Our response to the killing of five Indian soldiers last week by the Pakistanis inside our Line of Control has again shown our inability to deal effectively with the dual issue of dialoguing with Pakistan and scotching the terrorist threat from it.
Pakistan will not cease supporting terrorism unless we impose costs on it or offer it concessions.
The issues are closely inter-linked as using the arm of terrorism against a neighbour is not how a normal state conducts itself. To believe that such a state can be persuaded through political talks to give up a lever that it uses to further its strategic goals is not realistic. It will change its conduct either if the cost of use becomes too high or if it achieves its objectives.
Pakistan will, therefore, not cease supporting terrorism unless we impose costs on it or offer it concessions. If we conclude that we cannot force Pakistan to stop terrorist activity against us and that we have no choice but to talk to it, hoping that it will control the jihadi groups in the country’s own longer-term interest, then we play into Pakistan’s hands, leaving it to decide how and when it will deal with the issue based on its internal and external calculus.
The composite dialogue is therefore a political trap for us, as Pakistan views it as a platform to constantly press us for concessions without needing to make any of its own, particularly as we appear unduly anxious politically to keep the dialogue going.
Our appeals to Pakistan to cease support to terrorism for the dialogue process to succeed lack logic. Pakistan actually believes that because we cannot handle terrorist pressure externally as well as internally because of our divided polity, we cling to the dialogue option and seek accommodation with it.
We are in confusion when we say that we can make progress in settling our differences only in an atmosphere free from violence. Are we implying that we are holding up progress in some areas because Pakistan is not suppressing terrorism as we want?
Pakistan has yet not moved to grant India MFN status stalled since December last year, even though it is obliged to grant it under international trading rules.
What “progress” will we offer on Kashmir to satisfy Pakistan? Will we withdraw from Siachen if Pakistan controls jihad against us? Will we accept the Pakistani position on Sir Creek? Will we accept its case on the Wullar Barrage and our hydroelectric projects on the western rivers allowed by the Indus Waters Treaty(IWT)? What progress can we offer on nuclear matters?
Contradictions
In reality, if no progress is being made on our differences it is because Pakistan is fixated on obtaining concessions from India rather than making any of its own. On Siachen they want us to basically accept that we are occupying territory that is rightfully theirs and vacate it. Apart from lack of strategic equivalence in the scope of the withdrawals, the reality is that even what Pakistan is currently holding is strictly illegal because we consider the whole of the erstwhile state as legally ours. Pakistan should in the first instance end its cartographic aggression by showing the cease-fire line correctly as ending at NJ9842 and not extended to the Karakoram Pass. Pakistan should also be required to remove the presence of China as an intruding third party in POK, consistent with its claim that J&K is “disputed” territory.
On Sir Creek, Pakistan should accept the median line as the border in accordance with international law rather than insisting on a one-sided solution. On water related issues it should cease to further vitiate the atmosphere by accusing India of diverting water in violation of the IWT which is in fact is exceptionally generous to it. In the nuclear field, apart from increasing its holdings at a break-neck pace, it is introducing tactical nuclear weapons in the sub-continent and dangerously lowering the threshold of their use.
We should reverse the burden and ask Pakistan to deliver conceretely on terrorism before we resume a process that has produced virtually nothing for years.
On trade, Pakistan has yet not moved to grant India MFN status stalled since December last year, even though it is obliged to grant it under international trading rules. If it does so eventually, it will be because of its economic woes rather than as a goodwill political gesture. On our side, were Pakistan to cease violent activity against us, an area in which we could contribute to “progress” would be people to people contacts.
Straitjacket
It is time that we released ourselves from the diplomatic straitjacket of the composite dialogue. On all the agenda items, barring terrorism, Pakistan seeks concessions from India. We are exposing ourselves to blame for being rigid if no progress is made, with some of our own commentators joining Pakistanis in faulting us for not culling the so-called low hanging fruit such as Siachen and Sir Creek. On terrorism and trial of those responsible for the Mumbai attacks, our demands have become ritualistic through fruitless repetition and Pakistan ignores them. Worse, we have allowed Pakistan to put us on the defensive on the issue by tagging the Samjhauta Express incident to the issue of terrorism.
Need
We had a confused response to the recent border incident because of concern that holding the Pakistan army directly responsible would have jeopardized the resumption of the composite dialogue and the meeting of our Prime Minister with his Pakistani counterpart in New York next month. We have lost our margin of manoeuvre by investing too heavily in the policy of holding a broad-based dialogue with Pakistan despite its truck with terrorism. The Pakistani premier is pressing for the composite dialogue as it serves Pakistan’s interests well, the onus of making progress having been heaped on India’s shoulders. We should reverse the burden and ask Pakistan to deliver conceretely on terrorism before we resume a process that has produced virtually nothing for years.
Prime Minister Sharif should put his money where his mouth is to inspire confidence.
Please wait...
A well written article. Why do we have trade relations with that country and why do we indulge in sports especially cricket ?
