By: Tariq Osman Hyder
One relationship where the potential for good that could be unlocked but has not been is between Pakistan and India where 20 per cent of humanity resides uneasily in a nuclear weapons environment.
The two foreign ministers will meet this month in New Delhi. Can progress towards better and more stable relations be expected by the peoples of both countries who have a stake in the outcome?
Unfortunately the recently -concluded June 23-24 foreign secretary talks and its precursors give little grounds for optimism. The stumbling block comes from the parameters that India's nationalistic and ambitious policy makers have circumscribed in their attitude towards Pakistan. Having got rid of a majority of Muslims at Partition in 1947 and succeeded in 1971 in disintegrating Pakistan, India's objective now is to manage its nuclear neighbour to make it compliant to Indian regional and international interests.
The path of friendship, requiring large heartedness and concessions leading to reciprocal concessions from Pakistan has never been on the Indian agenda beyond the well meaning protestations of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Talks on the Siachen glacier dispute and the Sir Creek sea boundary preceded the foreign secretary talks. Despite a near agreement in 1989-92 to disengage from this highest flash point in the world, India, spurred on by its military, has insisted on authentication of its existing position despite compromises offered by Pakistan.
In the latest round if anything the Indian position became more aggressive, insisting that the entire boundary northwards left undemarcated on the ground by the Karachi ceasefire agreement of 1949 be demarcated before any disengagement be considered. The Indian Air Chief publicly stated that as India had the strategic advantage of the high ground there was no need to resolve this issue despite the unnecessary cost in lives and logistics.
Talks on the Sir Creek sea boundary were equally fruitless. India suggested that the maritime boundary be agreed to with the horizontal and vertical lines which would define the crucial extended economic sea zone under the Law of the Sea treaty to follow. As these two issues were the closest for resolution, it was an inauspicious backdrop for the foreign secretary talks. Both sides entered the talks with limited expectations given the resumption after a post-Mumbai terror attacks two-and-half-year hiatus. India's assessment was that Pakistan had been weakened by political instability, economic difficulties, expanding threats from terrorists, continued spill over from Afghanistan and sustained pressure from America on Pakistan's armed forces and intelligence services which are the bulwark of its defence.
Nuclear safety issues
The Pakistan objective was to keep India engaged, to reduce Indian pressure on various fronts including through India's traditional reliance on using Afghanistan to put pressure on Pakistan. As a result little of substance emerged from the talks. In the key peace and security segment, the core issue of Kashmir which continues to divide the two countries was raised without substantive discussion on avenues for its resolution.
The separate experts groups on Nuclear and Conventional Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) were reconstituted with a mandate to discuss implementation and strengthening of existing arrangements and to consider additional mutually-acceptable measures, to build trust and confidence and promote peace and security. Pakistan's suggestion that in the post-Fukushima disaster period, it would be useful to discuss nuclear safety issues was turned down by India probably on the grounds that in the nuclear field it was playing in a bigger league. The inclination of India to delink itself in the nuclear field is indicative of what one can expect in this area where strategic stability and restraint should be motivating factors for both countries.
In the Conventional CBMs field which holds little interest for India with its expanding armed forces, the few Indian suggestions to exchange military bands and visits by the heads of the National Defence Universities and Maritime/Coast Guards commanders had no substance or attraction for the Pakistani side.
On terrorism, India repeated its refrain which was re-echoed in the concluding press briefing. On inter-Kashmiri CBMs it was agreed that the joint working group would meet soon. India, as part of its policy to include Baltistan in the disputed territory attempted to introduce two new meeting points outside Jammu and Kashmir which Pakistan turned down. Still it was agreed that the two hitherto unused agreed meeting points would be explored further.
Probably the only modest forward movement which will take place in New Delhi when the foreign ministers meet will be an agreement on cultural exchanges.
Better relations between the two countries would unlock South Asia's economic and developmental potential and also that of Afghanistan. But sadly little progress is on the horizon. Pakistan has to put its house in order and India wants to deny it any space to do so. In the short term this may suit India which is riding high with its economic resurgence and American alliance, but in the long term it is a shortsighted policy which would rebound on India.
--From:
[Pak-Friends] Group Member
Visit Group: http://groups.google.com/group/Karachi-786
Subscription: http://groups.google.com/group/karachi-786/subscribe
Blog: http://rehansheik.blogspot.com
===========================================================
¸,.-~*'¨¯¨'*·~-.¸¸,.-~*'[PäK¤.¸.¤F®ï£ñD§]'*·~-.¸¸,.-~*'¨¯¨'*·~-.¸
===========================================================
All members are expected to follow these Simple Rules:
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Be Carefull in Islamic Discussions;
Disrespect (of Ambiyaa, Sahabaa, Oliyaa, and Ulamaa) is an INSTANT BAN
Abuse of any kind (to the Group, or it's Members) shall not be tolerated
SPAM, Advertisement, and Adult messages are NOT allowed
This is not Dating / Love Group, Sending PM's to members is unethical act.
Please avoid any post linked to facebook.
Thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment