What's new

Befriending India

ajtr

BANNED
Joined
May 25, 2010
Messages
9,357
Reaction score
0
Befriending India
By Tanvir Ahmad Khan

Islamabad has shown extraordinary persistence in continually renewing the invitation to Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to visit Pakistan. More recently, it was done by its foreign minister, commerce minister and President Asif Ali Zardari himself during his pilgrimage to Ajmer Sharif. Unfortunately, bilateral meetings held in the wake of Mr Zardari’s visit, including between the foreign secretaries, were not particularly productive. A fresh formal invitation combines the mundane and the sacred by suggesting that Manmohan Singh joins the Guru Nanak Jayanti celebrations at his ancestral village Gah.
As a theme, ‘Befriending India’ is likely to be considered wildly optimistic; the contentious agenda has all but expanded to include water-related issues and apprehensions about the Indian project in Afghanistan. And yet, there is a change in dynamics that can provide a climate in which a more harmonious relationship may well be negotiated. Deeper processes are at work in both the countries that make rapprochement a possibility.
That Pakistan has learnt its lessons enough to abandon confrontation is generally recognised. It is ready to move forward. The momentum of the two-nation theory, the 1949 border confrontation, the Kashmir war and many other factors lay behind the Pakistani desire to escape the gravitational pull of India not quite reconciled to partition. Pakistan sought military and economic security through pacts with the West and closer relations with the Arab-Islamic world. The secession of East Bengal accelerated this flight with the Arab world as a favoured destination. In recent years, information technology has brought India’s soft power to Pakistan diluting many of the old prejudices. More importantly, there is a reassuring wish to do what Shahid Javed Burki recommends in “Steps towards greater South Asian cooperation” (August 6): “bring Pakistan back into South Asia in the economic sense”.
In the Pakistani view, India has deliberately prevented a similar evolution of positive thoughts; the Mumbai episode made this task difficult anyway. But there is a change in the Indian approach to the neighbours, from which Pakistan is no longer being entirely excluded.
After being a captive of the hubris generated by its own marketing gimmick of “shining India”, the political elite of India has a more realistic appraisal of national and regional issues. In India-Pakistan Track-2 encounters, you still occasionally come across the view that India does not need Pakistan or even the rest of South Asia. It is usually a tactical ploy. Indian policy is shifting towards a mellower interest in regional trade and other economic exchanges. India has rediscovered that it is not immune to external shocks or, for that matter, internal challenges such as extreme poverty in large swaths of its huge landmass, perils of social polarisation and rampant corruption. The lowering of the GDP growth rate to between 5.5 to 6.5 per cent, depending on what part of the country you look at, makes for a less disdainful attitude towards the neighbours. The power outages that affected 680 million Indians, awakened the Indian elite and outsiders, addicted to an uncritical celebration of the Indian economic miracle to the reality that millions of Indians know only too well.
India can benefit from trade and investment ties with Pakistan and from an eventual access through Pakistan to West and Central Asia. In comparative terms, Pakistan may find valuable opportunities to rehabilitate its troubled economy. Neither side now forbids FDI from the other; it would be a game changer if trade and investment build up to a substantive level.
Improvement of infrastructure and a rapid removal of other inhibiting factors should make it easy to bring the current illegal trade worth $1.5 billion and a substantive part of much larger trade through third countries into the ambit of official trade by land and sea. If Prime Minister Singh and President Zardari are together in Tehran for the Non-Aligned Moot, they can settle the ground rules for Singh’s visit in November. A visit at this stage will create the right atmosphere for issues such as complaints about India’s non-tariff barriers (NTBs), customs procedures, harmonisation of standards and issuance of visas. More significantly, the leaders can initiate a serious dialogue about joint ventures and regional energy grids. This would also be an occasion to exchange views on creating conditions conducive to overland transit in the future.
Delinking economic issues from the larger differences as on Kashmir, terrorism, Afghanistan, a South Asian strategic regime and water can only be relative as they would continue to influence the inflections of bilateral relations. It is vital to make progress on them as well.
In the short term, progress on Kashmir would mean gradual winding down of military presence, repeal of draconian laws, freer intra-Kashmir trade and strengthening of autonomy on both sides of the Line of Control. Such progress would push conflict into the background as would agreements that enable the two nuclear-armed powers to build credible security architecture.
Pakistan should favourably note the lessening of Indian rigidity on Mumbai and seek to carry greater conviction with New Delhi. Some of New Delhi’s concerns are particularly related to its perception of Indian interests in Afghanistan being threatened by the Afghan Haqqani network and the Lashkar-e-Taiba’s alleged inroads into that country. Instability in Afghanistan spawns elements that would threaten the interests of all outside powers including India and Pakistan and, therefore, the two South Asian states should make a determined effort to develop a shared perspective on post-2014 Afghanistan.
A summit in Islamabad in November could also clarify the principles by which worsening differences on the Indian interpretation of the Indus Basin Treaty can be resolved. It could also clear the path to a resolution of issues like Sir Creek and Siachen which Pakistan regards as “doable” but India continues to stall. They need not become intractable. There are Indian sages that keep reminding their prime minister that the process can be part of the solution and, therefore, he need not tie up his visit with achievement of spectacular results. He should seriously consider this advice. Bilateral summits seldom fail completely even as they hardly ever constitute a breakthrough.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 11th, 2012.
 
