February 9, 2014
By Saeed
Qureshi
The incumbent
PMLN regime in Pakistan is striving hard to normalize relations with
neighboring India. It is bending over heavily backward and ready to go extra
mile for a new beginning of peaceful and mutually beneficial relationship with
the big neighbor.
But such an earnest ambition and thrust may not fructify
because India would never be ready to part an inch of Kashmir to Pakistan or to
Kashmiris. It is another matter if both agree to declare the line of control as
the permanent border.
Prime
Minister Mian Nawaz Sharif’s outlook and perception about friction-free
relations between India and Pakistan is laudable and promising for the
stability and progress of both the countries. During his earlier two stints as
the Pakistan’s prime minister he has addressed this prime issue very
diligently. As a result of that the then Indian prime minister Atal Bihari
Vajpayee made an historic visit to Pakistan in February 1999 to inaugurate the
Delhi-Lahore bus service.
The Lahore Declaration
signed by Nawaz Sharif and Mr. Vajpayee enshrined among others, such momentous
clauses as initiation of process for permanent settlement of Kashmir dispute,
expansion of trade relations and denuclearizing South Asia.
Unfortunately the
Kargil conflict watered down that milestone accord as military under Musharraf
did not want a rapprochement with India. Furthermore, Mian Nawaz Sharif was deposed
on October 12, 1999 in a military take -over throwing up the then COAS Pervez Musharraf as the head of
state.
The
bitterness and the malaise of strained relationship are spawned by the
hardliners and fanatics of all sorts on both the sides, most notably the
religious outfits. As such in a festering animus loaded environment, it is
difficult to presage if Pakistan and India can forget their strife ridden past
and embark upon a path of abiding friendship.
Unfortunately,
India and Pakistan thus far have failed to sort out their mutual disputes for
lasting peace and good neighborliness. There is no precedent in the past that
they worked out a bilaterally acceptable solution or agreement with regard to
such thorny issues as the demarcation of borders, mutual trade, the
apportionment of water from rivers flowing down into Pakistan or the paramount lingering
Kashmir issue. The Indus Basic Treaty was breached by India being the upper riparian.
There is no record of accomplishments for the two neighbors liberated from the British colonial yoke in 1947 of sitting down and coming up with a recipe of veritable peace and friendship. India will not give up her hold on Kashmir, nor will Pakistan or Kashmiri nation relinquish or forego their claim about holding a pledged plebiscite to elicit the local population’s opinion as to which country they would prefer to join.
Indian deems Kashmir as an integral part of
Indian federation while Pakistan’s standpoint is that Kashmir is a disputed
territory whose final status has yet to be determined by the people of Kashmir
though a plebiscite.
The three wars, in 1948, 1965, and 1971 followed by brief skirmishes in Kargil in July 1999 have failed to bring about change of hearts on both the sides. The fact is that primarily it is Pakistan that would be the major beneficiary of the illusive settlement of the outstanding issues between India and Pakistan.
For that matter, India would not let Pakistan off the hook lest it can move
forward on a course of stability, progress, and prosperity. By
facilitating cross border trade Pakistan would earn 12 billion dollars per
annum.
India’s military intervention in Bangladesh in 1971 led to the dismemberment of Pakistan and a humiliating defeat for the Pakistan’s armed forces. The Simla Agreement signed in 1972 between India and Pakistan, binds both the countries to settle all contentious issues via parleys to be conducted in the framework of the UN Charter.
Now building of 22 barrages by India on rivers emanating from Kashmir apart from being a violation of the 1960 Indus Water Treaty, would give a complete control to India to stop or release water to Pakistan, which is a lower riparian. India agreed to sign Indus Basin Treaty because it deprived Pakistan of three rivers. Otherwise, she would have never agreed if such a treaty had impinged upon her interests.
There can never be a consensus agreement on water distribution and a workable arrangement for water share to Pakistan because India would never do anything that would even marginally benefit Pakistan. Indus Basin Treaty or no treaty, Pakistan agricultural sector would always remain at the mercy of India for release of water that she would do after taking care of her domestic needs.
If
Pakistan doesn't get enough water, it would be exposed always to a looming
threat of drought and famine. Tacitly India’s preference has been to turn
Pakistan into a market for disposal of her products both industrial and
agricultural.
