While commenting on the creation of a Kartarpur corridor for Sikh pilgrims, Prime Minister Imran Khan said that contrary to public perceptions, Pakistan’s powerful military and intelligence services do want peace with India. He said, “My political party, the rest of our political parties, our army, all our institutions are all on one page. We want to move forward.”
That is a quite a statement and, if true, it represents a much-needed U-Turn for Pakistan. The prime minister reinforced the U-Turn theme when talking later in Islamabad to a group of Indian journalists. The former cricket star travelled extensively in India during his sporting years and bonds easily with Indians. He promised that he was ready to hold talks with Prime Minister Narendra Modi to bring peace to the sub-continent.
Interestingly, the security establishment in Pakistan did not express any reservations about his desire to talk to his Indian counterpart. He was not accused of selling out to Indian interests, as Prime Minister Nawaz was.
Imran continued the U-Turn theme. He acknowledged that it was not in Pakistan’s interest to allow its territory to be used for terrorism. Did he just concede the point that in the past Pakistan had allowed its soil to be used for terrorism? Or was he simply saying that regardless of whether that had happened or not, he would not let that happen in the future? Does he have the ability to control the groups that carry out such acts?
Sounding very upbeat, he said all issues that have divided the two countries since their birth, including the vexing and forever contentious issue of Kashmir, could be resolved through dialogue. And then came the clincher. He went on to say that there was no military solution to the Kashmir problem.
Was he was admitting that Pakistan’s decisions to wrest Kashmir by force in 1947/48 and 1965 had failed, as had all the proxy wars it had carried out in recent decades. Had he come to the realization that there was no military solution to Pakistan’s conflict with India? Had he admitted that Pakistan had initiated all the major and minor wars (with the exception of the Siachen conflict) and that it had lost all those wars?
He added that there would be no easy solution to Kashmir since the problem has festered for seven decades which is probably true if the emphasis is on the word “easy.” But he injected an air of optimism when he said that “If both sides are willing to talk, I’m sure we can come to an acceptable solution.”
When it came to the core issue of extraditing masterminds of terror attacks, Dawood Ibrahim and Hafiz Saeed, he said that was a possibility but only if there was reciprocity: “There can be grand gestures. But there should also be a response from the other side.” He did not deny that they were terrorists, nor did he deny that terrorists based in Pakistan had carried out the attacks in Mumbai, which are major concessions.
Then, without offering any evidence, he claimed there was a change in mindset in Pakistan on ties with India: “There is now a consensus in Pakistan to seek peace with India.”Why had it taken seven decades to arrive at this obvious consensus?
He went on to say that the dividends from peace could be large for both countries but especially for Pakistan since it would now have access to large markets in India. That is a true statement. But it had been true all along. Why was is it being realized now?
Similar desires for peace have been expressed in Pakistan in the past. Its leaders have always talked about wanting peace with India, even when a war is about to break out, or when a war has ended. For example, right after the surrender of Dhaka in December 1971, General Yahya famously said that “wars solve no problem.”
The prime minister now has to walk the talk, or lose credibility domestically and internationally. This is Imran’s moment on the world stage. Everyone is watching his every move. He has to take some very specific steps or peace will slip from his hands.
First, he has to change the Indo-phobia that characterizes the military and civil establishment. They continue to feel that India is anxious to dismember Pakistan, like it did in 1971. But more than one person has said that what happened in 1971 was Pakistan’s own doing.
While commenting on the creation of a Kartarpur corridor for Sikh pilgrims, Prime Minister Imran Khan said that contrary to public perceptions, Pakistan’s powerful military and intelligence services do want peace with India
Second, that Pakistan cannot wrest Kashmir from India by force, either directly or indirectly. It has tried that over and over again. It has failed every time. The interventionist policy has backfired, because every time India becomes even more repressive in its Kashmir policies.
Third, that militancy directed at India is a failed strategy which yields no positive results. Indeed, it creates bitterness between the two countries and gives the Hindu extremists in India an excuse to malign Pakistan and prevent peace from taking root.
Fourth, that Pakistan’s strategy of creating strategic depth in Afghanistan to ward off an Indian attack in the east needs to go. There is not much that is different between the Afghan Taliban that Pakistan has supported and the Pakistan Taliban that Pakistan detests. And once peace is achieved with India, what would be the point of seeking strategic depth in Afghanistan?
Fifth, and most importantly, if Pakistan is serious about peace, it has to rein in its spending on defence, which now encompasses both conventional and nuclear forces. This spending is creating tensions in the region and fuelling an arms race. It is creating instability and paranoia in both countries. And most fundamentally, it is diverting funds from productive uses such as poverty alleviation and social and economic development.
It’s time for the prime minister to take the soft path toward India. He might find it worthwhile to reach for his book of poems, and turn it to the Robert Frost poem, “The Road Not Taken.”It describes the choice a traveller faced as he was going through the forest and encountered a fork in the road. One was well travelled and the other less so.
The traveller says: Two roads diverged in a wood, and I — I took the one less travelled by, and that has made all the difference.
Imran needs to take the five-step U-Turn outlined above. If he doesn’t, the conflict with India will continue with all the attendant costs, risks and uncertainties. It’s Imran moment to shine on the world stage. It’s his for the taking. Will he?
The writer is a defence analyst and economist. He has authored Rethinking the National Security of Pakistan (Ashgate Publishing, 2003)
Published in Daily Times, December 3rd 2018.