Why India came back to the negotiating table

[s90]

By Baqir Sajjad Syed

ISLAMABAD: Renewed international pressure and growing realisation in New Delhi that the rapidly changing situation in Afghanistan could deprive it of its strategic leverage in the region has forced the sudden change of heart in India regarding ties with Pakistan, according to diplomats and analysts.

“It was being increasingly felt by strategists in New Delhi that after recent conferences on Afghanistan that endorsed President Hamid Karzai’s plan for reintegrating Taliban, India was being left out and Pakistan might take the centre stage,” a diplomat told Dawn when asked about the Indian proposal for resumption of bilateral talks.

It all started with Indian Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao’s call to her Pakistani counterpart Salman Bashir, almost a week ago, inviting him to Delhi in February for talks on wide-ranging issues that have been constraining the bilateral ties, particularly in the aftermath of the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks.

She expressed Indian government’s willingness to discuss issues besides terrorism which would remain the focus of the parleys.

Ms Rao went to the extent of offering negotiations on contentious issues like the water dispute, but stayed short of suggesting resumption of the Composite Dialogue.

India’s eagerness for resuming talks was evident from Home Minister P. Chidambaram’s belated admission that there was also a local Indian link to Mumbai attacks for which New Delhi had earlier been blaming Pakistan-based terror groups only.

Things afterwards started moving at a rapid pace towards detente. Pakistan sought clarifications and on Friday High Commissioner Shahid Malik met Ms Rao in New Delhi to discuss the agenda and possible dates for the meeting.

Although Pakistan is insisting on accepting nothing short of Composite Dialogue, there is realisation in the Foreign Office that sticking to revival of peace talks may jeopardise the opportunity for normalisation of strained ties.

The thinking is that the offer of initial contacts should be availed and subsequently taken forward to full resumption of Composite Dialogue.

“The attempt is to keep talking about the issues which are of concern to us,” Mr Malik said.

Although analysts and diplomats believe there are a number of factors that triggered the rethinking in India, the primary reason remains the changing scenario in Afghanistan coupled with the impending reintegration of Taliban in Afghan society.

Afraid of losing all the strategic gains made by India in Afghanistan by investing over $2 billion, it was thought that Indian interests could be best served by re-engaging with Pakistan.

The Istanbul and London conferences and acknowledgment by Nato commanders that Indian role in Afghanistan needed to be clipped to address Pakistan’s concerns showed the proverbial writing on the wall to the Congress government.

The global endorsement of President Karzai’s plans for reintegrating Taliban in Afghan society, motivated by the West’s eagerness to get out of Afghanistan as quickly as possible, was seen in New Delhi as strengthening of Pakistan’s position because of the role Islamabad was expected to play in wooing the Taliban. Equally worrisome for India was Pakistan’s offer of training the Afghan police and army personnel.

Sustained international pressure on New Delhi to mend fences with Islamabad also played a role.

The pressure from the UK and US increased in recent months, as the coalition forces in Afghanistan got ready for the final push in the war-torn country before pulling out.

Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, speaking at a Kashmir day event, also attributed India’s change in stance as a manifestation of the increasing international pressure on New Delhi.

Progress in the prosecution of alleged mastermind of Mumbai attacks in Rawalpindi courts where the accused have been indicted after lengthy delays and the first witnesses deposed last week provided the right ‘face saver’ to India to restart talks with Pakistan.

Indian Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna, in his interaction with media personnel, described these developments as constructive signs.

“Any step forward in the direction of Pakistan also investigating the Mumbai attacks will certainly make it easier for India to carry out normalisation of business with Pakistan,” Mr Krishna had noted.

Additionally, detractors of the Indian government began to characterise Indian stance of not engaging with Pakistan as futile. The upcoming Saarc events – the interior ministers’ meeting in Islamabad and the summit in Thimphu, Bhutan -– hastened the Indian decision, because it no longer wanted to be seen as stalling the peace process.

