Back door diplomacy in Kashmir won't improve Indo-Pak ties: Modi, Sharif need to do much more

By Sujeet Sarkar The terror strikes in Gurdaspur and Udhampur by suspected Lashkar-e-Toiba, a virtual proxy of ISI, remains the fall out of the Modi-Sharif Ufa (Russia) declaration. The Ufa talks, incidentally, convened on the top of a utterly unwarranted and bizarre threat issued by the Pakistan’s defence minister KhwajaAsif to nuke India.While the Indian media is upbeat about the outcome of the talks, their Pakistani counterpart is hyper critical of the allowances made by Nawaz Sharif to India. The BJP Government is relentlessly drumming their triumph in compelling Pakistan to explore ways and means to expedite the trial of 26/11 accused in Pakistan. It may be “advantage India” in terms of attracting favorable outcomes aligning with its strategic priority and ready domestic consumption, but India has to bear the brunt of Ufa declaration. The opposition parties in Pakistan are at swords with the PML led Government amid the conspicuous silence of Kashmir in the joint declaration statement, issued after the much-hyped meet.It has irked the Kashmir centric terrorist network along with their sympathizers within the Pakistan Army establishment. Within 48 hours, the prosecution team’s chief ChaudharyAzhar said that Pakistan government will not file a fresh petition in an anti-terrorism court requesting for obtaining voice sample of LeT operations commander Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi in the Mumbai terror attack case. This was followed by increased cease-fire violation in northern borders along with a precipitous rise in terrorist attacks in Punjab and Kashmir. It is curtains on the joint declaration and the flip-flop of Indo-Pak ties continues, unabated. Like all previous summit and declaration, the Ufa declaration too would slip into the annals of history. But beyond rhetoric, the outcome of the summit in Ufa is slightly different from all such bilateral discourse in the past. The solitary bright spot is the absence of Kashmir in the joint declaration, which has created a political furor in Pakistan. Kashmir is muted by intention and very much part of a long-term design to address the enduring rivalry between India and Pakistan. Some time no news is big news in bilateral parleys. Kashmir must have been placed under back channel dialogue, popularly referred as “Back Door” diplomacy, after some serious and calibrated pondering. [caption id=“attachment_2338170” align=“alignleft” width=“380”] PTI[/caption] The political parties in Pakistan, especially opposition have discovered it as a shot in their armory, to vitiate public sentiments against the incumbent government. The political temperature has already soared to a level, whereby the Pakistan Prime Minister’s adviser on national security and foreign affairs Sartaj Aziz has to assure the opposition that “No dialogue will take place unless Kashmir is on agenda”.The emotional and strategic stake remains exceedingly high and so is the national pride attached to Kashmir, on both side of the border. Hence the mainstream bi-lateral dialogue wont fit the bill anymore. By toning down the Kashmir reverberation in the joint declaration, the two democratically elected popular government, have taken the first prudent step in resolving the Kashmir imbroglio. The recurrent flip-flop over Kashmir policy has proven beyond doubt that the complex issue cannot be resolved under the glare of 24x7 hyperactive media. The burgeoning and powerful media habitually manipulate public sentiment and opinion around Kashmir suiting their respective audiences. The media further transform the Kashmir dialogue into the popular game of “who blinks first” as and when Indo-Pak leaders convene. The retired generals, from both side of the border also play their part in spinning this maddening game. This creates an adverse milieu to begin with for solving a problem as complex as Kashmir. There are diverging views on Kashmir in India and Pakistan. Media stifle the political leeway of the leaders to soften their conventional stand on Kashmir, which is largely rigid and untenable. It further choke their political audacity to place fresh set of thinking in the table, with the fear of being judged and defamed in front of their immediate constituency. Hence it is prudent to think that an intense and serious deliberation on Kashmir can happen in the absence of media limelight only. It was reported that military dictator Musharraf and the democratically elected Manmohan Singh had bet big on peace and almost clinched the Kashmir deal, through such clandestine diplomacy. Both Modi and Sharif must be credited for setting a stage and tone for serious dialogue on Kashmir. However they are still confronted with a plethora of challenges. A considerable segment of strategic experts on both sides of the border remain skeptical that the steps laid out in the joint statement, will be ample to ignite any real momentum in the overall state of India-Pakistan relations. Part of the reasons lay in the fact that Sharif and Pakistan’s civilian leadership don’t hold a controlling stake in Pakistan’s foreign and security policy, especially concerning to India. The division between the civilian government and military forces, on matters related to Kashmir, is in public domain. This