Both countries must recognise their near-indispensability to each other’s causes
A joint statement to officially affirm the key agreements reached between PMs Sharif and Modi at the SCO sideline meeting in Ufa, Russia, has ruffled a few feathers in the land where no feather is ever left fully unruffled. Many, at home in Pakistan, lamented the conspicuous absence of any mention of ‘Kashmir’ in the said joint statement. Chief among the grumblers was Hurriyat leader Geelani who took Kashmir’s neglect in the discussions as tantamount to a betrayal of Kashmiri people by both Pakistan and India; he later discovered that declining an invitation to an Eid milan event from Pakistani High Commission was perhaps the most effective expression of his disillusionment. Other weepers included the likes of Senator Rahman Malik – he of the unblemished glory — and PTI’s Shirin Mazari; evidently a broad sweep across the political spectrum. It is tempting to ask of these despairing souls that notwithstanding the Kashmir issue’s significance – a matter so complex it merits its own scholarship – what did prior joint statements inclusive of the Kashmir predicament really achieve?
Anyhow, following the angry reaction at home, National Security Advisor Sartaj Aziz came forward to offer much needed damage control and insisted that all issues of grave concern – yes, including Kashmir – and even Samghota Express, etc, had been duly brought up during the meeting with Modi. Why such critical details were left out of the official joint statement remains a mystery absolute. However, in fairness, one could ask to what degree does the lack/absence of acknowledgement of the Kashmir issue in this particular communiqué affect Pakistan’s standing with respect to its rival neighbour. In fact, it wouldn’t be too outlandish to stretch the envelope a little and conjecture that all these theatrics could well be part of a conscious plan; a plan to slowly push the inert issue of Kashmir to the background, followed by a quick succession of scripted assurances and promises to placate the masses. We could, after all, be witnessing a shift in Pakistan’s foreign policy vis a vis India, with Kashmir, for once, no longer in the foreground. Perhaps this is crediting Pakistani policy makers with undeserved political acuity and the reality could be far simpler and less romantic, ie our leaders are actually inept and they just botched up the most critical part of state level correspondence – communication.
Given their massive population sizes and border-hugging proximity, India and Pakistan can no longer wall off their markets from each other, unless some deranged collective masochism or grand paranoia dictates otherwise
Regardless, the fact is this meeting between the two prime ministers was a much needed resuscitation measure considering some acrimonious developments between India and Pakistan of late, featuring such downers as suspension of diplomatic dialogue last year, military exchanges across the working boundary, and more recently Modi’s attempt to move the UN sanctions committee to take action against Pakistan for releasing Zakiur Rahman Lakhvi, the alleged mastermind of the Mumbai attack – a move subsequently vetoed by China.
However, it wasn’t all gloom and doom, with some positive aspects which tend often to fall into the cynic’s blind-spot, for instance, the desire by both leaders to seek reconciliation and future dialogue, evidenced in their agreement to meet next year (in Pakistan) along with their commitment to arrange NSA level meetings on top of engaging their respective DGMOs. This is certainly an advance over the previous decade that featured zero visits from Manmohan Sign to Pakistan.
Bravado and bluster aside, both countries must recognise their near-indispensability to each other’s causes. India may be a rapidly growing economy, but a more stable Pakistan offers it greater opportunities for: trade and commerce; paring down its defense budget; more security, and perhaps even – at the risk of getting ahead of oneself – a possible South Asian Union at some point — an online casino arrangement similar to the European Union. A tumultuous history does not necessitate a likewise tumultuous future. The status quo need not remain constant. In WW2, America and Japan were pitted against each other. Today they are allies. Russia and China likewise overcame their rivalry to become to become members of AIIB, SCO and NDB. America and China have inflicted mutual wounds plenty, but are also the biggest trading partners in the world. And decades ago most of Europe was up in flames, ravaged by internecine warfare before a gentle calm settled over its fiery blood and gut splattered landscape like a soothing blanket.
Besides, what other choice does Pakistan have? In case you haven’t noticed, Pakistan is no terrestrial heaven. With our military engaged in cleansing operations in the tribal belts and Karachi, do we have even the slightest bandwidth for yet another six decades of sustained engagement on our eastern border?
Understanding the regional dynamics could be helpful here. India is a rising power. Obama’s pivot to Asia has elevated its strategic position still further in the regional power dynamics. India is rapidly expanding her market and engaging regional powers in trade. At present, bilateral trade between India and China stands in the ballpark of $65-70 billion – by some estimates set to hit a trillion dollars by 2050. With Russia, India aims to hit the $30 billion mark in the next ten years – in bilateral trade. In addition, India is investing heavily in Afghanistan on dams, power plants, steel plants, iron-ore mines, trade-routes and institution building among other initiatives. The list goes on. Given their massive population sizes and border-hugging proximity, India and Pakistan can no longer wall off their markets from each other, unless some deranged collective masochism or grand paranoia dictates otherwise; because the cost benefit calculus simply doesn’t add up, too heavily tipped on the cost side as it is.
It would take special ingenuity in incompetence and ineptitude to goof this up. But then again, one must never underestimate our ‘leaders’
Gone are the days of conventional warring and closed economies. Smart diplomacy and liberal economies are sacrosanct features of successful states. Crass and puerile tit for tat international politics should be left to North Korea and the like. Luckily, this is recognised as much by Modi and Sharif; both savvy businessmen before all else – including statesmanship. Furthermore, with its membership into the SCO, the onus is now on Pakistan to take a harder line with terrorists of all shades given that Central Asian states are already vulnerable to growing radicalism as is evident in ascendancy of militant groups like IMU.
It does appear, though, that for Pakistan things are finally starting to look good: with a conciliatory Ashraf Ghani in place of manic depressive Karzai on the west; a generous investment friendly China on the east; an emerging Iran (with relaxed sanctions fresh from its nuclear deal with US) making ripples; watershed though preliminary Taliban negotiations riding over the fiery thunder of Zarb-e-Azb against the radical cancer in-house; and now rekindling of diplomacy with India. It would take special ingenuity in incompetence and ineptitude to goof this up. But then again, one must never underestimate our ‘leaders’.
So, yes, our foreign office is need of re-shaping – and a permanent foreign minister! – and, yes, the Kashmir question cannot ebb into complete oblivion; and, perhaps we can agree Nawaz took a few steps too many when he walked to greet Modi at the SCO summit, but clearly renewed diplomacy between two nuclear countries — which between each other share some significant percentage of our planet’s population and have also fought four wars with each other – of necessity merits precedence over lighter concerns and should, therefore, be celebrated by both.