Islamabad has shown extraordinary persistence in continually renewing the invitation to Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to visit Pakistan. More recently, it was done by its foreign minister, commerce minister and President Asif Ali Zardari himself during his pilgrimage to Ajmer Sharif.

It has been equally persistent in not addressing a key concern of India i.e. taking action against 26/11 perpetrators. Not just that it takes what India gives but fails to reciprocate. It wanted India to waive its objection to special tax breaks for Pakistan with regards to exports to Euro. This was against Euro rules and certainly likely to impact India which competes in the same textile products as Pakistan.So it promised India that if India waived its objections which WTO allowed it to have, in turn it would give India an MFN status. First of all, unclear why India agreed to suchunfair terms since India had ALREADY given Pakistan MFN status in 1996 as required by WTO rules. Pakistan took what India gave and has been dragging its feet with regards to MFN status for India. Indian home secretary had also come to Pakistan to sign off on a more liberalized visa regime which Pakistani businessmen demanded but after having agreed to all the terms, Rehman Malik backed out at the last moment stating that India’s home secretary was too low for him to accept his signature.
India had planned a trip to discuss the Sir Creek issue but Pakistan cancelled that meeting also. India has also unilaterally given permission to Pakistanis to invest in India – something that Pakistan has not reciprocated.
Pakistan talks peace but its actions are pretty unilateral – justtake – no give. Under the circumstance why would Manmohan Singh come to Pakistan? We also remember when Vajpayee had come to Pakistan – even gone to Minaare-e-Pakistan and what happened, Pakistan rewarded India with Kargill.
 
Let's not fool ourselves, good relations with Pakistan ain't possible unless Pakistan has a dramatic change in attitude and deeds, until culprits of 26/11 are punished etc, until then India should channelize it's energy in eliminating the threats
 
You require statesmen on both sides for a detente. Do you see any? I don't - just a raucous polity of self serving straw-men short of ideas.

Unless and until we have people like Jinnah and Sardar Patel, we as nations can never hope for a better future for our teeming millions. Our politicians will keep squabbling like juvenile delinquents for one-up-man-ship and personal power and pelf. We will keep the vile propaganda against each other alive as long as it suits our 'interests'.

Vested interests are too strong and too many to allow a change in the paradigms of the relationship between our two benighted countries. The stakes are too high for a radical shift in policies. And that's the reality. The next generation would perhaps bring hope for a better tomorrow for the millions in the sub continent.

Till then we will continue to languish in our self inflicted injuries while the rest of the world moves on.
 
It is not that pakistan cant live with indian enemity .. Point is can they without it ? If they can then a lot of energy can be diverted in to constructive process which are now big holes in our respective nations ,draining our economy and spirit
i think for india it can climb the ladder with some difficulties with this baggage of enemity but for pakistan odds are against it ..
Peaceful co existence is great reserve of happiness which is not yet explored and need to be tapped if we want to open the next door of prosperity ..otherwise we are too familiar with darkness
 
Pakistan's story is a saga of Conflict of Weak Democratic & Political Leaders & Powerful Military Generals. Premature death of Sir Mohd. Ali Jinnah with no strong succesor almost shattered the ideology of Pakistan.

The enemity with India itself justifies the dominance or existence of huge armed forces to counter it. Two Nation Theory , Punjab Partition which had casualities on both sides, Governance failures like 1971 Bangladesh liberation are blamed on India to make it more EVIL in minds of generations to make public fearful of India & see Army Generals as saviours or Messiahs for Pakistanis.

