Pakistan must either dump jihadis or get globally isolated, says Husain Haqqani

Ambassador Husain Haqqani, a Hudson Institute Senior Fellow and Director for South and Central Asia served as Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States after Mumbai attacks of November 2008. A passionate advocate for the need for Pakistan to change its attitude and policy towards India, Haqqani spoke to Sunil Raman about his new book, India vs Pakistan-Why can’t we just be friends? and on developments in Pakistan today.[caption id=“attachment_2923382” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]  Former Pakistan ambasaador to the US Husain Haqqani. AFP[/caption] Ambassador Haqqani, in your new book focused on India-Pakistan relations you have argued “why can’t we just be friends”. Before becoming friends two countries like ours have to be good neighbours. Why do India and Pakistan need to be friends? They have 5,000 years of shared history and 70 years of Partition. Nehru recognised that it’s difficult for two countries that have had long history to be indifferent. One way is as some say to be enemies. The other choice is to be friends. I have listed factors that impede friendship. Primarily for psychological reasons the two have not been able to be friends. At the end of the day both history and geography dictate that we should be good neighbours and good friends. Pakistan’s founder Muhammad Ali Jinnah said he expected that after an initial phase the two countries would settle down like between US and Canada. Both recognise each other as separate nations, have sovereign equality but after that they have virtually open borders, shared policing, no militarisation along borders. They still have nine pending dispute. That doesn’t come in the way of free trade and flow of investment and capital. Such an arrangement would benefit both India and Pakistan. How can there be friendship when Pakistan sponsors and backs terrorism against India? From Kargil to Mumbai attacks to Pathankot attack…Pakistan boycotted the South Asian connectivity plan put forward by PM Modi at Saarc Summit, India’s demand for land access to Afghanistan has not been accepted… There can be no friendship or good neighbourly relationship in the presence of terrorism. Terrorism has to be shut down. Pakistan must understand that continued support or even tolerance for jihadis will result in their international isolation. As for Pakistan’s tendency to try and oppose all regional arrangements I would only say that it is a short term view which will be swept aside by the logic of economics and history. Right now South Asia is the least connected region in the world. Last month the African Union has agreed to start issuing African Union passports. A significant proportion of Asean trade is between members. The European Union and the three North American countries — Canada, US and Mexico — have 50 percent of their global trade with one another. In South Asia total volume of regional trade as part of the total trade is only 5 percent. It is easier to fly from Pakistan to Dubai than it is to fly to rest of South Asia. Pakistan can hold up regional integration only up to a point, irritation with this attitude of Pakistan will see it lose friends both in the region and outside. It is a matter of time before folks in Islamabad wake up and ask themselves a question whether it is worth to lose the advantage of having many friends because rest of the friend sees India differently. After all, France and Germany had several wars and fought two world wars and look at their relationship now. They finally realised they are neighbours. I am expecting a similar reasoning prevailing in the sub-continent. It will prevail. May be after five, ten, or 50 years. After WWII an exhausted Germany realised it was better to be part of the European community than trying to dominate it by force and resolve dispute over Alsace Lorraine through war. For this realisation to dawn there has to be a change in the outlook of the powerful Pakistan Army that plays an integral role in the formulation and execution of country’s policy towards India. Unless Army’s position and policy towards India changes how can relations improve? I am not expecting it. I am advocating it. As far as Pakistan Army’s role is concerned it should be kept in mind that Pakistan inherited one third of British Indian Army but got 17 percent of its resources.. Army became a dominant institution. Even now to formulate public opinion retired officers play an important role. Retired officers dominate TV debates and discussions and print media, who present a certain world view. Voices like mine are drowned by shouts of traitor and kafir. Having said that more than 80 percent of Pakistan’s population was born after 1947 and they have no personal memory of the Partition. I am one of them. I was born a Pakistani and I don’t need an ideology to be a Pakistani. Young Pakistanis ask why do we need to be an ideological nation? Why do we have to keep discussing the ideological position on the logic of Partition. It may have been important to those who were Indians and overnight became Pakistanis. People who were born Pakistanis have other questions. They want a better life. They ask why one-third of school age going children does not go to schools. Why does GDP of Pakistan lag behind other South Asian countries? They ask questions as to why Human Development Indices of Pakistan are poorer than other South Asian nations. Why we are an aid depended nation? Those people are the hope. They will eventually make even the Pakistan Army softer in its attitude. To be fair to Pakistani Army, it’s an important point I make. While the army is a factor it is not the only factor in tense relations with India. Over the years the national narrative has evolved in a way where this relationship has been jeopardised. While the Army does not help in changing that national narrative but, if the national narrative changes so would the Army’s view. There are many civilian constituencies who also believe India is an enemy. They have to go beyond the overly simplified worldview in which Pakistan is “us” and India is “the other”. At the same time rest of the world has to understand Pakistan’s complexity instead of military-civil dichotomy. It is not like civilians are good and Army is bad. It is far too complicated. Army Chief Raheel Sharif is far more popular than politicians.Several months ago posters and billboards came up across Pakistan praising him as a savior (after launch of a campaign against terror groups within the country that targeted Pakistan), in recent days posters have come up in 13 cities calling upon him to stage a military coup (and remove the Nawaz Sharif government). What is all this about? Gen Sharif is a very good man by all accounts. He is different from other Pakistani military commanders. He genuinely went after Pakistan Taliban and successfully eliminated jihadi safe havens. He has also gone after military corruption. He has tried not to get involved in politics. This is the positive side of Gen Sharif’s balance sheet. But, he is the product of an institution like the Pakistani Army that believes it is the only savior of the country. That belief manifests itself every few years in the form of coup or political manipulation. The PR apparatus of the army has built up Gen Sharif’s image, taking advantage of weak civilian leadership. This definitely creates apprehension about the intentions of the Army. Gen Sharif says he does not want an extension (when term ends in November). I believe him. We hope we can build a system where an Army Chief can complete his three year term and elected prime ministers can complete their five year term. As far as his popularity with the masses may be a better way to test it would be for him to enter politics after retirement. All those military people and apologists who say Pakistan has no good civilian leaders should demand a political role for Mr Raheel Sharif and not Gen Raheel Sharif. If Pakistan military apologists say Pakistan has no good civilian leaders then Raheel Sharif could become a good civilian leader like retired generals in Nigeria and Indonesia. If he wins an election and gets elected under the Constitution, Pakistan will get a better politician than the politicians Army hates, and the country will also be saved from another military coup. Do you think it is likely? Unfortunately, Pakistan politics goes through a cyclical process. Generals are said to be popular when in uniform but none has been able to muster popular support as a civilian after retirement.