is further compounded by the fact that there is an ISI, within the ISI in Pakistan. Historically, such elements of the Pakistan army have worked to foil any budding rapprochement around Kashmir, between the two nuclear-armed neighbors. The military and their jihadi proxies in Pakistan are against Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s intention to expedite the normalization of bilateral ties with India. This is largely because a status quo of “no-peace-no-war” suits the Pakistani army establishment. Ultimately, these elites within Pakistan’s military enjoy a lion’s share over the direction of relationship with India, than Sharif’s elected government. Hence, whether the pronouncements made by the Sharif’s Government in Ufa resonate with the thinking of the powerful Pakistan army is under great deal of suspicion. In absence of any traction on the political overtures made by the PML government, the Pakistan army would resort to increase cease-fire violation, in order to sabotage the talks on Kashmir. Lashkar, the most disciplined non-state actor of ISI may be called upon duty once again to attack Indian interest in the Border States and put a spanner on the growing Indo-Pak ties. Mounting Indo-Pak tension has traditionally suited the jihadi and extremist forces in Pakistan. It helps them to step up terror recruits and fill their coffers with cash to exacerbate the Kashmir struggle. A closer ties between India and Pakistan would undermine the perception, held by a sizeable Pakistani public, that India poses an existential threat to Pakistan. The jihadi outfit would lose its raison d’être if this were to occur. The insurgent groups flourish a lot by keeping tensions on the LOC alive to stoke fears about the potential of an armed conflict between two nuclear-armed neighbors. Hence the Pak based jihadi and terrorist sanctuaries would continue with terror strike, with or without guidance of ISI, to deteriorate the already strained Indo-Pak relationship. Beside there are reports of assertive chase by Pakistan army to selectively quell the terror network in Waziristan, after the deadly Peshawar school attack. The aggressive  hunt by the Pak army would loose steam in consequent to any flare up in Indo-Pak tension. Rise in Indo-Pak border skirmishes would necessitate army build up in the LOC and thereby deflect the focus of Pakistan army from the ongoing Waziristan operation. Consequently,the Waziristan based jihadi and terror network will leave no stone unturned to aggravate Indo-Pak tension by attacking Indian interest in the northern borders. By default, it would be a win-win situation for both ISI and its bandwagon of virtual proxies like Lashkar and Jaish. India would continue to bleed and the trust deficit between the two arch rivals expands further. India has consistently demonstrated that any provocation or serious attack on India interest from insurgents and Pak military proxies is a reason strong enough to freeze dialogue, and resume it unconditionally, later. Pakistan army and Pak based insurgent groups have effectively integrated this reality in their core strategy, while dealing with India.However by pushing the Kashmir dialogue into track II, India in particular has insulated itself from reacting to public pressure in advent of any attack on Indian interest and stall the dialogue. For the first time, it seems that the Sharif Government too has demonstrated strong intent and political grit in resolving the intricate issue, by diluting its conventional stand of “No Kashmir no dialogue”. Nonetheless both the leaders would be piquantly tested to see if they can persist with the new stand and approach towards addressing Kashmir. Taking Kashmir through back door diplomacy wont be enough to improve the increasingly volatile Indo-Pak relationship. This has to be served with other potential starters. A great deal of cooperative equilibrium could be achieved if both the leaders initiate cooperation around non-securitized issues, which is beyond the ambit of Pak army. There are bunch of low hanging fruits like granting MFN status to India, promotion of religious tourism, trading of energy, sharing river water treaties, and promotion of trade and investment, etc lying in front of these leaders to begin with. This can be further supplemented with neutral but pertinent set of bi-lateral cooperation around disaster response, humanitarian operations, release of all fishermen, climate change, resuming cricketing ties and increasing people to people contact. Deliberation around these issues would bridge trust deficit, normalize ties and open floodgate of additional possibilities for both the nation. This would deflect the attention and obsession from Kashmir, an imperative for finding along-term solution of the vexed and convoluted issue. The more integrated the two nations are, the more secured and prosperous remains the future of its citizen. Enhanced cooperation and integration between the two arch rival nations would also lead to a prosperous, stable and peaceful South Asia. Both the leaders with a popular mandate should not squander the historical opportunity to resolve the old and festering issue of Kashmir. Sujeet Sarkar is an author and works as an international advisor on governance. He writes columns on international affairs for leading international dailies.