Besides,
since the inception of both the states in 1947, Pakistan has remained under
unrelenting diplomatic, military, economic, and psychological pressure from
India. So the talk of CBMS (confidence building measures) is a mere ploy to
obfuscate the real issues. Both countries have varying and different
interpretation for CBMS.
For Pakistan, primarily it is the easy movement of
citizens of both the states without much of harassment and strict conditions.
For India, it is to allow India to export her goods to Pakistani without any
let or hindrance. While Pakistan has ever remained ready to talk on substantive
issues India’s priorities and prerogatives have been focused on pushing them to
back burners or keeping in a state of limbo.
Good neighborly relations between Pakistan and India have remained elusive because there is no overwhelming goodwill or an earnest desire to resolve the contentious issues bedeviling their relationship for almost seven decades. At people’s level, the deep-seated animus can be witnessed when a match is being played or a situation of tension like the attack on a Bombay hotel arises.
The
Hindu extremists have been demonstrating the anti-Muslim vendetta by lynching
and burning the Muslims and their houses in ethnic and communal clashes. One such
horrible mayhem happened in Gujarat and Ahmadabad when Muslims suffered a kind
of carnage and mini genocide at the hands of Hindu extremists. These anti
Muslims riots continued for three months causing unspecified number of deaths
and casualties and loss of property.
The hate and
the animosity have a history of a thousand years between the Muslims and
Hindus. Hindus think that Muslims were primarily aliens and intruders into the
sacred Hindustava or Bharat Mata and they have no right to live and survive in
the Indian subcontinent.
Muslims, though, have been rulers in India until the
British came, seldom indulged in the persecution or ethnic cleansing or proselytizing
their religious minorities. The Muslim rulers like Akbar married with Hindu
women and invariably treated Hindu population well and on equal level.
While
Pakistan is caught in the throes of a civil war at home front and also has been
fighting a proxy war for the west, it cannot afford to ignite a crisis
situation that can lead to a war and military confrontation with India. Given
the Indian expanding role and interest in Afghanistan, Pakistan is genuinely
worried that it night get a push both from the eastern and western fronts once
the foreign occupation troops leave Afghanistan.
Only the time would unravel if the future Afghan government would allow India to carry on its anti Pakistan activities and be able to incite pro-Indian Afghan and tribal militants against Pakistan for an insurgency. There are rumors that India was backing the insurgency now going on in Balochistan for separation. However, hopefully Pakistan would be able to stem the extremists’ militancy in Balochistan as it did in Swat, Dir, and Malakand and of late in South Waziristan.
. India is
more interested in dislodging China in Balochistan. India is deeply incensed
over the Chinese running the Gawadar port. Moreover it would not want an
increasing influence of China by way of a motorway linking Karachi with Kashgar
or establishment of industrial zones on Pakistani territory.
However Chinese
presence in Pakistan in a way would also be a redeeming feature for Pakistan.
India may not venture creating further troubles for Pakistan or military action
for fear of Chinese reprisals in safeguarding here own commercial interests.
Therefore, in the backdrop of this endemic and seething hostility, any goodwill visits to other country by politicians would hardly make any difference in generating genuine and sincere cordiality between India and Pakistan.
The former
Indian External Affairs Minister, S. M. Krishna came to Pakistan on a three-day
visit in July 2010 with a “message of peace and friendship from the people of
India”. Yet that proved to be another futile attempt in mending fences even
marginally between two inveterate adversaries.
Since then
four years have passed and there doesn't seem to be any demonstration of
goodwill. As the past betokens the
possibility of a far reaching or watershed breakthrough at present or in future
looks remote. Such visits have been window-dressing and cosmetic without
throwing up tangible outcome for fostering a real era of friendship and peace
between India and Pakistan.
However one
would wish that China, India, Pakistan and Afghanistan and even Iran can join
hands through a regional treaty to work for the uplift, peace and economic
cooperation of this part of South Asia. Wars and military engagements are not
lasting answer to the stability and advancement of this thus far neglected
region especially war-torn Afghanistan.
One can hope that better sense
prevails. The first giant step towards lasting peace, enduring goodwill and abiding
mutual understanding between Pakistan and India is the dire need to resolve
their lingering disputes. One such paramount bone of contention is the Kashmir
issue.
No comments:
Post a Comment