Kashmir: If progress is to be made, India must dictate the terms

[Abingdonboy]

I fail to understand this particular Indian excuse to avoid engagement with Pakistan. The question of which power center in Pakistan has the final word on the level of engagement with India should be a moot point given that the power center in question will control the pace and content of negotiations regardless of who the 'face' of the negotiations is.

If the Indian establishment really believes that the Pakistani military establishment controls foreign policy (specifically foreign policy towards India), then the civilian government in Pakistan is not going to engage with the Indian government outside of the confines demarcated by the Pakistan military establishment.

With respect to the "Islamabad dharna's", while many Pakistani analysts were falling over themselves to argue "military complicity with IK and TuQ", there is very little actual evidence to support that contention, and quite a bit of circumstantial evidence to support the contrary view that the institution of the military had no role in the dharnas.

How can it be labelled a "moot point"? And how can you so brazenly state that India's assertions that the multiplicity of power centres in Pakistan complicate and even hinder the talk/peace process, are unfounded? Show me another example where engaging one faction at the cost of another competing faction has worked out? If India engages the GoP (as it tried to in May with Nawaz Sharif) then the PA/ISI is going to try and sabotage such steps (Herat attack, IK drama etc).

So it is up to India to engage with all factions at once, act as the Jerry Springer of the region and get all the sides together, sat down and on the same page, even those factions that define themselves as the eternal nemesis of India? I can't see how this is even remotely reasonable to expect of India. It is and always has been for Pakistan to sort out its own internal issues/mess.

 

[VCheng]

I know (as well as you do) what the reality/facts are. But let him come up with an answer.

You know what the answer is going to be, don't you?

 

[VCheng]

How can it be labelled a "moot point"? And how can you so brazenly state that India's assertions that the multiplicity of power centres in Pakistan complicate and even hinder the talk/peace process, are unfounded? Show me another example where engaging one faction at the cost of another competing faction has worked out? If India engages the GoP (as it tried to in May with Nawaz Sharif) then the PA/ISI is going to try and sabotage such steps (Herat attack, IK drama etc).

So it is up to India to engage with all factions at once, act as the Jerry Springer of the region and get all the sides together, sat down and on the same page, even those factions that define themselves as the eternal nemesis of India? I can't see how this is even remotely reasonable to expect of India. It is and always has been for Pakistan to sort out its own internal issues/mess.

Seriously, what India should do is engage with the Pakistan Army in a sustained and positive way, just like USA does. Only then might things improve.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Seriously, what India should do is engage with the Pakistan Army in a sustained and positive way, just like USA does. Only then might things improve.

It is the most logical step but the question is will the PA be receptive? One has to question whether peace with India is really in the PA's best interest or at least if the PA's top brass would perceive it as beneficial. Right now the PA has enormous political and economic power within the state of Pakistan and it appears to be this is stranglehold the PA has on Pakistan is accepted by the people of Pakistan because the PA has projected itself as the only entity within the state able to defend Pakistan against the hemogenic nation to the East. This has allowed the PA to aggregate enormous resources for itself as well as power almost unlike any other army in the world.

If peace with India was attained, the PA would ultimately sidelining itself and taking away its raison d'être.

I agree that until India gets the PA on side peace is an impossibly but I don't see how it will ever happen- will the generals be willing to give up their power? Their status? Their pension plans (vast lands)?

Human nature would suggest otherwise....

 

[VCheng]

It is the most logical step but the question is will the PA be receptive? One has to question whether peace with India is really in the PA's best interest or at least if the PA's top brass would perceive it as beneficial. Right now the PA has enormous political and economic power within the state of Pakistan and it appears to be this is stranglehold the PA has on Pakistan is accepted by the people of Pakistan because the PA has projected itself as the only entity within the state able to defend Pakistan against the hemogenic nation to the East. This has allowed the PA to aggregate enormous resources for itself as well as power almost unlike any other army in the world.

If peace with India was attained, the PA would ultimately sidelining itself and taking away its raison d'être.

I agree that until India gets the PA on side peace is an impossibly but I don't see how it will ever happen- will the generals be willing to give up their power? Their status? Their pension plans (vast lands)?

Human nature would suggest otherwise....

Look at the issue this way: What can India do to make the Army see that it's interests are best served by making peace with India?

 

[KingMamba]

It is the most logical step but the question is will the PA be receptive? One has to question whether peace with India is really in the PA's best interest or at least if the PA's top brass would perceive it as beneficial. Right now the PA has enormous political and economic power within the state of Pakistan and it appears to be this is stranglehold the PA has on Pakistan is accepted by the people of Pakistan because the PA has projected itself as the only entity within the state able to defend Pakistan against the hemogenic nation to the East. This has allowed the PA to aggregate enormous resources for itself as well as power almost unlike any other army in the world.

If peace with India was attained, the PA would ultimately sidelining itself and taking away its raison d'être.

I agree that until India gets the PA on side peace is an impossibly but I don't see how it will ever happen- will the generals be willing to give up their power? Their status? Their pension plans (vast lands)?

Human nature would suggest otherwise....

There are bigger threats to Pakistan than India today, according to the army green book of Pakistan the military seems to be figuring this out. Peace with India is not something the PA is against but if it is done in a way that they lose face it won't work.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Look at the issue this way: What can India do to make the Army see that it's interests are best served by making peace with India?

