But how does the suspension of dialogue punish Pakistan?Will it hasten the prosecution and punishment of the perpetrators of the 26/11 crime? Will it lead to dismantling of training facilities and arrest of known terrorists in Pakistan? Will it facilitate a solution of the Kashmir problem and return of peace and normalcy in the Valley?
I don't think suspension of dialogue is as much about punishing Pakistan as it is about a lack of options. Dialogue will not change the nature of our relationship simply because Pakistan can't control the jihadis even if it wanted to. They've lost 40,000 people in less than ten years and that's only against a fraction of jihadis that exist on Pakistani soil. They can't afford a civil war and invite American intervention, definitely not by choice. Under these circumstances dialogue is just an eyewash. Talking to them might not necessarily embolden them but it won't stop them either. Suspending talks is simply a face saving measure until someone really crosses the line and forces the other's hand. Nuclear weapons simply increased India's threshold for war, the equation didn't change.
Will it erode the dominance of the Army and the ISI in Pakistan? Will it strengthen the hands of the civilian government in Pakistan and support democracy? Will it strengthen political stability in South Asia? Will it promote good neighbourly relations between India and Pakistan? Will it serve our broad national interests and enhance our international image?
Nope, but that's beyond our control anyway.
An honest answer to all these questions is an emphatic no. We can’t change our geographical location or wish away Pakistan. We must learn to live with Pakistan with all its failings; post-Partition baggage of animus and bitterness against India included.
We're doing exactly that. We're modernizing the police force, RAW is expanding its footprint, the military is being modernized, we're pressuring them diplomatically as best we can. Once again, the purpose here is to expand our options. Pakistan will not take on terrorist groups by choice because the stakes are more or less acceptable to them. If India can give its military real teeth and give itself an edge in localized skirmishes we'll have a real shot at controlling the jihadi menace. Of course, the obvious Pakistani answer here is 'well you can't contain the conflict'. That's true to an extent, but Pakistan will respond conventionally first they won't launch nukes at the first sign of trouble. After all, nukes were meant to safeguard their existence. That's hard to do when you nuke a country that's stronger than you.
The above can sound a little counter intuitive because who knows how Pakistan will respond to a limited strike right? Well think about it, 80% of Indian firepower faces west anyway. With a modern military holding a defensive line they'll be hard pressed to gain any ground without over extending themselves conventionally. Simply put we'll make a conventional response too expensive for them. The nuclear option will only come into play if India occupies a large part of Pakistan or attacks a city like Lahore. Nobody cares about the Thar desert. That leaves Pakistan with few cards to play, including the nuclear one of course. If India can limit their conventional capabilities we'll increase their threshold for a face off and keep Kargils and 26/11's to a minimum. We can live with the odd coffee shop blast or two as long as they can live with international pressure and Baluchistan.
Think about the status quo on the Korean peninsula. Pakistan is no N.Korea but we can maintain a similar arrangement.
We aren’t Pakistan’s largest trading partners or investors or source of defence supplies or financial supporter. In a nutshell, the suspension of dialogue doesn’t hurt Pakistan; other countries aren’t going to follow suit; Pakistan won’t be so isolated as to beg for peace with India!
We can't isolate them but we can grow without their cooperation.
Since 1947, every major conflict between India and Pakistan has been followed by the resumption of dialogue. So, instead of keeping the dialogue on and off why not let it continue uninterrupted in spite of the cycle of ups and downs in relations?
Sure why not, its not going to change anything.
The naysayers will dismiss this suggestion as capitulation to Pakistan. It will encourage Pakistan to inflict 1,000 cuts with impunity, they will claim. But is there any other option except dialogue? Have the naysayers ever come up with any plan, short of a dialogue, which will resolve the Kashmir problem, stop terrorist attacks from across the border and result in normal and peaceful relations with Pakistan?
Ah yes. There is a plan and its what we do best. Nothing. India needs to do nothing except maintain its growth trajectory and let Pakistan deal with its demons. There is no need to do anything about Kashmir, especially at the moment, when Pakistan has too much on its plate and is accused of interfering in Afghanistan. We can deal with them more decisively once the economy and military are stronger, why do it now when you can do it from a position of strength later?
Nudging Pakistan’s major trading partners: China, EU, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Iran to counsel her to make peace with India for her own survival and prosperity. Make prudent use of the carrot of our bourgeoning market and huge investment prospects. Make serious efforts to woo Pakistan’s corporate sector and make them vested stakeholders in peace with India.
Makes sense, and we're doing it without Kashmir.
Vigorous use of India’s soft power resources — films/film stars, music, fashion, cricket, writers, academics — can, over a period, bridge the trust deficit at people-to-people level and goad the decision makers to take the plunge and transform decades of hostility in to neighbourly peace.
Dear hippy, murderers have been showered with rose petals in Pakistan. What kind of transformation do you think bollywood/intellectuals can achieve? Pakistan has already been saturated by the Indian media.
Focus on new age, middle class, educated Internet savvy, Facebook/Twitter using youth of Pakistan whose dreams and aspirations aren’t too different from their Indian counterparts and encourage them to be catalysts of change. Invite 5,000 Pakistani college students every year to interact freely with Indian students and see for themselves what is happening in India.
See above. Talking to their moderates won't make a difference because they're too afraid to stand up to the jihadis.
Yes, the Army and the ISI control levers of power in Pakistan. But currently, the US-Pakistan relations are on the brink. Turmoil in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Syria and Libya must be a cause of concern for Pakistan Army’s top brass; the power of unarmed, non-violent people passionately and fearlessly demanding their rights might have not gone unnoticed.
We can take advantage of their relations with the states.
And lol, if people had to stand up for their rights they would've done it decades ago. Egypt has a higher standard of living than every country in South Asia.
