Modi’s peace charade

In a recent long conversation with American podcaster Lex Fridman, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi repeated oft-heard allegations against Pakistan, accusing it of exporting terrorism and waging a proxy war against India. Modi framed himself as a proponent of peace, citing his invitation to former prime minister Nawaz Sharif for his 2014 oath-taking ceremony as a "gesture of goodwill". He went on to claim that Pakistan is the "epicentre of turmoil" not just for India but for the world. These remarks, predictably, have elicited a strong rebuttal from our Foreign Office (FO), which has rightly called them misleading and one-sided. The FO has fittingly sought to remind India of its role in fomenting terrorism within Pakistan and its state-sanctioned oppression in Illegally Occupied Jammu & Kashmir. Pakistan has -- in contrast -- always sought dialogue despite India’s rigid, hegemonic stance has been the real roadblock to peace.

This strong response from Pakistan’s FO is crucial. Islamabad has always been willing to engage in constructive dialogue -- contrary to Modi’s insinuations. That is the reality. What is also fact is that India under Modi has shown little interest in de-escalation or regional peace. Instead, New Delhi has weaponised its anti-Pakistan rhetoric as a domestic political tool, fueling jingoism to rally support among its right-wing electorate. It is ironic that a country implicated in extrajudicial assassinations on foreign soil, including Canada and Pakistan, would dare to point fingers at others for allegedly fostering terrorism. While the Kargil conflict derailed a promising peace process, Pakistan has on multiple occasions tried to ask for peace and a resolution to conflict. When Modi first assumed office in 2014, there were hopes that Nawaz Sharif’s presence in Pakistan’s leadership could lead to a thaw in relations. Nawaz reciprocated Modi’s initial outreach, choosing not to invoke anti-India rhetoric and even hosting Modi during his surprise visit to Lahore in December 2015. However, these gestures of peace were soon overshadowed by Modi’s domestic agenda -- one that increasingly relied on vilifying Muslims and Pakistan to consolidate Hindu nationalist support.

Over time, it became evident that Modi was adopting one of the most hawkish Pakistan policies in modern Indian history. This was not merely about security concerns; it was a calculated political manoeuvre to sustain an anti-Muslim, hyper-nationalist discourse at home. Even when Nawaz, known for his pro-engagement stance, advocated for improved ties with India ahead of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit last year, India remained indifferent. More recently, New Delhi refused to send its cricket team to Pakistan for the Champions Trophy, further highlighting its pettiness in allowing politics to taint sports. While previously Pakistan and India have both, at different times in history, squandered opportunities for peace, today it is India and not Pakistan that is stonewalling any meaningful engagement. Until New Delhi abandons its rigid, ultra-nationalist approach, the prospects for lasting peace and cooperation in South Asia will remain bleak. If Modi is truly the great peacemaker he pretends he is on podcasts, he may wish to first abandon the politics of hatred and division that have become his hallmark.