With all set for the two countries to resume bilateral talks, there are worrying signs as well. Jamaatud Dawa, accused of being a front organisation for banned Lashkar-e-Taiba, the group blamed for Mumbai attacks, is seen as gaining strength after holding a series of meetings in Muzaffarabad, Peshawar and Lahore.

The first high-profile activities by the group since the Mumbai attacks have almost coincided with a thaw in Pakistan-India relations.

This in itself may throw a spanner in the works and the much-awaited restoration of peace process may elude the people of the two countries.


©2010 DAWN Media Group

 

[karan.1970]

The Hindu : Front Page : India, Pakistan talks likely this month





Special Correspondent







NEW DELHI: A day after Indian officials acknowledged having asked Pakistan for Foreign Secretary-level talks, Pakistan High Commissioner Shahid Malik met Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao on Friday evening to clarify the scope of the proposed dialogue and explore convenient dates.

India now awaits a response from the Pakistan side, with Mr. Malik promising to get back soon. At the 45-minute meeting, the two officials discussed “details relevant” to the forthcoming meeting of the Foreign Secretaries, said Vishnu Prakash, spokesman of the Ministry of External Affairs. Addressing journalists, he described the meeting as “positive and constructive.”

In the background, South Block officials said the two sides were looking at the possibility of a meeting in February itself, and that the venue was not an issue. The initiative for reopening the talks, suspended since the Mumbai attacks in November 2008, came from the Indian side, when Ms. Rao called up her Pakistani counterpart Salman Bashir 10 days ago.

Dismissing speculation on either side seeking to restrict the scope of the talks, sources said all issues of interest to both sides could be taken up. But they hoped Pakistan would respond to the “Indian initiative” for talks with an “open and positive mind.”

Emerging from the South Block, Mr. Malik said the meeting was “useful” and the two sides discussed the possible agenda and dates for the talks.

Asked whether his government was insisting on the formal resumption of the ‘composite dialogue,’ he said dialogue was the only way forward. “We are not getting into details … There are so many issues in the composite dialogue which are of concern to Pakistan and India,” he said, adding he had heard the Indian side was keen on talking with “an open mind.”

“No one issue”


Pressed by reporters about Pakistan’s desire to focus on Kashmir, Mr. Malik said this was an issue which Islamabad always brought up whenever it had talks with India. But there were many issues which were of concern to both countries, including terrorism. “There is no one issue.”

 

[karan.1970]

Thaw in India-Pakistan talks? Chidambaram on way- Hindustan Times

India ends chill, calls Pakistan to talks

India has proposed foreign secretary-level talks with Pakistan, signalling the resumption of a dialogue that stalled after the 26/11 Mumbai attacks. This is being seen as Government's most important foreign policy initiative, reports Jayanth Jacob.
India on Wednesday indicated its willingness to resume dialogue with Pakistan, saying even "a few steps" by Islamabad in the Mumbai terror probe will "satisfy" it and will make it easier "to carry on normal business" with the neighbour.

Confirming the visit of Home Minister P. Chidambaram to Islamabad later this month, External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna said: "We are trying to focus their attention also on terrorism."

"Chidambaram will get a chance to have very useful exchanges with his counterparts and other leaders in Pakistan," Krishna told reporters accompanying him on a two-day visit to Kuwait.

"Any step forward in the direction of Pakistan also investigating the Mumbai attacks will certainly make it easier for India to carry out normalisation of business with Pakistan," Krishna said while taking note of Pakistan's recent actions in the Mumbai terror probe.

"India should be quite satisfied with Pakistan taking a few steps to investigate the Mumbai attacks," he replied when asked whether India would think of re-starting composite dialogue.

Pakistan recently indicated its willingness to accept Indian dossiers, including the confessional statement of Ajmal Amir Kasab, the lone Pakistrani terrorist caught alive during the 26/11 attack, as evidence to prosecute the planners of the Mumbai attacks. Islamabad also accepted evidence relating to boats used to ferry the attackers from Karachi.

