case of itself in the international comity. Rather than presenting us as weak and meek, our officials should make sure that we stand tall in the international community and do not under-represent our case.
