Round The World

New Delhi, 5 October 2010

Pak-India Spat At UN

TIME FOR ISLAMABAD TO MATURE

By Monish Tourangbam

Research Scholar, School of International Studies (SIS)

The Recent diplomatic spat between India and Pakistan during the United Nations General Assembly over Jammu & Kashmir yet again underscored the distrust and uncertainty that defines their relationship. The exchange of acidic comments between the two sides more than demonstrated the uphill task that officials will face in moving forward on other issues of importance. Clearly, the Pakistanis always seem well braced and intent on snatching some “undiplomatic” brownie points over the Kashmir issue.

Moreover, they have got a good amount of fodder to feed on given the recent unrest in the Kashmir Valley. Hence, it was no surprise that the much-publicised probable meeting between Foreign Minister S M Krishna and his Pakistani counterpart Shah Mehmood Qureshi did not materialize. Qureshi was game for some below the belt attacks at the United Nations.  Addressing the UN General Assembly, he expressed “complete solidarity” with the Kashmiri people and reiterated the oft-repeated call for a comprehensive dialogue with the Kashmir issue on the table.

The comprehensive dialogue should indeed be on the cards for both the countries, but enough groundwork and foundations need be laid or else the crash would be too drastic and disastrous to handle. The calls for a comprehensive dialogue should be accompanied with evidences of enough spadework being done to build this confidence. Islamabad cannot hope to jump to a conclusive dialogue and expect the New Delhi to make compromises unless the former is ready to come down hard on anti-India terrorist plans emanating from the Pakistani soil.

Qureshi pulled some diabolical strings at the UN casting a huge shadow over the current fragile state of relationship. He “strongly” condemned the “brutality” in Kashmir. “Pakistan views the prevailing situation in the Indian Occupied Kashmir with grave concern...The human rights of the Kashmiri people must be respected, and their voices heard to create an enabling environment for a peaceful solution of the longstanding Jammu and Kashmir dispute,” he told the General Assembly. The Kashmir dispute, he added is about the exercise of the right to "self-determination" by the Kashmiri people through a "free, fair and impartial plebiscite" under the UN auspices.

The diplomatic spat between the two nations continued with deputy envoy of Pakistan to the UN, Amjad Hussain B Sial, charging India with sponsoring terrorism in neighbouring countries. This led to Indians attacking Islamabad for raising Kashmir to deflect attention from its own internal problems, which needed to be addressed for the common good of Pakistanis, and thereby the entire region.

"The Indian government is well advised to take careful stock of its own polices and conduct that includes supporting terrorist elements in neighbouring countries which contributes to the problems facing South Asia," stated Sial. "India is also the country which conceived, created and nurtured the most lethal terrorist organization, which introduced suicide bombings in our region. Still India has the nerves to give lectures on morality to others," he added in an indirect reference to the LTTE.

Indian diplomat at the UN, Manish Gupta shot back saying that Pakistan should rather concentrate on facing its own “enormous challenges” and that such “unsolicited ad untenable” remarks are not going to help divert attention from its “multiple problems”.

Earlier, Krishna addressing the UN General Assembly had slammed Pakistan for sponsoring terrorism and militancy in Jammu and Kashmir. The Minister had also reiterated the spirit of solidarity that it had expressed towards the people of Pakistan in pledging US$ 25 million which was being channeled through the UN for flood relief efforts in Pakistan.

However, at the same time, he also stated that Islamabad should not impart lessons to New Delhi on democracy and human rights, apparently referring to the remarks by his Pakistan counterpart on the internal situation in Kashmir. “If, however, Pakistan were to live up to its commitment not to allow use of its soil by terrorists acting against India, this would significantly help reduce the trust deficit that impedes the development of better bilateral relations between our two countries. We are neighbours, and as neighbours, we have an obligation to work together,” Krishna added.

The issues that Krishna brought up at the UN were general in nature and did not contradict the long-held Indian policy towards Pakistan and the issue of terrorism. Moreover, Pakistan as a hot-bed of terrorism is something known the world over and as such, nothing startling was disclosed during Krishna’s speech. Hence, the vitriolic comments from the Pakistani side, entirely vengeful and rhetorical were unwarranted. 

Since Prime Manmohan Singh met Pakistan’s Yousuf Raza Gilani on the sidelines of the SAARC Summit in Thimpu, the two irreconcilable neighbours have tried to engineer a roadmap to normalize relations. But the process of engagement is caught between the relative importance of the specifics and compositeness. For New Delhi justice for the Mumbai attacks victims is a vital component and a lot hinges on how Islamabad deals with this. Till now, Pakistan’s Government has clearly failed in bringing the perpetrators to book.

Pakistan too is facing the brunt of its home-grown terrorism. But this is largely a result of its wrong policies and the high-handed insularity of some of the State’s machineries (read the military and intelligence). So, when Islamabad talks to New Delhi, it would not suffice to say that Pakistan is also a victim of terrorism. The severity and regularity of attacks from Pakistan-based terrorism is too well etched in the Indian psyche for terrorism to acquire secondary importance.

Islamabad has always accused New Delhi for being selective in its approach and killing the efficacy of talks, by not agreeing to talk on all issues. But, New Delhi prefers a more graduated policy to build on the confidence building measures (CBM’s). Clearly, there can be no CBM more potent than Pakistan’s earnest willingness to curb anti-India terrorism emanating from its soil.

After their independence, both India and Pakistan are at very different pedestals of growth and development. This fact stares some sections of the Pakistani establishment in their face. But, a wiser Pakistan would create bridges and reap the benefits of India’s prosperity. There is no way a country such as Pakistan, embroiled in fighting its own demons, (and right now the demons seem to be much overpowering) can hope to compete militarily or even otherwise with India, one of the largest economies in the world.  

Worse, instead of giving primary importance to at least decreasing the proportions of Pakistan’s woes with international assistance, the Pakistan Foreign Minister cares more about internal problems in India and seeks to give unwanted advice to New Delhi. Considering that Pakistan is in dire straits, with insurgents born on its own soil to wreak havoc, it needs assistance from neighbouring countries. Indeed, it will not have to look too far, if only it is sincere in battling terrorism in all its facets and making irrelevant some sections of the establishment that are obsessed with the age-old anti-India policymaking. ---INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)