Correctly brought out by the author Pakistan’s nefarious adveturism has been dashed to ground by our IA and BSF thus dictating in very clear terms the muscular power of armed forces and strong intentions of Modi govt so far unprovoked aggression of pak is concerned. As I see through strategic mirror Pak resorted to this border firing due to fwg reasons:-
1. Pak is finding herself cornered both nationally and internationally.
2. UN as well as USA payed no atention to nawaz sharif’s beating the same outdated drum of kashmir.
3.US has asked Pak the balance sheet of the aid of 20 b $ already given and asked the expdr details whether it was not utilised for terrorism.
4. Obama,s sudden changed response post Modi’s visit has really tensed Pak.
5.So Pak want to internationise the issue by firing at the border to make international bodies realise the severity and escalation of kashmir issue to kerp receiving the aid.
6. As winter is nearing, so this is desperate attempt to assist infiltration.
7. To bring down the image of army which is at its peak post kashmir floods.
8. To check whether this govt will also be defensive like UPA earlier.
9. Non state actors duly supported by Army n ISI dont want peace otherwise their relevance will cease to exist.
Very good and relevant article by the author. ……
Sir you are requested to continue writing like this on imp issues. ..
The indian foreign service though manned with 850 good effecient officers is handicapped as it is not integrated with the mod which itself is led by generalist babus and no service officers representation . The nation cannot aspire to be a superpower if the armed forces are treated like chowkidars the only indian elite with understanding of strageic affairs , reach and mangement of voilence to implement the nations aspirations and great power desire . THE IAS , IFS LED BABUS OF FOREIGN AND MOD INCLUDING PMO AND CABINET SECRATARIAT HAVE FAILED TO WRITE OR ESTABLISH A INDIAN STRATEGIC VISION FROM WHICH THE NATIONS ARMED FORCES CAPABILTY AND CAPACITY IS BUILT , NO CABINET SECRATARY , DEFENCE SECRATARY HAS BEEN HAULED FOR FAILING IN THEIR PRIMARY DUTYOF LAYING DOWN INDIAN STRATEGIC DOCTRINE AND WHAT WE SEE IN FOREIGN SERVICE MOD , SERVICE HEADQUARTERS WORKING IN SILOS WITH DRDO SCIENTISTS NOW THE REPOSITARY OF THE NUCLEAR ARSENAL WORKING IN ISOLATION AND A TIME WILL COME WHEN THE INDIAN HIGHER DEFENCE MANGEMENT WILL BE UNABLE TO RESPOND TO A EMERGINGING OR ACTUAL CRISES . WITH ISLAMIC TUR MOIL IN SYRIA , IRAQ , LEBENON , BERUIT , ISRAEL , PALESTIANS , ISLAMIC JIHAD IN AFGHANISTAN , PAKISTAN AND NIBBLING OF INDIAN BOUNDARY BY CHINA AND TERROR ATTACKS BY PAKISTAN INDIAN HIGHER DEFENCE ORGANISATION DOESNOT DISPLAY A SENSE OF URGENCY OR DESIRE TO MEET THE THREATS . WITH THE ELITE COVERED BY SPG , NSG THE TAXPAYER AND COMMON MAN IS BURDENED BY THE FAILED SERVICES OF THE NATION . A INTERNAL UPRISING BASED ON RELIGON BOILING CAULDRON AND EXTERNAL THREATS ARE A READY RECIPE FOR DISASTER . THE NATIONS ELITE IN LUTYENS DELHI THOUGH WORKING HARD BUT THE MANGEMENT OF 1.3 BILLION ARGUMENTATIVE DIVERSE INDIANS HAS FALLEN APART .
Sir when we have people like you in our foreign affairs as to why we have not been able to guide our government for decades to a correct path
It’s too farfetched an idea that Pak (read Pak Army) will stop training and abetting terrorists whose aim is India. In fact they are the first line of action of the Pak Army against the Indian Army. The Pak army wants the Indian Army to be continuously embroiled in an insurgency, which keeps it drawn away from the main aim being the defence of the country. It bleeds the Army slowly and it takes its toll on the soldiers due to continuous deployments in Kashmir. It also keeps the cauldron in Kashmir on the boil. If terrorism stops in the Valley then the Army pulls out except for guarding the LC. Once the Army is out, the normal people of the valley don’t have much of a grouse against Delhi and will perhaps be happy to get on with their lives.
Freeing of a large number of troops from the Valley doesn’t sound a very good idea for Islamabad and Beijing. If all Indian troops are free from insurgency deployments all over India the balance of power in Asia has a new meaning.
We shouldn’t pull out of Siachen. It’s hurting Pakistan to maintain a presence in Siachen. Since they don’t accept our claim we should never step back. They will be quick to roll in one day. Let them hang on in Siachen.
We need to be aggressive with Pakistan at the LC. Keep it on the boil. The same is the case with Sir Creek. We should keep it aggressively engaged and bleed it financially. Our focus should be China. We should develop our forces to handle the Chinese in Land Sea and Air. Pakistan gets s taken care of automatically. Pakistan cannot sustain operation readiness for long. It begins to hurt their economy to keep their army on the go for long periods. They can’t even afford to keep fuel stocks for a protracted period of time.
The other measures should be to squeeze then on River Waters, Shia issues and Baluchistan. We should begin to support the Shia communities in Pak and specially so in POK to include Skardu, Gilgit, Hunza and Chilas.
Let’s play their game.