Krishna's remarks indicated a likely thaw in bilateral ties amid Pakistan's repeated pitch for the resumption of composite dialogue.

Chidambaram will go to attend the Feb 26-28 meeting of home/interior ministers of the eight-nation South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). This will be the first visit by an Indian minister to Pakistan since the 26/11 attacks that suspended bilateral dialogue and brought ties to an all-time low.

Chidambaram is likely to be accompanied by Home Secretary G.K. Pillai and Intelligence Bureau Director Rajiv Mathur.

Chidambaram's visit could be followed by a meeting between the foreign secretaries of India and Pakistan, well placed sources said.

The foreign ministers and leaders of the two countries are expected to meet on the sidelines of the SAARC summit in Thimphu April 28-29.

The talks, however, will focus at this stage on terror and actions taken by Pakistan to prosecute the perpetrators and planners of the Mumbai carnage, the sources said.
The final decision on Chidambaram's visit will be taken by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in consultation with the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS), the sources said.

On Tuesday, Krishna had hinted at the possibility of re-engaging Pakistan, saying the doors to "talks were never shut."

He, however, made it clear that any talks with Pakistan at this stage would only focus on terror and actions taken by Pakistan to dismantle the anti-India terror infrastructure on its soil.

In a recent interview, Pakistan Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani made a fresh pitch for resuming composite dialogue while advising India not to allow the entire relationship to be held hostage by the single incident of 26/11 attacks.

Since the leaders of the two countries last met at Sharm el-Sheikh in July last year and decided to de-link composite dialogue from actions against terror by Pakistan, the mood had hardened in India amid a widespread feeling that Islamabad has done little to bring perpetrators of the Mumbai carnage to justice.

 

[karan.1970]

US ties India-Pak talks to Afghanistan - India - The Times of India

WASHINGTON: The persuasive hand behind the India-Pakistan thaw has welcomed New Delhi’s decision to talk to Islamabad while underscoring the dialogue’s importance to the situation in Afghanistan rather than to Pakistan’s peeves about Kashmir.

Two senior US officials who gave thumbs up to India’s move explicitly linked the decision to the complex situation in Afghanistan where New Delhi and Islamabad are locked in shadow boxing that could prove detrimental to Washington’s goals of enforcing peace and exiting from there. Neither of them mentioned Pakistan’s obsession with the unresolved Kashmir issue or India’s focus on terrorism.
''We are supportive of dialogue among India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan as a key component of moving ahead and achieving a stable region,'' P.J.Crowley, Assistant Secretary of State who is also the state department spokesman said on Thursday when asked about the Indian offer, adding, ''We certainly have been encouraging steps that both Pakistan and India could take to address mutual concerns and to take appropriate steps so that tensions can be reduced, cooperation can be increased, and as a result, you have a more stable region that is focused on threats – both interests that they share and threats that they share.''

The US concern about Afghanistan at the expense of Pakistan’s Kashmir agenda was made even more explicit by Washington’s special Representative to Afghanistan-Pakistan Richard Holbrooke, who made an important pronouncement – that will be music to New Delhi’s ears – by endorsing India’s stake in the war-torn country where Pakistan is questioning its locus standi.

''The Indians have a legitimate series of security interests in that region, as do a number of other countries, including, of course, Pakistan, China and all the other countries that neighbor on Afghanistan,'' Holbrooke said at a briefing for the international media. ''And any search for a resolution of the war in Afghanistan requires that the legitimate security interests of every country be understood and taken into account.''

''The dilemma arises when those security interests tend to be in conflict,'' Holbrooke continued in his exposition of the India-Pakistan face-off. ''And Afghanistan has suffered throughout history by the fact that it has sometimes become the terrain for surrogate struggles for power. We do not want to see that happen.''

