A new game of brinksmanship

The way India-Pakistan relations are, a meeting at any level creates a big hype. Thus the aborted NSA level meeting in New Delhi was no exception. But it got caught up in the planned meeting of the Pakistani adviser with Hurriyet leaders, and led to a rather undiplomatic tiff between the two governments, amply spiced up by the media of the two countries.
Pakistan would not accept the preconditions set by India for the dialogue. The net result: no meeting between the two sides, and a lot of added tension due to this spat. For the last few weeks tension has built up as India shelled border areas, resulting in many deaths. Pakistan protested but to no avail. For the outside world, and commentators, this was typical of the two traditional neighbours born and bred in a state of animosity.
The last few days have seen a convergence of experts/security analysts on local TV channels, discussing the coming dialogue, the issues involved, and indulging in blame games. The same was reflected across the border, with counter arguments – a veritable war of words.
The current strain is characteristic of Indo-Pak relations under Indian PM Modi. (this strain had actually started under PM Manmohan Singh.) Despite Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s participation in Modi’s inauguration, Modi has not budged an inch to give way to diplomacy. He has rather kept widening the gap of hostility – the most recent during his visit to UAE. There is another aspect to be reckoned: this time the stumbling block is not really the issues, but a procedural detail. The two sides are stuck on the detail; for India, this meeting was not part of the Composite Dialogue; for Pakistan, the agenda/issues were agreed at Ufa in Russia.
India is adamant that Pakistan should talk on terrorism, in other words that Pakistan should accept its role in ‘sponsoring’ terrorism. That is a non-starter, and a case of diplomatic naiveté. Pakistan is ready, as stated by

Sartaj Aziz, to give evidence of RAWs involvement in terrorism in Pakistan. Where do you go from here? Both sides are ready with non-agenda items, taking them nowhere. A typical game of brinksmanship.
While India still wishes to keep terrorism – read Pakistan’s involvement – at the top of the agenda, the Indian foreign minister also reiterated other items on the agenda: Siachen; Sir Creek; Tulbul Project; Exchanges; Trade; CBMs; Kashmir; and terrorism and drugs. It is inconveniently ignored that progress and agreement on any of these could give a big push to other items, and mark a major breakthrough in bilateral relations.
Pakistan cannot deny the problem it faces in the province of Balochistan, for whatever reasons. India, on its part, cannot close its eyes to the ground reality in Kashmir, especially in recent months. Anti-India protests, arrests of leaders, and other violations of human/political rights in Kashmir are indications of a serious malaise that India cannot ignore by pointing a finger at Pakistan, and through violations of the LoC. Such an attitude has rekindled the independence movement. If India wants peace and harmony in Kashmir, the issue has to be addressed.
Modi must be feeling good about getting closer to the US and the Gulf States, in the process reaping economic benefits for India. But dealing with Pakistan remains his biggest challenge. For it is also linked with eight issues that are to be discussed as part of the Composite Dialogue that is languishing now for months. India’s dream of a regional and global role cannot be fulfilled till these issues are addressed, and there is positive peace in the region. Currently, the region seems to have become a flashpoint once again.
Preconditions for talks, the Pakistan side meeting Kashmiri leaders, even terrorism – these are only roadblocks to prevent the dialogue process. It is very clear now that the Modi government is not ready to move ahead toward dialogue, let alone agreement, on any issue, terrorism or Kashmir. In some ways, he is following the footsteps of Manmohan Singh, who made no real effort at a peace overture or a breakthrough in the diplomatic impasse.
There are lessons for these two antagonists – the US-Iran nuclear deal and the US-Cuba thaw. While the former is incredible , the latter is more instructive. Nine US presidents, for about six decades, were unable to end the bitter confrontation, which involved so many contentious issues. But with political will the issues were resolved. Similarly, there were few optimists about a nuclear deal between Iran, and what it saw as the Great Satan.
Closer to home, under Modi and Nawaz Sharif, our two countries have another opportunity to give diplomacy a chance, and succeed where so many of their predecessors failed. They do not have to find a solution (to Kashmir), or pin blame, for terrorism, at the next summit, but sincerely commit to a dialogue that takes them ahead towards a solution – sometime in the future. They owe this to the millions on both sides of the border who will reap the dividends of peace.
The writer teaches at the Quaid-e-Azam University, Islamabad.
Email: pakirishyahoo.com