Tense borders

Lo and behold! In the present circumstances, the last thing we would have wanted to happen has happened. As if the continuous exchange of fire at the LoC with India was not enough, there was a flare up at the Pak-Iran border.
Fortunately, for the time being, the two countries have agreed to resolve issues amicably, to strengthen border controls, to show restraint and to keep peace with fresh communication protocols established. However, the situation warrants once again a serious dialogue within Pakistan between its politicians, security forces, defence analysts, economic managers, academics and civil society to thoroughly review our foreign policy and security imperatives in the light of both the outside factors of current global and regional challenges and the inside factors of a struggling economy and our internal security paradigm.
Pakistan’s foreign policy has traditionally cascaded from our security policy, not our economic interest. This may well be true for other countries but our unique relationship with India and the frequent long-lasting martial rules have solidified the military view of foreign relations over the past many decades. Our foreign policy has revolved around sustaining a competing and adversarial relationship with India, pursuing a friendly and conducive relationship with China, building and strengthening a security relationship with the US and maintaining a combination of cultural, social and economic relationship with Arab and other Muslim countries.
There are reasons for Pakistan’s foreign policy pundits with the civil and military establishment behind them to remain paranoid of Indian designs of hegemony in the region, both in terms of military supremacy and economic onslaught. There is a small change visible for short periods of time but the traditional situation recurs. The preferences made at times by those determining India’s foreign policy and the manifestations of how their military mind conceives Pakistan from time to time also provides succour to the mutual mistrust between the two countries and helps perpetuate a feeling of insecurity in Pakistan.
It has been said time and again here by those who sincerely believe in social progress and economic prosperity of Pakistan that unless there is genuine understanding between the two countries on resolving all issues amicably and peacefully including that of Kashmir, with both parties agreeing to negotiate their conventional positions, the region will remain on tenterhooks. Concurrently, economic cooperation, trade, commerce, cultural and educational exchanges, etc have to be encouraged and promoted.
Taking this path is more crucial for Pakistan than for India. However, Indian policymakers must also realise that a perpetual conflict with Pakistan will create a glass ceiling for their progress. India may wish Pakistan to become a non-nuclear, compliant state. But the fact is that it is neither Nepal nor Bangladesh. Therefore, a long drawn conflict with Pakistan will drag them down as well.
The military mind on both sides of the border will see each other as enemies forever. They are trained as such – land over life, territory over people. The political minds, with the social and economic interest of the people they claim to represent, must understand that there are no permanent friends or foes between states. A nation’s interests define its friends. It is not in our interest as a nation to fight with India. The whole premise of partitioning India was based on creating peace and harmony in the region, not to harbour acrimony.
Our relationship with China is more comfortable but not at its all-time best. It is no small occurrence in foreign relations that the high-profile visit of a head of the state is cancelled at the last moment by the host country, thanks to internal political strife and tainted visions of revolution and creating a ‘new’ country. Besides, China sees links between its East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM)-led militancy and safe havens for international terrorism in our tribal areas. A few from the insurgent leadership from the Muslim-majority Xinjiang province of China were killed in drone attacks.
In terms of investments and economic relationship, we must not let ourselves become a dumping ground for second-class Chinese-made products, consumables and appliances. We must seek more technology transfer and access to Chinese markets, however limited it may be at the beginning.
We continue to have a love-hate relationship with the Americans. One reason being that Pakistan’s policymakers perceive that while they took a clear position all along during the cold war, they benefitted much less than other partners of the US. Americans may look at it differently as their military and development aid surpasses anyone else’s support to Pakistan. They have been around but Pakistanis see them as unreliable even after being a frontline state in all American wars or military interests in the region since the 1950s.
Furthermore, while Jordanians, Saudis, Egyptians, Turks and UAE Sheikhs have few issues with Israel now, Pakistani people at large and its governments continue to see Israel as a usurper of Palestinian land and Palestinian rights. American support to Israel has a negative impact on popular imagination. Also, in wide-ranging Pakistani public opinion, the two military adventures in Iraq were completely unjustified. Being uneasy partners, Americans continue to twist our arm and we try to hoodwink them whenever an opportunity is found.
American overtures towards India, with investments being made and a long-term relationship being sought, are a reality check for us. We must not forget that the Americans will not easily forget that Osama was finally found in Pakistan. In the new scenario, our relationship with the Americans will soon be more incumbent on our easing of tensions with India.
As far as working with Arab and Muslim countries is concerned, we gained from our economically beneficial relationships with the Pro-American Arab governments. The same stands true for Turkey, less in substance and more in spirit though. But it is an unequal relationship with Arab countries as, simply put, we provide cheap labour and get subsidised oil on occasion.
Iran has remained a friend for a long but the relationship has deteriorated due to militancy across the borders, our leadership becoming too close to the Americans in the Afghan war, and persecution of Shias in Pakistan over the years. There was effective diplomacy initiated by the last PPP-led government but it seems to have been placed on the side burner by the incumbents. Iran is far more important than they think.
The core issue is that unless we become a modern, progressive and economically strong state and society, no equal relationships can be dreamed of. But to get there, while an internal policy shift is needed, foreign policy has to be revisited in order to create stability in the region, invite investment, increase production and expand markets.
Also, technologically advanced and fairly independent countries like Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Poland and Russia can benefit Pakistan in unprecedented ways. We need rigorous country-focused relationship development and deepening of existing ties with Japan, Holland, Canada and the Scandinavian nations. The point is to take these countries as seriously as we have traditionally taken the US and the UK.
But this can only work when we decide to coolly reflect on the choices that we have made in the past and revise our internal security and foreign policy paradigms. Perhaps, this is for the first time in our history of foreign relations that no neighbour is happy with us and we are happy with no one either.
The writer is a poet and author based in Islamabad.
Email: harris.khalique@gmail.com