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

[Capt.Popeye]

Which is why more carrot and less stick might be a better option for India to pursue with Pakistan.

That will happen.....in some time. Right now, its a phase of more stick and hide the carrot.....
then it will become......speak softly and carry a big stick.

 

[VCheng]

That will happen.....in some time. Right now, its a phase of more stick and hide the carrot.....
then it will become......speak softly and carry a big stick.

So how is it all working out for you guys so far?

 

[Judge]

I.K. Gujaral comes to mind when one thinks of this and it was not a success at the time. It was perceived as weakness.

No harm in trying again.

Gujaral and one more Prime MInisters pacifist overtures have bitten India heavily in terms of capacity building. A similar move again would be nothing short of disastrous.

Creative approaches are required when dealing with Pakistan.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Creative approaches are required when dealing with Pakistan.

What did you have in mind?

 

[Bang Galore]

All nations offer positions based on who their leader is at any given time, not just Pakistan. The sort of permanence that you seem to seek is not possible, but all nations continue to work at such important relationships despite changes of leadership.

Not the same case here. The PA is the ghost in any talks & there is no way for India to know what exactly their line of thinking is on any deal. There is no Musharraf in the picture now, someone who could atleast have been seen as having the army's backing too. In any case, the contours of any deal are clear but it seems that the Pakistani establishment is not willing to work on the lines of the Musharraf-MMS idea. Expecting more from India is pretty much of a non-starter. A minister in the NS government publicly disowned Musharraf's proposals,so there is no meeting point at this time. I have said this many times before, Pakistan doesn't bring much to the table except for its demands, either on the larger Kashmir issue or even the more specific Siachen issue. Expecting something for nothing is going to go nowhere. The stress from India on the relationship with Pakistan is now in management rather than searching for a larger solution. Unlikely to change unless there is a complete shift in Pakistan's position.

 

[Bang Galore]

. However, my suggestions were made in a geo-political context, of India leveraging the resources unique to her to help overcome obstacles in moving the India-Pakistan relationship forward (assuming that both sides will continue to remain deadlocked over the territorial disputes).

If you assume that territorial disputes are going to be deadlocked & therefore we must move on in the economic field, that would pretty much be the Indian position. Something that Pakistan seems unable to bring itself to agree on.

Pakistan can do one simple thing to attract Indian investment - create industrial/commercial zones close to the Indian border. It may take a lot of time before Indian companies are willing to risk large amounts of capital deep in what has so far been hostile territory. Even large scale power projects can be built in these zones with customers on both sides thereby providing some amount of derisking. Everyone benefits and if large areas of the border is comprised of Industrial zones, that will automatically limit (in those areas atleast) a large number of these border transgressions and with automatic support zones building up on both sides, there will be a lot less interest in militarizing any small dispute.

 

[Pakistan First]

Mr Harsh Pants (what a name!) has merely repeated the same old rhetoric and achieved nothing else in his poorly written article.

 

[Vinod2070]

The stress from India on the relationship with Pakistan is now in management rather than searching for a larger solution. Unlikely to change unless there is a complete shift in Pakistan's position.

Exactly what I feel. This is a bit unfortunate but I think the focus now is to prevent things from boiling over. Probably the slow simmering will go on for quite some time.

 

[Vinod2070]

IMO the focus on improving the economic connectivity between the two countries is a good idea (overall), but the current focus on making a few adjustments here and there to the lists of goods that can be export from country to the other severely limits the positive impact on the India-Pakistan relationship.

Pakistan is by far the weaker country economically, and any 'opening of trade' is going to be more of an advantage to India than to Pakistan, much as Pakistan's 'free trade agreement' with China has skewed the trade imbalance in favor of China. A more comprehensive approach to economic cooperation that looks at facilitating investment by major business groups in the other country in certain sectors might alleviate some concerns on the Pakistani side. Think of Indian pharma and automotive assemblers and auto-parts producers teaming up with partners in Pakistan to set up/expand manufacturing facilities.

Of course the beneficiary of such an approach, initially, would be Pakistan primarily, since Indian industry is significantly more diversified, which is why it would have to be part of a long term process of comprehensively liberalizing trade between India and Pakistan.

This may be a good approach.

I think we should avoid looking at who gains more (or loses more) from a particular transaction. We need to think win win
.

 

[Vinod2070]

Gujaral and one more Prime MInisters pacifist overtures have bitten India heavily in terms of capacity building. A similar move again would be nothing short of disastrous.