And that is the multi-billion dollar question sir.

It will take strategists far smarter than me to figure this out and to be honest I'm not inclined to think the current GoI is looking at perusing a long-term committed peace process. They seem more focused on maintaining the status quo and buying India some breathing space to go about its own business for a few decades.

 

[VCheng]

And that is the multi-billion dollar question sir.

It will take strategists far smarter than me to figure this out and to be honest I'm not inclined to think the current GoI is looking at perusing a long-term committed peace process. They seem more focused on maintaining the status quo and buying India some breathing space to go about its own business for a few decades.

I would suggest that surely India, as a functioning democracy, can find the wisdom and long term thinking to see what can serve its national interests better, and making peace with Pakistan would be at the top of the list, if it is to rise above the region and play on the world stage as it wants to do.

 

[Abingdonboy]

I would suggest that surely India, as a functioning democracy, can find the wisdom and long term thinking to see what can serve its national interests better, and making peace with Pakistan would be at the top of the list, if it is to rise above the region and play on the world stage as it wants to do.

Sure in the long term but not with the current GoI/PM,the climate is not right for the GoI to pursue such things. There is already a heightened anti-Pakistan sentiment due to the 26/11 attacks (still very fresh in the minds of most Indians) then the repeated infiltration attempts and now the cross-border firing (not laying blame solely at Pakistan's door but it is about perception) added on top of that the current party in power was scathing of the past GoI for being "soft" on Pakistan with respect to all of the above so they can't be seen to u-turn now.


I think in 10-15 years time that India will feel secure enough in itself (as a military and economic power) and the electorate of India will be educated and mature enough to initiate serious and meaningful peace talks with Pakistan and stick at it (previous attempts have been derailed by terror attacks), just not today.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

First of all you need to define: WHO in Pakistan controls Foreign Policy towards India?
If you answer that question then I will respond on how India should then engage with that entity.

But that is precisely my point - why does it matter 'who controls Pakistani foreign policy towards India'?

If it is the military establishment, then Pakistani interlocutors (whether civilian or military) will push the military position, and if it is the elected government that control's it, then Pakistani interlocutors will push that particular position.

 

[Vinod2070]

If peace with India was attained, the PA would ultimately sidelining itself and taking away its raison d'être.

Enmity with India has become an end in itself and a key part (perhaps the only part) of the "ideology". And of course the PA has made itself responsible to preserve the ideology.

There are some good recent books that throw light on the strategy of PA. They explain why PA behaves in a certain way even when it may not appear rational to others and is often self-defeating.

Moreover it explains the very concept of defeat for the PA. It is not losing at the battlefield (or failing to achieve the goals) but to accept the status quo! So you will keep on seeing Kargil and Mumbai attacks and promoting Taliban and AQ and the myriad terror groups. It can't change until PA can change (or is made to change) its very basic strategy.

The world has to live with the reality and look at how it can be managed. There is a terrible price to pay, most of all by Pakistani people but also by the neighbors including India and Afghanistan and others.

The books are:

Fighting to the End: The Pakistan Army's Way of War [C. Christine Fair]
The Wrong Enemy: America in Afghanistan 2001 - 2014 Carlotta Gall

Quite detailed and well researched books!

 

[Vinod2070]

Look at the issue this way: What can India do to make the Army see that it's interests are best served by making peace with India?

Very good point. Unfortunately, the answer would be very little. Please see my post above and if you get some time, read Christine Fair's book that is based on 7 decades of Pakistani army in-house literature.

 

[Vinod2070]

Seriously, what India should do is engage with the Pakistan Army in a sustained and positive way, just like USA does. Only then might things improve.

Even the USA has failed in this endeavor!

And we don't have a fraction of the leverage that the USA has on the PA. We don't have to even go into the reasons for that.

Fact is that the PA has stuck to it's guns where it's core strategy is concerned and it has been able to play the US well for decades despite getting billions of dollars for supposedly being an ally, the most allied ally.

It can and does negotiate with a gun to it's own head and it has worked beautifully for it (from PA's perspective). So far!

In a way Musharraf's period provided some hope but unfortunately it couldn't go the distance in agreeing to the final resolution.

 

[VCheng]

Very good point. Unfortunately, the answer would be very little. Please see my post above and if you get some time, read Christine Fair's book that is based on 7 decades of Pakistani army in-house literature.

Actually Sir, the ART of international geopolitics makes everything possible, and I mean everything.

 

[ito]

Sure in the long term but not with the current GoI/PM,the climate is not right for the GoI to pursue such things. There is already a heightened anti-Pakistan sentiment due to the 26/11 attacks (still very fresh in the minds of most Indians) then the repeated infiltration attempts and now the cross-border firing (not laying blame solely at Pakistan's door but it is about perception) added on top of that the current party in power was scathing of the past GoI for being "soft" on Pakistan with respect to all of the above so they can't be seen to u-turn now.


I think in 10-15 years time that India will feel secure enough in itself (as a military and economic power) and the electorate of India will be educated and mature enough to initiate serious and meaningful peace talks with Pakistan and stick at it (previous attempts have been derailed by terror attacks), just not today.

You are spot on..unless India is confident of its power...both economic and military, any Indo-Pak talks may be a non starter.