Dealing with Modi – difficult but doable

Both sides will need to rein in the extremists

Accepting Indian prime minister designate Narindera Modi’s invitation to Nawaz Sharif amongst leaders of all SAARC members to attend his oath taking ceremony on Monday in Delhi should have been a routine matter. Ironically it was not to be.

Atal Behari Vajpayee’s bus yatra to Lahore in early 1999 cost Sharif his job. The Pakistani leader embracing a BJP prime minister did not amuse a recalcitrant military leadership headed by general Pervez Musharraf.

In fact they had other designs. Musharraf did no hide his disdain for Vajpayee by refusing to salute him. Neither Nawaz nor his Indian counterparts were aware at the stagethat the Kargil misadventure was on the anvil.

Although there are some similarities, the situation is now intrinsically different from 1999. But perhaps the prime minister this time over was being doubly careful not to alienate the military by hastily accepting Modi’s invitation.

Although Nawaz Sharif did extend an invitation to India’s prime minister elect to visit Pakistan, he is not coming any time soon on a friendship mission a la Vajpayee.Neither is Sharif embarking on a bilateral visit to New Delhi.

All the SAARC members have been invited. Hence Sharif’s no show at the oath taking would have stood out like a sore thumb, especially in the backdrop of strained relations between the two neighbours.

Although the foreign office had recommended that Pakistan should not spurn Modi’s invitation, its spokesperson did not rule out the possibility of someone representing the prime minister at the oath taking ceremony. Some had even suggested the president gracing the occasion.

In ordinary circumstances he would have been a perfect choice. But being the chief executive of the country only Sharif can do business with his Indian counterpart.

Modi ‘s hard-line against Islamabad in the past also entails that even a semblance of an olive branch from New Delhi should be reciprocated. Mamnoon Hussain is a ‘shareef aadmi’.

Modi ‘s hard-line against Islamabad in the past also entails that even a semblance of an olive branch from New Delhi should be reciprocated

Unlike his predecessor Asif Ali Zardari he is perceived as a rubber stamp president. Hence sending him would be deliberately missing an opportunity to set the ball rolling on bilateral relations with the newly elected Indian government.

Once bitten twice shy. Sharif, before going to New Delhi, wanted to take all stakeholders — euphemistically speaking the military leadership — on board.

This is indeed a sad state of affairs that within a year of being sworn in as prime minister there is a strong perception that he has developed a trust deficit with the khakis. Proxies like Hafiz Saeed supplanted by supportive voices in a small section of the media are crying at the top of their voice that Sharif should not shake hands that “are soaked in the blood of Indian Muslims”.

Whatever Hafiz Saeed’s problems with India, it is indeed ironical that BJP could not have secured a historical victory at the hustings without being buttressed by theMuslim vote bank. The Hafiz is on the most wanted list of the Indians for his alleged role in the Mumbai carnage of 2008. But in Pakistan he is the darling of the establishment, as well as a section of the media.

Attending Modi’s oath taking ceremony is a multilateral formal occasion rather than a bilateral visit. Hence only good can come out on the sidelines of such a contact.

Sharif has set a record of making fourteen foreign trips in eleven months of his rule — most of them useless. This one to India was necessary. But he was dragging his feet for obvious reasons.

The late Zuliquar Ali Bhutto heading a truncated and vanquished Pakistan, in1972 embarked on a historic visit to Shimla to cut a deal with the Indian prime minister Indra Gandhi in 1972. Before embarking on the visit along with his young daughter BenazirBhutto, he took the stakeholders including the parliament on board.

This oath taking is no East Pakistan debacle or Lahore process moment that Sharif against his natural instincts was being overly cautious, to mend fences with our estranged neighbour.

Nawaz Sharif and Modi, despite some basic differences, have similar economic agendas. Both of them head right wing parties with a string of pro private sector agendas.

Modi has been variously compared to free enterprise championslike the late Margret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan; as well as to the father of China’s four modernisations Deng Xiaoping, some have likened him to the Russian strongman Vladimir Putin.

Drawing support from Hinduvta, Modi’s treatment of the Muslim minorities in the past has been dismal. But the economic miracle he spearheaded in his home state of Gujarat, where he was chief minister for the past 13 years, is spectacular. He has been singularly successful in doing what Shahabaz Sharif is trying to achieve in Punjab albeit with mixed results.

Granting most favoured Nation (MFN) now euphemistically rechristened as Non–discriminatory Market Access (NDMA) by Islamabad was ostensibly put on hold at the last moment on the plea that the status is granted to the next Indian government. Soon it will be the opportune time to initiate bilateral negotiations on the issue with the new BJP government.

Once bitten twice shy. Sharif, before going to New Delhi, wanted to take all stakeholders — euphemistically speaking the military leadership — on board

Islamabad will also like to discuss the Kashmir issue, Saichen and water disputes with New Delhi. Modi is committed to removing Article 370 of the Indian constitution giving a special status to Indian held Kashmir. Removing it would be tantamount to legally annexing it.

This would be an unacceptable position for Pakistan. The COAS General Raheel Sharif ‘s recent statement that Kashmir is ‘shahrug (artery) of Pakistan’ should be read in this context.

The Indian wish list, apart from trade and economic cooperation from Pakistan, would include an end to what it terms as cross border terrorism on the Line of Control in Kashmir. It would also demand more stridently than its predecessors that the perpetrators of the Mumbai carnage be brought to book by Islamabad.

Bringing Jamaat e Dawaa ‘s head Hafiz Saeed to book is on the top of New Delhi’s wish list. But owing to known sensibilities this would be hard act to follow for the civilian government in Islamabad.

Pakistan condemning the terrorist attack on consulate general of India in Heart is timely. But Islamabad needs to precisely guard against the consequences of such incidents. Afghan leadership and the newly elected leadership will have no qualms blaming them on Pakistan based or supported groups.

The GHQ has a major stake in our India policy. Hence any rapprochement with India is not possible without the military being on the same page.

It is axiomatic that Nawaz Sharif is able to take general Raheel Sharif on board when he makes his overtures across the border. The ubiquitous establishment opposing such measures will be disastrous not only in the regional context but also for future of democracy in the country.

Unfortunately real or perceived tension between the military and civilian leadership could not have come at a worst time. It could have detrimental consequences for Pakistan in the present developing regional scenario.