Q: Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) has remained a bone of contention for quite a long time. As Pakistan’s envoy to India, you’ve also tried to address the matter through dialogue but in vain owing to certain hostile factors. Where do you see the issue heading at a time when India is using state machinery to crush genuine voices of freedom with past proposed solutions such as the much talked about four-points and Chenab formulas fizzling out eventually? A: At the end of the day, the issue of J&K would be resolved as per the aspirations of the Kashmiris. Pakistan and India are obviously two major parties but eventually we cannot remain oblivious to the thoughts of the people of J&K. At the moment, the UNSC resolutions provide the best framework. For that to happen, the two countries need to sit together but I do not see that happening anytime soon because India is adamant to continue its oppressive policies in the valley. The farcical appointment of the interlocutor as well reflects how India is trying to distort the issue itself. So, things may not appear very optimistic at the moment but I do not have an iota of doubt that the people of J&K will eventually get the right to self-determination through continued struggle whether five or twenty years from now. Q: But how relevant are the UNSC resolutions passed in 1948 and 1949 in the context of international law when India is still stuck in the post-Mumbai attacks mantra and pushing for bilateral talks as per the 1972 Shimla agreement and UNSC resolution 1172 adopted in June 1998 that specifically called for bilateral solution? A: Those resolutions shall continue to remain relevant and there’s no question about that. As far as the Shimla agreement is concerned, yes, we have agreed to resolve this issue bilaterally but in no way, did we or the people of Kashmir ever agree to surrender the right to self-determination. The agreement was primarily a means to how we can get UNSC resolutions implemented so this how I interpret it. In the last few decades, the two countries failed to resolve the issue bilaterally. Hence, it is important as to how we can progress. You mentioned UNSC resolution 1172, and if you see one of the paragraphs, it is clearly mentioned that all issues including the issue of J&K must be resolved. The international community is aware of the fact that J&K is the core issue. India needs to be told about this clearly but since it is suffering from hegemonic tendencies towards its neighbours, it looks difficult. Pakistan is willing to resolve it bilaterally, but the Indians need to be amenable to bilateral talks. I do not have an iota of doubt that the people of J&K will eventually get the right to self-determination through continued struggle whether five or twenty years from now Q: How significant is Tehran’s recent support for the Kashmir cause given that it also enjoys cordial trade ties with New Delhi? A: I think the Iranian supreme leader has taken a principled position to support the struggle of the Kashmiri people and Pakistan appreciates that support. We hope that other friends of India too press upon it to reach out to Pakistan and the Kashmiris to resolve the matter. As I said earlier, unless this issue is resolved there is simply no possibility of sustaining the process of enhancing mutual trust between our two countries and then embarking on a trajectory of cooperative arrangement in this region. Hence, we hope that the international community would push for lasting peace. Q: How true is the perception that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Pakistan policy has largely failed? A: It has indeed failed in the context of bringing about any positive change in Pakistan-India relations but on the other hand, Indian PM Modi’s attitude towards Pakistan has kind of paid off electorally speaking because BJP has been able win Uttar Pradesh (UP) elections with thumping majority. So, it is delivering them in the context of vote bank and that’s why by sustaining anti-Pakistan rhetoric they are trying to get more states like Gujarat where legislative elections are due next month. But when it comes to creating a conducive environment in the region, obviously PM Modi’s foreign policy has failed. Q: What about former Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif? Why did he fail in peace overtures even when New Delhi-based business tycoon Sajjan Jindal was allegedly involved in track II diplomatic initiatives in Kathmandu and Murree? A: You know the Pakistan-India relationship is unique. By taking such inconsistent, incoherent and adhoc measures, one cannot place this relationship on irreversible trajectory of normalisation. If this relation were to be really normalised, both sides need to take measures which are fundamental to addressing our problems. Now Pakistan has always shown remarkable flexibility in order to accommodate Indian concerns but unfortunately, we do not get a similar response from the Indian side. You do know how things are in Indian-Occupied Kashmir (IoK). Operations continue with close to 700,000 Indian forces deployed with people being killed every day. So, unless India takes some tangible steps to reduce repression and demilitarise occupied territory, we do not see as how the bilateral atmosphere can improve between the two countries. Unprovoked firing along the Line of Control (LoC) is another issue for which Islamabad proposed formalising an understanding but received no response from New Delhi back in 2015. It is India which is the stumbling block to lasting peace that refuses to cooperate with Pakistan and even tries to give a perception to the world that Pakistan is uncooperative on the issue of terrorism. However, I can tell you that how India refused to cooperate on Mumbai attacks trial and Pathankot incident inquiry. Perhaps, they do not want these issues to conclude and continue to keep on hammering Pakistan. Q: Coming to the issue of Indian spy Kulbhushan Jadhav, don’t you think that Pakistan should have granted limited consular access at the initial stage to stall any Indian media propaganda which eventually managed to twist some facts and even tried to undermine the credibility of Pakistan’s legal team at the ICJ? A: It wasn’t necessary because it is governed by the 21st May 2008 agreement on consular access. Paragraph 6 of that agreement very clearly states that when it comes to people involved in espionage, consular access is not automatic which is decided on merit. So, we took the right decision and now if consular access has been granted to his wife purely on humanitarian ground then it’s a welcoming step. It must remain clear that Pakistan was never obliged to grant consular access under our bilateral arrangements. Q: What are the odds that the Jadhav case would eventually be in Pakistan’s favour? A: We’ll be submitting our counter-memorials on 13th of December which is next month. Now the maximum the ICJ can do is to tell us to grant consular access which we’ve already given to his wife as I said earlier. Hence, it’s already settled. Beyond that the ICJ cannot give a ruling because the case is confined to consular access. As far as the merit of the case is concerned, Jadhav has already been tried according to our domestic laws and he has been given a fair chance to defend himself. He’s now been sentenced to death and his mercy petition is with the army chief. If that gets rejected, then he has a chance to file another petition with the President of Pakistan. Hence, he’s being treated fairly under our legal domain. Q: You’ve recently presided over a conference on South Asia under IPRI’s banner where luminaries such as the Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee (CJCSC) General Zubair Mahmood Hayat addressed the participants. What were the core reasons to organise this conference? A: IPRI is committed to promoting dialogue and promoting understanding of topical issues. We do organise such conclaves periodically and will continue to do so substantially on this discourse to address the challenges our region faces. We need to engage more in such intellectual activities in order to achieve tangible solutions to our problems which are not only traditional security challenges but non-traditional as well such as cybercrime, terrorism and drug-trafficking. Our aim is to keep pace with the world by exploring possibilities through which Pakistan and the region as a whole can adapt to changes. The writer is a geopolitical analyst and an alumnus of the Department of War Studies, King’s College London, University of London. He regularly appears on the media to discuss and debate on issues related to foreign policy, politics and national security. He can be reached at hassankhan440@gmail.com and tweets @mhassankhan06 Published in Daily Times, November 26th 2017.