Parliament, academia and India

A good step by the National Assembly Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs

It was only in 2013 that for the first time in the political history of the country, power was transferred from one democratic government to another elected government after the successful completion of the former. Pakistan has experimented with various democratic spells in the past but these efforts had always been interrupted and cut short by military takeovers. Whether it was the ineptitude of the political leadership or lust for power of the men in khaki that drove them to assume the front seat in the politics of Pakistan, the bitter truth remains that this mixture never led to the development and strengthening of democratic institutes and values in the country.

Merely holding elections and transferring power from one set of elites to another is not going to put Pakistan on the pedestal of growth and development. Carefully crafted policies and strategies and their subsequent implementation are a pre-requisite to utilise the true potential of the country’s resources and human capital. Given the historical significance of the geo-strategic location of Pakistan and the tremendous local ramifications of its interactions with the international community, it is particularly important to study and scrutinise the foreign policy of Pakistan. Though the task of drafting and implementing the foreign and security policies in a parliamentary democratic system is the prerogative of the executive, the standing committees of both houses (upper and lower) overlooking these matters can be strengthened to ensure the systematic flow of voices from the lower echelons to the top.

One such initiative in this regard is being carried out by the National Assembly Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs chaired by Mr Sardar Awais Ahmed Khan Leghari, who is a strong proponent of constructive engagement of parliament in foreign affairs and enhanced collaboration between legislature and the Foreign Office. The committee is collaborating with academics and experts from various fields to enhance its institutional capacity to better understand five main key areas: maintaining critical balance between Pakistan’s strategic partners, regional connectivity and integration, relations with GCC countries, Iran and Arab world, workings of the Foreign Office and economic diplomacy and the security challenges for Pakistan.

This initiative, however small, is a positive development towards a more democratic approach which creates space for voices from diverse sources to coexist. It also enhances the effectiveness of committee’s oversight role and creates greater possibility of divorcing the foreign policy of Pakistan from being ad-hoc and reactive to more preemptive and proactive in nature.

The committee released a policy document earlier this week that stipulated two main policy approaches with specific policy recommendations with respect to India-Pakistan relationship. The committee agreed that Pakistan’s approach towards India should be based on the following key principles:

• Reciprocity from India that may be simultaneous or sequential
• Reduction of trust deficit between the two countries through collaborative efforts
• Resumption of dialogue
• Result oriented dialogue that must focus on resolution of conflict which will be the end result of the above three principles of engagement

The document briefed that Pakistan should continue to seek comprehensive engagement with India on all outstanding issues. However, in the absence of this scenario, the committee recommended the Government of Pakistan to selectively engage with India in four key areas including Kashmir, water, trade and culture and communication. Some of the steps included institutionalisation of the 2003 ceasefire agreement, seeking reduction in state-sponsored violence against Kashmiris in Indian Occupied Kashmir, allying international support for the Indus Water Treaty violations by India, reducing and controlling of the bilateral informal trade and renewing the 1988 Cultural Agreement between the two countries.

The second policy option referred to adopting a rather defensive approach of restrainment towards India. This policy doesn’t signify a complete disengagement but focuses on taking actions that are contingent on and actively cognizant of the Pak-India and South Asian dynamics. Late Dr William C Martel talked about the policy of restrainment in the US foreign policy and it is interesting to see Pakistan-India relationship in this context. The salient features of this policy approach include monitoring ongoing events and responding proportionately.

The policy of refrainment might be the best bet for Pakistan if the relations between the two countries take another plunge and India adopts a hard line and extremely hostile attitude towards Pakistan (which until recently has been Modi government’s stance towards Pakistan). Therefore, while reducing its dependency on India, Pakistan should continue making efforts to increase its political clout in the international arena. For instance, development of bilateral ties with SAARC countries and other regional states such as Iran, focusing on untapped opportunities that exist in Central Asia like the Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India gas pipeline, vigorously pursuing IP gas pipeline (post P5+1 nuclear deal) or ensuring smooth implementation of the CPEC projects.

Whether the movers and shakers of the foreign and security policy of Pakistan will pay heed to these recommendations, only time will tell. However, for now, let’s commend the initiative of the standing committee to involve independent voices and provide concrete input on an area that is more often than not left untouched. As far for the deeper inculcation of democratic values in the overall system in Pakistan, we still have a long way to go.