news details |
|
|
| WAYS TO REVIVE STALLED DIALOGUE PROCESS | | | Ashok K Mehta
The India-Pakistan Track II diplomacy looked beyond the issues that bedevil relations between the two. It made an effort to change the narrative; in other words, transform the dialogue process between both the countries
You could be forgiven for
mistaking this month's
US-Pakistan Obama-Sharif summit at Washington as a trilateral including India. A great portion of the bilateral was devoted by Islamabad to complaining against New Delhi tension on Line of Control, stalled dialogue, Kashmir, dossiers about clandestine activities in Balochistan, Federally Administered Tribal Areas and Karachi, Cold Start doctrine and so on. The joint statement significantly extracted from Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, a commitment for effective action against all Pakistan-based terrorist outfits including Lashkar-e-Tayyeba and its affiliates and the Haqqani network. Equally, it called for a sustained and resilient dialogue for resolving all outstanding issues with India.
That is precisely what the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung-sponsored India-Pakistan Track II interaction has been doing, following the attack on Indian Parliament since 2003. Here is a snapshot of this month's meeting in Bangkok to broaden the canvas looking beyond issues that bedevil India-Pakistan relations while attempting to break the deadlock in the three-year long hiatus in official talks. Included was the effort to change the narrative, in other words, transform the dialogue process.
The conference started with an examination of China's new Great Game of expanding infrastructure, energy, ideology and happiness in bigger Asia through one belt, one road. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor was seen in Pakistan as the focal area of one road one belt. For Islamabad, CPEC travels through Gilgit-Baltistan not Kashmir and will benefit Balochistan, so why should India object? India's response to one belt, one road is lukewarm as it has its own Silk and Blue Road ideas like Chabahar and the International North-South Transportation Corridor through Iran.
Linking Gwadar and Chabahar ports was favourably considered. The second session on trade normalisation, visa liberalisation, power trade, water and connectivity was considered by many delegates as the game-changer. Avoiding using Most Favoured Nation (sabse pasandeeda mulk) and replacing it with Non Discriminatory Market Access was the idea from Pakistan. A mixed view prevailed that trade creates peace. That Pakistan was ready to grant MFN to India in 2014 but the then Government told Pakistan to wait for the new Government, hit the Indian delegates like a bombshell. A Pakistani tersely added that Inter-Services Public Relations also has a view on MFN.
The interaction on the print and electronic media was rather exciting. 26/11 was recognised as the turning point as it had lowered the bar on tolerance in India. Times Now figured along with its Pakistani vernacular counterparts as representing the extreme view which though was not the mainstream on both sides. But social media was now the new monster. A Pakistani mentioned that media was controlled by the Inter-Services Intelligence and that LoC briefings were done by ISPR. Access to each other's publications, TV, films and exchange of journalists was needed to moderate the "extreme'" and a shared mechanism to defuse burning issues. It was agreed that eventually only political leaders (and the military in Pakistan) and not the media will change the narrative of discourse.
Pakistanis felt that the present status quo on Kashmir was not acceptable as it had led to a 'satisfaction differential'. This has prompted Islamabad to keep its sub optimal options (like cross-border terrorism) open. The opinion on the relevance of the four-point Kashmir formula which was described as a missed opportunity was divided though the majority favoured revisiting it, some saying not as back channel. Both sides agreed that neither could alter the border through use of force though India would have to circumvent the joint parliamentary resolution to retake Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. About Indian news reports that a file on the four-point Kashmir formula has been handed over by former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Prime Minister Narendra Modi was denied by an Indian delegate who was a Minister in the UPA Government.
Siachen, which was virtually a signed and sealed deal some years ago, has reverted to established positions: India's demand to authenticate Agreed Ground Position Line versus Pakistan's of demilitarisation following a mutual withdrawal to pre-1984 positions. The trust deficit after Kargil and 26/11 is so high that the Indian Army holds a veto on Siachen. Sir Creek is similarly stuck over whether the boundary should be on the southern bank or in the centre of the channel which is the international convention. Siachen has become a part of any future package deal on Kashmir.
On terrorism and delay in bringing terror cases to closure, Indians said that, as both Pakistani and Indian judicial system is derived from the UK, ordinarily there should be no difficulties in expediting cases. The problem of no extradition treaty can be overcome by invoking the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation regional convention on terrorism. It was clarified that 26/11 and Samjhauta are not comparable and, therefore, equivalence is not justified. In the region radicalisation was a bigger challenge than terrorism itself, it was stated.
Radical elements of the Pakistan Armed Forces had links with Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan as proved by the insider collusion in attacks against military bases. The credibility of the Nawaz Government was slipping. Recently, people living near Bannu Cantonment saw posters on the wall with pictures of Gen Raheel Sharif that read: "Thank you for Zarb-e Azb. We love you", along with 'Go go Nawaz Sharif'. According to Pakistanis, India had lost its moral high ground on terrorism after provocative statements by Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar and National Security Advisor Ajit Doval. The score on terrorism was, therefore, deuced.
The signature presentation on Afghanistan by a veteran Pakistani journalist described the security situation there as phenomenally low with the Afghan National Security Forces cracking up due to failures of intelligence and leadership, a politically divided national unity Government and lack of full spectrum battlefield support for ANSF. The Taliban had captured for a few days the first provincial headquarter, Kunduz, came close to taking Ghazni and were in temporary occupation of 12 district headquarters. The Taliban offensive was aimed to capture weapons, loot banks, free prisoners and establish the supremacy of the new leader Mullah Mansour. The blowback is that Taliban's rise has triggered fears of a collapse of the Kabul Government which has prompted President Barack Obama to delay by one year, withdrawal of US forces.
The last session considered the strategic re-orientation of the straitjacketed India-Pakistan dialogue which might facilitate some outcomes on at least Track II instead of being stuck in the blame-game. Finally, the way suggested to break the impasse on reviving the dialogue grounded over terrorism first was to agree discussing terrorism and Kashmir simultaneously even if it is optically one after the other. This should be back channel.
(Courtesy@daily Pioneer.com) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