Creative approaches are required when dealing with Pakistan.

Of course, I don't expect a repeat of the same mistakes. The fact remains that it will always be an unequal relationship and it will need to be factored in.

 

[surya kiran]

If you assume that territorial disputes are going to be deadlocked & therefore we must move on in the economic field, that would pretty much be the Indian position. Something that Pakistan seems unable to bring itself to agree on.

Pakistan can do one simple thing to attract Indian investment - create industrial/commercial zones close to the Indian border. It may take a lot of time before Indian companies are willing to risk large amounts of capital deep in what has so far been hostile territory. Even large scale power projects can be built in these zones with customers on both sides thereby providing some amount of derisking. Everyone benefits and if large areas of the border is comprised of Industrial zones, that will automatically limit (in those areas atleast) a large number of these border transgressions and with automatic support zones building up on both sides, there will be a lot less interest in militarizing any small dispute.

Not going to happen. They do not have electricity for their own industries. Any infrastructure build up is not worth investing, by India in Pakistan. Let the Chinese do it.

The only thing which is even remotely interesting is sourcing raw materials, like @Syed.Ali.Haider said. In return for this what do we get? Are they ready to open up the transit route to Afghanistan? Are they ready to give us MFN status? Trade requires give and take. While, the rest of the countries in the neighbourhood are small, except China, they do not support secession from India. China too has a border problem. So in these scenarios, bit of more give than take is fine. The only thing Pakistan understands is the stick. No amount of carrot is going to change things. So with Pakistan follow a strict policy and 'stick' with it.

One other thing, I can think of is investing in the Pakistani markets. Equity markets.

For any investor to seriously consider major investments one needs the following :

a. Political stability
b. Economic viability
c. Electricity and infrastructure

Pakistan is on the road to political stability, economically viable as a market in the medium term and a disaster as far as electricity goes. When the basic raw material of power is not available, raw material import is only way left. Add to this the active and overt support to insurgency against an investing country. Given the close proximity to existing parks in the North of India and with the increasing focus on Make in India, manufacturing investment from India to Pakistan is a pipe dream. Both from a policy and economic perspective.

 

[Bang Galore]

Not going to happen. They do not have electricity for their own industries. Any infrastructure build up is not worth investing, by India in Pakistan. Let the Chinese do it..

Never said it will happen, only that an idea for thinking out of the box would be to create Industrial zones very close to the border or straddling both sides of the border. Electricity for these zones can be supplied on commercial rates by Indian grids or by building a power plant as part of these Industrial zones or as a separate power zone which is also situated close to the border. The question was how India can leverage its abilities to help change attitudes in Pakistan. If Pakistan agreed to this idea, that alone would be a big change in mindset. I'm as hard headed on national security as they come but I simply see any such situation if it were to ever fructify to be a win-win situation for both.

 

[Vinod2070]

I think we need to be hard headed but not rule out the fact that things can change in Pakistan and be open to encourage that change when the other side is ready for that.

Mostly, the decision to be open to the change has to come from within Pakistan. Till that time it will probably be about managing the situation and prevent things from boiling over.

 

[qamar1990]

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

Harsh V Pant


Pakistan has a way of making its presence felt in India’s national security matrix that, much to New Delhi’s chagrin, tends to steal India’s diplomatic thunder.

At a time when India’s prime minister Narendra Modi was trying to project himself as a global statesman, Pakistan decided it must get some attention. So, the Pakistani army did what it does best. It escalated tensions along the border in an attempt to ratchet up pressure on India.

Accusing India of “deliberate and unprovoked violations of the ceasefire agreement and cross-border firing”, Pakistan promptly shot off a letter to the UN secretary general asking for an intervention by the UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan. In reply, the UN has merely reiterated that India and Pakistan need to resolve all differences through dialogue.

Meanwhile, Pakistan’s powerful army chief Gen Raheel Sharif has suggested that the resolution of the Kashmir issue was imperative for sustainable peace. Gen Sharif said that the people of Kashmir should be allowed to decide their own fate in the light of UN resolutions.

Pakistan is facing multiple crises. Its global isolation is increasing by the day. US forces are withdrawing from Afghanistan and Beijing is increasingly dissatisfied with Islamabad’s attempts at controlling the flow of Islamist extremists into its restless Xinjiang province.

Tensions are also rising on Pakistan’s borders with Iran where Sunni extremists are targeting Iranian border posts, forcing Iranian policymakers to suggest that if Pakistani authorities “cannot control the common border, they should tell us so that we ourselves can take action”.

