Email a copy of 'Pakistan-India: Let's Get Talking, Please' to a friend
Loading ... Loading ...
Dear Readers,
While All Things Pakistan has remained alive and online, it has been dormant since June 11, 2011 - when, on the blog's 5th anniversary, we decided that it was time to move on. We have been heartened by your messages and the fact that a steady traffic has continued to enjoy the archived content on ATP. While the blog itself will remain dormant, we are now beginning to add occasional (but infrequent) new material by the original authors of the blog, mostly to archive what they may now publish elsewhere. We will also be updating older posts to make sure that new readers who stumble onto this site still find it useful.
We hope you will continue to find ATP a useful venue to reflect upon and express your Pakistaniat. - Editors
Pakistaniat
Poetry
Places
People
I think its a good singe for both countries
It was an interesting discussion by both Dr. Adil Najam and Dr. Raja Mohan. I would tend to agree with Raja Mohan’s point that the progress in the peace process first begun by Vajpayee and Musharraf and continued after Manmohan Singh became PM was built on a “tripod” of understandings as he framed it – an assurance from Pakistan’s side to rein in terrorist groups and elements within the Pakistani establishment that nurtured them, an assurance from India’s side that it would engage in a results-oriented and time-bound negotiation (and not just talks for talks sake) on Kashmir and a agreement between both to take steps that would increase goodwill on both sides (so-called confidence building measures). These first two assurances were not fulfilled completely (major terrorist incidents continued to happen on India’s side even after the peace process, and negotiations on Kashmir took place in fits and starts). However, there was progress on both fronts, enough to keep the countries moving forward. By all accounts, a pact on Kashmir was ready to be signed. And I presume that a series of measures to dismantle the infrastructure of terrorism in Pakistan would also have been ready for implementation (otherwise the progress on negotiations on Kashmir would not have been possible). That equilibrium seems to have broken down.
Hence, the countries will either have to find a new equilibrium, or restore the earlier one. But I do think it cannot be restored without simultaneous assurances from the two countries that address the other’s legitimate concerns. Pakistan would need to assure India that it would completely dismantle the infrastructure of terrorism within its state apparatus and while it may have varying degree of control over non-state elements, that it would take all reasonable steps that any Government would take to prevent them from attacking India. India would need to assure Pakistan that it would move towards a time-bound resolution to Kashmir that can be acceptable to Pakistan and the Kashmiris, and that while it cannot be expected to ignore its own concerns, it would need to acknowledge that the current status quo is not sustainable. And they would need to agree to take the small baby steps that would make the big steps easier to take and to sell within their own countries.
It is difficult, but doable. Let’s see what comes out of the meetings of the foreign ministers.
Can any one name a single issue India has solved with any of its neighbor? What makes you think that they are interested in solving the problems with Pakistan?