On May 30, in response to a question about the former Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s statement When Pakistan accused India of military adventurism in Kargil in violation of the 1999 peace agreement (Lahore Declaration), a Foreign Ministry spokesman said India was ” An objective view is emerging in Pakistan While this was probably an impromptu remark by the spokesman, those who keep a close eye on all things India-Pakistan have taken the Foreign Office’s response with a grain of salt. sign Once the elections are over in India, the door that was closed to Pakistan may reopen. There is rife speculation on both sides of the Radcliffe Line that ties between the two countries may be strengthened once again after the elections.
False optimism
I don’t know what is driving this optimism. Prime Minister Narendra Modi made the remarks in an interview. Modi has said he has “locked Pakistan’s box”. For him, Pakistan can do its own thing. India’s development will no longer be hostage to Pakistan. Modi also dissuaded those who think that in a third term he will focus on his own achievements and reach out to Pakistan. According to Modi, what he wants is to build a bright future for Indian children, not normalize relations with Pakistan. On the Pakistani side, while Nawaz Sharif and other civilian leaders have spoken out from time to time in support of negotiations with India, those at the helm of power in the country have made it clear that they have no intention of softening their bellicose stance towards India. In recent times, Pakistan has been swayed by the ideological and political scrutiny of the Indian government. Formation Commander’s Conference The Pakistani army not only repeated the mantra of Kashmir’s right to self-determination and implementation of UN resolutions, but also interfered in India’s domestic politics by “expressing concern over the treatment of minorities in India, especially Muslims, and pointing out the spread of fascism to achieve the political objectives of vested interests.” Nuclear threat This was likely a Pakistani response to PM Modi’s comments. Pakistan’s nuclear threats unimpressive.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi made it clear in an interview that he has “locked the Pakistan box.” For him, Pakistan can do its own thing. India’s development is no longer a hostage to Pakistan.
Modi’s policies and calls for re-engagement
In fact, the Modi government’s policy since the 2016 terror attack in Uri, and even more so since the Balakot airstrikes and the constitutional amendments in Jammu and Kashmir in 2019, has worked very well. The policy is basically to keep the lines of communication open, or cut them off. Pakistan has painted itself into a corner over the years, especially with its Pavlovian response to the constitutional amendments in Jammu and Kashmir, by downgrading diplomatic relations and banning virtually all trade. There is really no reason for India to go easy on Pakistan at this stage, especially since nothing has fundamentally changed as far as Pakistan’s hostile attitude towards India is concerned. Pakistan, cornered on the western front in both Iran and Afghanistan and not being the game changer that negotiations with China were advertised to be, needs India. But Pakistan wants India for free. To make matters worse, Pakistan wants to pick only what is good for itself (e.g. trade) and leave the rest (terrorism) for later. All those who advocate renegotiating with Pakistan have not explained how this kind of renegotiation is good for India. On the contrary, renegotiating with Pakistan at this stage would be tantamount to returning to old patterns and losing the gains of the past eight years.
In fact, the Modi government’s policy has worked very well since the Uri terror attack in 2016, and further since the Balakot air strikes and the constitutional reforms in Jammu and Kashmir in 2019. The policy is essentially to keep the lines of communication open and otherwise disengage.
But there is a view in India that Pakistan has realised the folly of its past approach and India should encourage Pakistan to continue down this path. At the very least, India should wait and see. But it is certainly one argument that is being put forward in defence of this. statement These are the words of civilian politicians in Pakistan. They also present the usual cliché: “You can choose your friends, but you can’t choose your neighbors.” The people who utter such clichés fail to understand that they have no depth and little merit in the context of international relations. Disgustingly.but, Indian politician They are ready to play on the wicket prepared by Pakistan. Whether this is due to the necessity of electoral politics or an attempt to lobby for votes, it undermines the national policy.
Beyond the political issues, there is the question of whether such a re-engagement policy would work. statement If some people are relying on this as a justification for optimism, such statements have been made before. Civilian Leaders but also Military General In Pakistan, both civilian and military leaders have been limited to issuing empty statements. Essentially, no actions have been taken on the ground to indicate that Pakistan has abandoned its territorial doctrine and use of terrorist proxies. Pakistan believes it can negotiate with India on the terms of the previous negotiations and continue to drag India on issues that are important to it. In these circumstances, any renegotiations would see Pakistan adopting a dual, parallel approach.
