IN
the current crisis, it is tempting to dismiss India’s dire threats, outlandish
propaganda, childish antics and illusory ‘surgical strikes’, in Shakespeare’s
words, as “a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying
nothing”. The clamour from India is certainly replete with idiocy and
delusional nonsense. Yet, India’s aggressive posture and propaganda may signify
a more ominous portent.
It is clear that India has been encouraged by its new
alliance with the US to conclude that it can suppress the latest revolt in India-held
Jammu and Kashmir with brutal impunity. America and other Western powers are
not prepared to speak out against India’s massive violations of human rights in
Kashmir.
The fictional ‘surgical strikes’ across the LoC have led
some Indian analysts to assert that New Delhi has established a new threshold
for military action against Pakistan without evoking retaliation. Do the Modi
government and Indian military leaders actually endorse this thesis? Was India
prevented from carrying out cross-LoC strikes because of its own assessment
that Pakistan would retaliate, or because of the cautionary advice of the US
and other powers? If this is not clear, Pakistan will need to evaluate what it
needs to do to re-establish the mutual deterrence inducted after the 1998
nuclear tests.
Pakistan’s policymakers must restore focus on the real
challenge posed by India’s hostility.
The high-level meeting convened in Islamabad to review
the current crisis with India should have focused on such strategic issues and
the challenge of defending the hapless Kashmiris. Instead, if the report in
this newspaper is correct, it appears that the meeting focused on India’s
thesis that Pakistan will be ‘isolated’ because of its incomplete action
against ‘terrorist’ groups. Apart from the legal and political complexity of
the issue, action on this issue at this time would be interpreted as
capitulation to Indian military pressure and threats and, that too, while India
openly supports insurrection in Balochistan and sponsors the TTP from Afghan
territory. To confound confusion, the sensitive internal deliberations were
‘leaked’ to the press.
Pakistan’s policymakers must restore focus on the real
challenge posed by India’s hostility and its oppression in occupied Jammu and
Kashmir. The prime minister made a bold speech at the UN General Assembly,
proposing an investigation of India’s human rights violations in occupied
Kashmir; Pakistan-India arms control and military restraint; and consultations
with the Security Council to demilitarise Kashmir and implement the Security
Council resolutions.
These proposals must be actively promoted by Pakistan’s
diplomacy in the Security Council, the Human Rights Council and other relevant
forums. The major powers should be apprised of the ground realities. The 20
political envoys dispatched by the prime minister, with some exceptions, are
unlikely to be equal to this task. There are at least a dozen experienced and
respected diplomats available in Islamabad who could be used for this purpose.
There are three essential messages that need to be
conveyed to the international community.
One: Kashmir remains a nuclear flashpoint. India has been
unable to extinguish the Kashmiri demand for self-determination in 70 years; it
will be unable to do so in the foreseeable future. Every generation of
Kashmiris will keep rising against Indian rule. Indian violence will be met by
Kashmiri retaliation. India will always blame Pakistan for this. A
Pakistan-India war will remain an ever-present threat.
Two: India is obviously being encouraged in its brutality
and belligerence by its new-found alliance with the US. New Delhi may convince
itself that it is in a position to engage in a limited or punitive war against
Pakistan. This would be a catastrophic mistake. Pakistan and India need to
adopt measures for mutual restraint to avoid any conflict, now or in the
future.
Three: since bilateral efforts have failed for 70 years,
it is essential that the international community intercedes forcefully to
promote a peaceful solution to the Kashmir dispute and prevent a war between
Pakistan and India, by design or accident.
Our leaders and people should be clear: Pakistan is not
isolated, nor likely to be. In fact, there are several current opportunities
for Pakistan’s diplomacy to shift the strategic balance in its favour.
First, Pakistan should open an early dialogue with the
incoming US administration to underline the need for a balanced US policy to
prevent an Indian threat to Pakistan’s security and to sustain Pakistan-US
cooperation on Afghanistan, counterterrorism, non-proliferation as well as
trade and investment.
Second, while US support for India’s military build-up is
aimed against China, it is Pakistan which faces the primary threat from this
build-up. As Pakistan’s strategic partner, China must be asked at the highest
level to intensify its strategic cooperation with Pakistan and enable it to
effectively counter the advanced military capabilities India is deploying
against Pakistan.
Third, Islamabad needs to take full advantage of Russia’s
new openness to a strategic relationship with Pakistan and build a relationship
covering defence, technology, energy, Afghanistan and countering terrorism.
Fourth, Pakistan and Iran have a common interest in
stabilising their Baloch provinces. This can be the foundation for a restored
strategic relationship encompassing trade, energy, defence and Afghanistan.
Fifth, Saudi Arabia is strategically adrift due to the
erosion of its alliance with the US. Pakistan can extend support to the House
of Saud without becoming involved in the competition between Riyadh and Tehran.
Sixth, Turkey’s ties with the US and Nato are also
frayed. Pakistan’s already close relationship with Ankara can be expanded
across the board.
Last, while the threat from India is existential, it is
potential. The hostile intervention from Afghanistan by the TTP and BLA is
operational. In the absence of Kabul’s cooperation, ‘surgical strikes’ against
TTP safe havens and BLA safe houses should be an active option for Pakistan.
Moreover, if Ghani’s government continues to refuse a negotiated peace,
Pakistan is well placed to promote an alternative peace process involving those
Afghans who are ready to reach a peace settlement based on power-sharing and
the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan.
The writer is a
former Pakistan ambassador to the UN.
No comments:
Post a Comment