Daily Times

Just as there are no permanent friends or permanent enemies in international relations, nations can ill afford to have permanent causes that determine relations with other countries.

And causes not showing any sign of realizing become deadweight on the national psyche scarring permanently the very persona of the nation.

We have been hoping against hope all these 68 years that one fine morning the UN would actually be shamed into enforcing its relevant resolutions and resolve Kashmir’s Gordian knot.The wars that we had waged in the pursuit of the cause have ended up in stalemates proving again and again the futility of using force. And after the nuclearzation of South Asia wars in any case have become mutually destructive with the potential toobliterate the very combatants.

The use of Non-State Actors (NSAs) has so far proved to be extremely counter-productive making life in the Indian Occupied Kashmir (IHK) even more miserable because after each ‘successful’ bloody NSA incident the backlash from the occupying troops had beenbloodier.

The umpteen numbers of bilateral negotiations that were held between Pakistan and India to resolve the issue too have failedbecause every time they met for the purpose the two did not seek a mutually acceptable solution but indulged in blatant one-upmanship.

The use of non-state actors (NSAs) has so far proved to be extremely counter-productive making life in the Indian Occupied Kashmir (IHK) even more miserable because after each ‘successful’ and bloody NSA incident the backlash from the occupying troops gets bloodier

Kashmiri Diaspora from IHK is too small. AJK Diaspora is mainly in UK where it is seen as an extension of Pakistani politics. So, one does not see either being able to accomplish anything beyond the noise that has surrounded the Kashmir issue for the last few decades.

And also why not accept that war, jihad, and approaching UN have all failed so freezing the dispute could be the best option? It has worked for many countries, including China and India. They have huge disputes including over Arunachal Pradesh and still enjoy $85 billion worth of bilateral trade. Why must we insist that dispute must be resolved before we trade?

Indeed, we would soon be at the risk of being accused by the world of wishing to live with problem for ever rather than wanting to resolve it if we did not replace sooner the tried and tested but failed Kashmir policy with the one that would seek to end the mutually harmful stalemate.

Of course, under the current circumstances the very suggestion of approaching the bilateral talks to find a mutually acceptable solution would be considered by our officially certified patriots as blasphemous.

So, before proceeding any further on this ‘blasphemous’ line of argument it would not be out of place here to state that perhaps the first step in putting the house in order would be to accept the right of the people to point out it is in disorder, question our contrived narrative of history, and acknowledge that critics among us are not enemies, neither are they Indian agents.

And while seeking alternatives why not take a second look at the four-stage Manmohan-Musharraf formula made public late 2007.The formula had seemingly held the promise of a give-and-take approach to resolving the dispute.

But today in Pakistan Musharraf is an ‘unwelcome’ name to say the least and in India Manmohan’s name may not be as unwelcome but going by the current mood of the BJP government particularly concerning Kashmir it is hardly likely that the two countries would even bother to refresh their respective memories about theinconclusive talks on a formula pregnant with possibilities.

During his last press conference just before the 2014 general elections in India Manmohan Singh had regretted not pursuing in right earnesttalks with Pakistan on ‘his’ four-stage formula.

In Pakistan President Zardari who had replaced President General (Retd) Musharraf in September 2008 had appeared all set to reopen talks with India on Kashmir but according to a source who should know what he is talking about Gen. Kayani the then Chief of the Army Staff (COAS) had told the then President Zardari’ to act as if nothing had been agreed’ with regard to the four-step Manmohan-Musharraf formula.

In any case President Zardari soon lost the little window of opportunity to resume talks with India as within 80 days of assuming office Hafeez Saeed the chief of the defunct Lashkar-i-Taiba alias Jamaat-ud-Dawah alias Falah-i-Insaniyat had allegedly masterminded the November 26, 2008 Mumbai massacre.

Former Foreign Minister Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri in his book ‘Neither A Hawk Nor A Dove’quoting extensively from Steve Coll’s New Yorker column ‘The Back Channel’ published on March 2, 2009 states (Page 352): He (Coll) refers to frequent meetings that Admiral Mike Mullen…had with the Pakistan Army Chief General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, as well as with General Ahmad Shuja Pasha, DG-ISI. Steve Coll gives Admiral Mullen’s assessment, according to which Kayani endorsed the principles of the non-paper on Kashmir. Both Pakistani generals, he said, spoke of a new strategic direction and that their shift in outlook ‘has been transformational’.

The US still has effective leverage in both India and Pakistan and like in the past it can still make the two resume talks on the formula.

However, interest in being broker for Pakistanis is said to be at an all- time low in the US today. ‘Why try to negotiate and renegotiate with people who probably like being victims and want the issue more than the solution’ is how most people in the US are said to see the matter.

According to Islamabad’s Washington watchers today the thinking in the new US administration is that Pakistan blackmails the US with nuclear flashpoint line of argument. It does not keep promises, its leaders lie and pretend they did not lie, and the quid pro quo is not always observed in a transactional relationship.

According to Steve Cohen of Brooking’s Institute the nuclear flashpoint theory amounts to Pakistan holding a gun to its head and saying ‘Help me or…’ the US feels its positive leverage has not worked with Pakistan so it is time to let go. Let China handle the issue.

The new narrative in Washington is said to be: ‘So let China deal with the nuclear flashpoint. We cannot contribute positively anymore.’

The writer is a senior journalist based in Islamabad. He served as the Executive Editor of Express Tribune until 2014

Published in Daily Times, September 23^rd 2017.