Pakistan’s dual parallel approach
The first parallel track would be to negotiate with India and resume trade (along with the restoration of full diplomatic relations). In parallel, Pakistan would keep the terrorism pot humming. Terrorism would be carefully calibrated so as not to overheat. Low-level, low-intensity attacks would continue to keep the jihad factory running. Meanwhile, every attempt would be made to rebuild the terrorism ecosystem that has been partially destroyed. Not only in Kashmir, but also in the Khalistan issue. In the latter case, Pakistan would cooperate with China to Destabilizing Punjab By inciting Khalistanis. In Jammu and Kashmir, which has suddenly become a home port for terrorism, Jamaat-e-Islami Jamaat has come out and pretended to participate in mainstream politics and even contest elections. Earlier, whenever tensions rose, Jamaat publicly distanced itself from terrorism and politics; Breaking into the systemunder the radar screen. The same thing is being attempted again.
The first parallel effort will be to negotiate with India and resume trade (with full diplomatic relations restored), while Pakistan will shut down its terrorism, which will be carefully calibrated so as not to generate too much heat.
The second parallel track is that the civilians will appear friendly and rational while the military remains tough and the civilians will ask for concessions to keep the military in line. This is the old Pakistani way of saying, “If we don’t support the civilians, the military will destabilize us.” The Indian leadership is the victim of this game and will be encouraged to buy Pakistan’s quack medicine by the hordes of Pakistan supporters in India. The Indian side will also be tempted to show some virtue by saying stupid statements like “strengthening Pakistan’s democracy.” At the same time, a quack medicine will be sold in India that Pakistan will have a new civilian government and a chance to negotiate with India again. But the reality is that Pakistan has a hybrid pro-max government headed by a civilian prime minister in name only. The civilians have nothing. Shehbaz’s government came to power and stayed in power with the permission of Army Chief Asim Muneer. His government has no institutions of its own, much less in relation to India. Given the various crises surrounding Pakistan, its survival is full of uncertainty. Any deal or engagement with such an administration, which may not even last a year, will not be worth a penny.
Is this a return of the “Mother India” complex?
It is precisely because Pakistan is in such a mess that there is an argument that it needs to normalize relations with India. This is also called the “Mother India” complex or the “Prithviraj Chauhan syndrome” – helping your enemy when they are in trouble. But the framers of this argument claim (without any evidence) that the Pakistani army cannot afford to open a new front with India. That may indeed be true. But that does not mean that the Pakistani army is ready for peace and normalization with India. If it was ready, the Pakistani army would stop instigating violence in Punjab, not allow terrorist activities to continue in Kashmir, and would hand over or eliminate Indian fugitives like Dawood Ibrahim and Tiger Memon, who are India’s most wanted criminals, and international terrorists like Hafiz Saeed and Masood Azhar. Until this happens, there is no reason to believe that Pakistan is ready to open a new page in its relations with India.
Whoever forms the next government will need to stick to the policies currently in place. Such policies take years to start showing results. The non-engagement policy began to be questioned by the usual suspects within three months, as no concrete results were seen. Eight years later, as Pakistan is in crisis and seeking political relief from India, the effectiveness of the policy is clear. Changing the policy now would undo the gains of the past eight years. More importantly, extending a helping hand to a vindictive enemy would be a Himalayan-sized blunder. But above all, the Indian government needs to have a clear policy on how to deal with Pakistan. It must be a policy free of sentiment and nostalgia. And that policy must go beyond India turning its back on Pakistan and pretending that Pakistan does not exist. Non-engagement is only a part of the policy, not the policy itself. The Indian government needs to make it clear that Pakistan is not only an enemy but also a harmful mindset. Indian policy must effectively address both these aspects of the Pakistan problem.
Sushant Sareen He is a senior research fellow at the Observer Research Foundation.
The views expressed above are those of the author. ORF research and analysis is now available on Telegram. Click here to access curated content including blogs, long-form articles and interviews.