While some US analysts have suggested resolving the Kashmir issue is central to US success in Afghanistan, Holbrooke declined to endorse the line of thinking, in keeping with the counter-view that Kashmir was just a symptom of Pakistan dysfunction, not the cause. Asked how important Kashmir is for reducing tension between
India and Pakistan, Holbrooke dismissed the issue from the US agenda while declining to even mention the K-word at a time when Pakistan is poised to put it back on the front-burner.
''On the specific you talked about, we are not going to negotiate or mediate on that issue. And I'm going to try to keep my record and not even mention it by name, Holbrooke said, adding, “But I want to be clear that anything that the two countries do to reduce tensions or improve relations will be something we would applaud and encourage.”

“But we are not going to act as intermediaries between Islamabad and New Delhi. That is not what we are here to do. I'm not just talking about myself,” Holbrooke maintained, suggesting that it was broadly the policy of the Obama administration and a continuation of the Bush White House’s policy of not highlighting the Kashmir issue.

Statements from the two officials on a day Pakistan pushed the envelope on Kashmir (with Kashmir Day rallies across the country) in response to India’s offer on talks indicated that US did not share Islamabad’s agenda on key issues, including downsizing New Delhi’s role in Afghanistan. The global think tank Stratfor has already forecast a deadlock without American help.

"India will want to talk about Pakistani-sponsored militancy and Taliban negotiations. Pakistan will want to talk about everything else. It will be up to the United States to attempt to bridge this difficult gap," Stratfor said in an analysis on Thursday.

Though little progress has been made in India's efforts to get Islamabad to crack down on India-focused militants operating on Pakistani soil, India's concerns over Taliban appeasement in Afghanistan are driving New Delhi toward engagement with Islamabad, the think tank said.

US officials were clearly in the loop on the Indian olive branch, with various administration mandarins having made known for weeks that Washington prefers engagement to India’s posture of no-talks till Pakistan acts on 26/11. The reasoning in Washington was that India’s ''obdurate'' position was allowing Pakistan’s militaristic constituency to up the ante and build up a hostile atmosphere at the expense of its peace-seeking civil society, undermining US goals in Afghanistan.

 

[karan.1970]

In my view, this approach from India will be a quid pro quo with USA for increasing India's clout in Afg since this stand of New Delhi will allow USA to put more pressure on Pakistan to increase operations in West. Remember a few comments about Pakistan Army spread thin.. Pakistan army can not launch new fronts etc from last few weeks..

So US gets pakistan to lauch new fronts
India gets US to increase India's influence in Afg under the aegis of NATO
Pakistan gets to release forces from Eastern front to fight terrorists on its soil

win - win -win.. or is it??

Lets give it a couple of weeks for the news

 

[vsdoc]

I am sorry but I do not agree.

The Congress owes Indians a sincere no-bullshit explanation as to why it is engaging Pakistan again. The Indian voter will accept nothing less, barely a year on from the heinous Mumbai carnage.

What has changed since then?

It is my opinion, shared by many many Indians today, that the best and possibly the only way to deal with Pakistan is complete and total isolation.

Ignore them long enough and they will start turning on each other .... as the past year has shown. It is the nature of the beast.

Cheers, Doc

 

[gogbot]

I am sorry but I do not agree.

The Congress owes Indians a sincere no-bullshit explanation as to why it is engaging Pakistan again. The Indian voter will accept nothing less, barely a year on from the heinous Mumbai carnage.

What has changed since then?

It is my opinion, shared by many many Indians today, that the best and possibly the only way to deal with Pakistan is complete and total isolation.

Ignore them long enough and they will start turning on each other .... as the past year has shown. It is the nature of the beast.

Cheers, Doc

The Americans why else.

frankly, nothing will come of it. Engaging with Pakistan is just as useful as not engaging at this point.

We can play though if we wished, but i am sure the Americans are giving us something for this political shift,

So since i weigh relations with the US as far more important , i dont mind really.

Who knows perhaps something good can even come of it, this time arround

 

[karan.1970]

The Americans why else.

frankly, nothing will come of it. Engaging with Pakistan is just as useful as not engaging at this point.

We can play though if we wished, but i am sure the Americans are giving us something for this political shift,

So since i weigh relations with the US as far more important , i dont mind really.

Who knows perhaps something good can even come of it, this time arround

I agree.. Nothing will come about in terms of Indo Pak relations. However this may help the US get more committment from Pak to fight Afghan Talibans in NWFP. I dont think India has anything to lose here except may be some political capital for Congress.. The gains thru the quid pro quo from US may be significantly higher

I will anyday give up political capital of a political party in exchange for a national gain..lets see how this goes down

 

[vsdoc]

Common sense tells me that you and karan are correct.

But the gloating face of that JUD vermin and the rest of their rogue's gallery says bollocks to common sense .....

Cheers, Doc

 

[Khajur]

By Baqir Sajjad Syed




India’s eagerness for resuming talks was evident from Home Minister P. Chidambaram’s belated admission that there was also a local Indian link to Mumbai attacks for which New Delhi had earlier been blaming Pakistan-based terror groups only.


©2010 DAWN Media Group

I want to draw attention of all pakistani members before they get any other ideas ,the socalled "local Indian link to Mumbai attacks " is none other LET/JUD handler named Abu Jindhal arrested by pakistan investigators for his role in 26/11 mumbai attack.

Its suspected that he is probably from india as he was the handler who was heard coaching the terroists to use pure hindi words while taking calls from the local media of india,in the telephonic transcript recorded by the indian intel of that attack.

Even Kasab has disclosed the fact that he was trained by his LET instructors to use hindi words while in india which explains why he and his other associates found using hindi words give the facade of thier indian origin and even e-mail which later tressed back to pakistan had been sent indian media telling that attackers were from a indian group called Dhakshin Mujahiddin in that regard during the attacks.

 

[Gazzi]

India should just make it clear if they do not want to hold any sort of negotiations, but I think that is not going to be the case, why, becuase Pakistan is suceeding in fighting the militants and TTP, who we believe are sponsored terrorist with RAW and Indian backing (and you cannot say Pakistan is speculating when a serving officer, SERVING officer Col Prohit is maligned or his involvement in terrorist attacks in India where they wanted to shift the blame on Muslims) which goes to show the Indian treachery of India's military and suspicion of Pakistan also. However this Operation is gathering pace and Pakistan has successfully managed to isolate the TTP whilst keeping the Afghan Taliban out of the scope and only targetting those who wish to harm us.

The US is going full speed ahead with a withdrawal plan in 2011 in which India knows all too well, Pakistan will shift its focus back on Kashmir and the temporary setback suffered by freedom dighters may once again go ahead with full steam. India is all too aware of the last uprising and how close it came then with 700,000 troops and just cannot afford another scenario like this from developing and does not wish to have further anarchy in other parts of India i.e. Naxals, where recently Indian troops have launched operation in 5 separate States.

India knows all too well that whether is admits or not, Pakistan believes it to be behind terrorists in attacks on its soil and the ISI will this time around do what it can in causing as much chaos in other States in India hand in hand with China this time around. Most likely a no holes barred secenario where India bears the brint like Pakistan has done with India's hand, only India gets effected badly with its economy, hence running for talks and agreement, as you pointed out,what has Pakistan done since 26/11, F all, and that will stay as such. It is India which will be needing and wanting talks soon enough, looking at realities on the ground.

The US will only have a small presence in Afghanistan if the Taliban allow which I doubt as they will continue relentlessly until all foreigners are out.

It may well be in India's best interest to hold talks as Pakistan will not just sit and watch as India has shown its colours as far as Pakistan is concerned.