There can be nothing more prosperous for both countries than the friendship ties are.Indo-Pakistan friendship will change the axis of power in asia & also change the game on global scene.

But be-friending with India means questioning the necessity or dominancy of military & army which is infact strongest lobby in Pakistan & its administration.Hence it is almost impossible as military rulers & their ideology is deeply rooted in minds of majorities of population.

This can be only done by a democratic leader who has much more public support than PA has on the masses.

On Indian side, India wont be friendly to Pakistan until it sees anti-india elements doing hidden conspiracies against it with pre-experience of Kargil, Kashmir & 26/11.
 
This is what i call completely biased & one sided article, author is treating siachin & sir creek as doable disputes b'coz India is having a clear upper hand in them, i ask the author if siachin was in Pakistani control would than he be saying the same thing??

+ i like the way GOI works, Indian PM has visited to Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Myanmar even to Bhutan but he does not visit to Pakistan even after so many invitations.....:lol:

+ it is good that PM visit Pak, many RAW agents will infiltrate Pak in the name of security for the PM :D
 
First of all, unclear why India agreed to suchunfair terms since India had ALREADY given Pakistan MFN status in 1996 as required by WTO rules.
May be that india is afraid of the kicks it regularly gets.:devil:
 
Why is Pakistan behind Singh? I don't get it.

Anyway, let us learn to live like neighbours, and then can think of 'befriending' each other :rofl:
 
Why is Pakistan behind Singh? I don't get it.

Anyway, let us learn to live like neighbours, and then can think of 'befriending' each other :rofl:

b'coz he is pro-Pakistan, they think he will gift-rap siachin & sir creek to Pakistan (which many in India also think), Singh is in his last years of PMship & wants a good relation with Pak ( & noble peace prize for himself....:lol:).

http://www.firstpost.com/india/siachen-pak-banks-on-pm-to-deliver-after-gen-singhs-exit-322128.html
 
b'coz he is pro-Pakistan, they think he will gift-rap siachin & sir creek to Pakistan (which many in India also think), Singh is in his last years of PMship & wants a good relation with Pak ( & noble peace prize for himself....:lol:).

Gifting siachin & sir creek to Pakistan? :rofl: It is beyond Singh
 
May be that india is afraid of the kicks it regularly gets.:devil:

May be because India's behind is self inviting.

However, how can India gets kicked in its hide so regularly when it has 10 out of 13 Corps including the strike corps' deployed against Pakistan. When 29 of its airbases are along Pakistan border and when most of Indian Navy is deployed against Pakistan.

And then Indians say we have gone over Pakistan and don't need Pakistan or its good will and that of others in South Asia.

Who needs India. The Indians say that Aryan invasion is a myth and the theory propounded now is "Out of India", which means that it is the Indians who had gone around and populated the rest of the world. No wonder they are so many in their own country, they had to move out to make room for the new ones.

I think it is time that the Indians may follow their "Out of India" theory in letter and spirit in the existing and future environment and leave South Asia for good.
 
The first important thing for being friends is have mutual faith and trust.. i dono if we have that now.... Even if we have trust then there should be 2 government who have the power and mandate to speak on behalf of the country... i dono if pakistan has that after mushraff's period.... I think the best chance we have is once pakistan has a very stable and powerful government who has army and the other agencies under its control, and in india a government which have a clear majority in parliament. Once we have these then there will be meaningful talks and meaningful actions.... Hmm i forgot to mention one point... All the above will happen if Mian hafiz sayeed and his friends stop his india specific actions...
 
The first important thing for being friends is have mutual faith and trust.. i dono if we have that now.... Even if we have trust then there should be 2 government who have the power and mandate to speak on behalf of the country... i dono if pakistan has that after mushraff's period.... I think the best chance we have is once pakistan has a very stable and powerful government who has army and the other agencies under its control, and in india a government which have a clear majority in parliament. Once we have these then there will be meaningful talks and meaningful actions.... Hmm i forgot to mention one point... All the above will happen if Mian hafiz sayeed and his friends stop his india specific actions...

And if Bal-less Thakery, Col Prohits of fundamentalist orientation in Indian Army, Chidambarams of Hashimpura massacres and not to mention the RAW-hide and IB-ibe and the like stop their Pakistan specific actions.

Alas they can't.
 

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom