MUNIR AKRAM
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.