Lets wait and see

 

[third eye]

There is good chance that these talks are being re initiated to show / prove that nothing can or will change.

BTW post above at Ser 11 is a duplicate from another thread ...?

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/46350-india-begs-us-not-leave-afghanistan.html

 

[karan.1970]

Common sense tells me that you and karan are correct.

But the gloating bearded face of that JUD vermin and the rest of their rogue's gallery says bollocks to common sense .....

Cheers, Doc

no worries Doc.. read this and keep cool. Its amazing the way this years old article's analysis is coming true

http://www.defence.pk/forums/strategic-geopolitical-issues/44215-monkey-trap.html

 

[Gazzi]

Yes this is as these threads are somewhat the same and should be merged

 

[karan.1970]

India should just make it clear if they do not want to hold any sort of negotiations, but I think that is not going to be the case, why, becuase Pakistan is suceeding in fighting the militants and TTP, who we believe are sponsored terrorist with RAW and Indian backing (and you cannot say Pakistan is speculating when a serving officer, SERVING officer Col Prohit is maligned or his involvement in terrorist attacks in India where they wanted to shift the blame on Muslims) which goes to show the Indian treachery of India's military and suspicion of Pakistan also. However this Operation is gathering pace and Pakistan has successfully managed to isolate the TTP whilst keeping the Afghan Taliban out of the scope and only targetting those who wish to harm us.

The US is going full speed ahead with a withdrawal plan in 2011 in which India knows all too well, Pakistan will shift its focus back on Kashmir and the temporary setback suffered by freedom dighters may once again go ahead with full steam. India is all too aware of the last uprising and how close it came then with 700,000 troops and just cannot afford another scenario like this from developing and does not wish to have further anarchy in other parts of India i.e. Naxals, where recently Indian troops have launched operation in 5 separate States.

India knows all too well that whether is admits or not, Pakistan believes it to be behind terrorists in attacks on its soil and the ISI will this time around do what it can in causing as much chaos in other States in India hand in hand with China this time around. Most likely a no holes barred secenario where India bears the brint like Pakistan has done with India's hand, only India gets effected badly with its economy, hence running for talks and agreement, as you pointed out,what has Pakistan done since 26/11, F all, and that will stay as such. It is India which will be needing and wanting talks soon enough, looking at realities on the ground.

The US will only have a small presence in Afghanistan if the Taliban allow which I doubt as they will continue relentlessly until all foreigners are out.

It may well be in India's best interest to hold talks as Pakistan will not just sit and watch as India has shown its colours as far as Pakistan is concerned.

Lets wait and see

2 basic flaws in your arguement

1. For one col purohit, you have legions of Pakistani army officers in the pay roll of terrorists. We atleast try them in our courts. You send them to your neighbouring countries in guise of mujahhidedin and then even refuse to take back their dead bodies.. But lets not derail this thread talking about Col purohit or kargil or afghani taliban

2. To the point of India talking to Pak to avoid it being targetted by pakistan in future. Even the most optimistic dove in the indian establishment knows that talking to pakistan has never helped India in the past nor it will in future in regards to the terrorists. Specially now that the terrorists in Pakistan have a stronger standing than the GOP. So its the Army, followed by the terrrorists and then the democratic govt of Pakistan. The only reason India is talking to pakistan is to call its bluff of not being able to do more on the western border due to tensions on the eastern one. So as you said, lets wait and see

The only withdrawl of US that you will see in 2011 will be the withdrawl of the additional forces being pumped in this year. You can just dream of US free Afg for next 15 years...

On your comment on only fighting TTP and not afghan taliban. I find it extremely funny. So how does it go.. Once you identify a group of rag-n-tag mujahiddeen in NWFP, do you ask them if they are Afghani taliban and if yes do you take an undertaking from them that they will not attack Pakistan in future

C'mon dude.. wake up and smell the coffee.. There are no selctive erradication of a disease. Either you kill it or you dont.