And the new government in Afghanistan under Ashraf Ghani is likely to go even further in developing close ties with New Delhi. Within Pakistan, Imran Khan is breathing down Nawaz Sharif’s neck and the Pakistan army’s struggle against the domestic Taliban seems to be going nowhere.

All this is happening at a time when there is renewed confidence in India about its future under the Modi government and when the world is ready to look at the Indian story afresh. No wonder, the Pakistani security establishment is nervous about its growing irrelevance – and so once again the issue of Kashmir becomes a rallying cry.

As tensions have escalated along the border, the Modi government has made clear to Pakistan that Indian forces would “make the costs of this adventurism unaffordable”.

This has given the Indian military the operational space to carve out a response that was swift, sharp and effective. Together, the Indian government and the nation’s military have underlined the costs of Pakistan’s dangerous tactics by massive targeted attacks on Pakistani posts along the border.

But this won’t be enough as the Modi government needs a long-term plan to handle Pakistan. India currently hopes that negotiations with Pakistan would ratify the existing territorial status quo in Kashmir.

At its foundation, these are irreconcilable differences. No confidence-building measure is likely to alter this situation. India’s belief has always been that the peace process will persuade Pakistan to cease supporting and sending extremists into India and start building good neighbourly ties. Pakistan, in contrast, has viewed the process as a means to nudge India to make progress on Kashmir, which is a euphemism for Indian concessions.

The choice that India has is not between talking and sulking. Pakistan has continued to manage the appearance of talks with India even as its support for separatism in India continues unabated. India should also continue to talk – there is nothing to lose in having a low-level diplomatic engagement after all – even as it needs to unleash other arrows in its quiver to manage Pakistan.

Smart policy for India means not being stuck between the talking and not-talking binary. It is now for India to dictate the terms for negotiations.

Pakistan’s India obsession is not about Kashmir. The very way Pakistan defines its identity makes it almost impossible that India will ever be able to find agreement with Islamabad. New Delhi should be ready to face this hard reality.

The Modi government is gradually resetting the terms of engagement with Pakistan on Kashmir. It remains to be seen if it will succeed where its predecessors failed.

Harsh V Pant is professor of international relations at King’s College London

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

lol

 

[surya kiran]

Never said it will happen, only that an idea for thinking out of the box would be to create Industrial zones very close to the border or straddling both sides of the border. Electricity for these zones can be supplied on commercial rates by Indian grids or by building a power plant as part of these Industrial zones or as a separate power zone which is also situated close to the border. The question was how India can leverage its abilities to help change attitudes in Pakistan. If Pakistan agreed to this idea, that alone would be a big change in mindset. I'm as hard headed on national security as they come but I simply see any such situation if it were to ever fructify to be a win-win situation for both.

Are you asking the right question? Do we need to change Pakistan's attitude? And if so, what is the reason for that attitude. So, let us start at this point.

The moot point in the Indo-Pak discourse is of revenge. The need to avenge East Pakistan. The manifestation of that was Punjab and currently, Kashmir. Punjab resulted in no gain. But, there was no backlash because of the use of Sikhs, who were not Pakistanis, as tools of war. Kashmir, is a different ball game. Post the failure of the Punjab issue, Kashmir was brought to the fore by the Pakistani establishment.

Here things changed. Kashmir saw Pakistanis being incited and armed by its own military. This has far reaching repercussions. Combined with the return of the mujahideen from Afghanistan, Pakistan dug its own grave. Till 1990s, the Kashmir problem was an overt problem from a militaristic point of view. When, wisdom dictated that conventionally it cannot be acheived, the concept of death by a thousand cuts was born. The death by a thousand cuts is not working and it has back fired. Here, the attitude is a result of indoctrination. Not necessarily actions of India.

Un-doctrination, if such a term exists, is the job of the Pakistani establishment. Not ours. Hence, I diasgree that we should look to change attitudes. The only way the Pakistani establishment realised that militarily it could not avenge East Pakistan was when it could not achieve its goals. The same way, the only way it will realise the current scenario does not work is on its own. We cannot and should not try to change anything.

Analysts argue, that the nuclear bomb is why Pakistan is safe. I agree, but for a different reason. Its not because India will not attack Pakistan since they have the bomb. It is because Pakistan itself will think twice before any military adventure and 1999 will re-inforce that belief. The support for insurgencies also started post the nuclear bomb.

Hence, we should welcome trade, but forget making any attempt to changing 'attitudes'. That is an internal process.