Daily Times

Relations between India and Pakistan are fraught with tension, hostility, mistrust and misunderstandings. Since independence both nations have fought four wars and countless border skirmishes, leaving them with catastrophic consequences. The most celebrated war of 1965 was, in fact, the ‘strategic defeat’ of Pakistan. Of the four wars, the Kargil conflict proved to be the classic case of civil-military imbalance in Pakistan. The prime minister was kept in the dark about the army adventure in Kargil (for a good reading, see Dr Shireen Mazari’s book Kargil Conflict). Consequently, the peace process initiated by the civilian government came to a halt. A haunting legacy of conflict and acrimony characterises the fragile relationship between India and Pakistan.

With Nawaz Sharif assuming the top executive office for the third time, there is renewed hope and interest in the revival of peace talks. The prime minister’s peace overtures toward India manifest his firm commitment to building a constructive relationship with India. Backchannel diplomacy is on. The special envoys of India and Pakistan are gearing up to take the peace process forward. One hopes that the backdoor negotiations would narrow the differences on lasting disputes, including the Kashmir issue.

In his recent visit to the Foreign Office, Prime Minister Sharif made his intent clear for repairing ties with India. Once Atal Bihari Vajpyee stated that you can change your friends but you cannot change your neighbours. As states cannot change their neighbours, it is in their interest to co-exist with them in a normal relationship. Decades of tension and conflict have proved time and again that neither India nor Pakistan can annihilate each other. They would have to learn to live together peacefully.

Prime Minister Sharif also holds the portfolio of foreign affairs. Perhaps it is to contain the encroachment of the security establishment in foreign policy making. It is the prerogative of the civilian government to make its foreign policy. In Pakistan, the army still holds sway over foreign policy with respect to relations with India, Afghanistan and the US. Reversal of this undemocratic practice in our body politic would take some time.

The veto of the army in the foreign policy domain is the cause of a host of problems confronting Pakistan on the external front. But two points place the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) government at an advantage: One, contrary to the forecast of a split mandate, the PML-N emerged victorious with a clear mandate. Two, the military is too busy to meddle in politics overtly. In the face of a growing insurgency, it has its hands full with countering the internal threat. Now it is up to the civilian government to take the driving seat in deciding foreign policy. In these circumstances, it would be difficult for the military to dictate its terms from behind the scenes.

In Pakistan much has changed in the relations with India over the last decade. The state and society are undergoing transformation slowly but surely. First, there is consensus among the civil and political forces to forge good relations with India. In the May 11 general elections India did not factor in our politics. The days of India-bashing are gone. Second, the military’s engagement on the western front does not allow it to open up another front on the eastern border. At the same time, it would not lower its guard on the eastern side. In fact, the normalisation process has the backing of the establishment, at least in the short-term. Third, Punjab has changed its hardline stance vis-à-vis Kashmir. People want to move ahead and bury the hatchet. Punjab, the largest province, dominating the military and civil establishment, has softened its stand on the Kashmir issue. In other words, the people in Pakistan are wary of the politics of confrontation with India. They are not merely desirous of government-to-government but people-to-people contact to be strengthened. Last but not least, the peace process between the nuclear-armed states would also enjoy the blessings of the international community, including the US.

To conclude, a summit level meeting of the prime ministers of India and Pakistan would give the much needed impetus to the stalled dialogue process. They can start with doable things on the table: expanding economic ties through trade, energy, cementing cultural and educational exchange and ensuring the implementation of the new visa regime. It is interesting from the Indian perspective that its drive to secure the Security Council permanent seat would remain a distant dream if it does not restore normality in its relationship with Pakistan. The anticipated meeting of both the prime ministers on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly would certainly give a boost to the talks. Nevertheless, expecting a breakthrough from it would be wrong as India is heading toward its parliamentary elections, likely by the end of the year. It is the right time to seize the golden opportunity of peace emerging between the nuclear-armed neighbours.

The writer is a Islamabad based
journalist and can be reached at hasan.naser.qau@gmail.com