See More on Facebook

Diplomacy, Opinion

Dialogue important after India-Pakistan crisis

As India and Pakistan wake up to the real possibilities of war, it is time to give dialogue another chance.


Written by

Updated: March 15, 2019

Although the 2019 India-Pakistan standoff may have passed its immediate intensity, it is clear that the entire episode has left a slew of new worries for policymakers all over the world. It is crucial that lessons are learnt and crisis-handling procedures between the two countries put in place. Because there is no doubt that Pakistan and India were perilously close to war.

In a digital age, resonating with the red noise of alternative facts fuelled by ultra-nationalisms, it was clear that the Modi regime’s need to bolster its flagging electoral ratings before an election took the Indian act of border incursion into Pakistan’s Balakot to act of war status. The second motivation was the impulse to divert attention from the growing insurgency in India-held Kashmir.

Read more: Kashmir bomber radicalised after beating by troops, parents say

However, one outcome of the crisis sparked by the Pulwama blast is that Pakistan’s response has redefined international assessments of both the resolve and capabilities of the two countries. The second counterintuitive outcome was that Kashmir re-emerged as the most dangerous flashpoint in the world, as the Modi government ended up internationalising the Kashmir issue. The world had chosen to forget that the Kashmir dispute remains the world’s longest international dispute on the UN docket since 1948, when India’s Nehru took it to the global body to resolve its status.

Today, Kashmir has emerged as the bone of serious contention between two countries bristling with nuclear weapons. What was dangerous about its Pulwama trigger is that it brought India and Pakistan to the brink of war. Since 1971, we have never been as close to a full-scale war as we were on the night of February 28. Yet in 1971 neither country had invested in nuclear capabilities.

Take a look: Who are the real victims of India-Pakistan tensions? It’s Kashmiris

This 2019 standoff, therefore, brought new strategic equations and new choices to the policy mix. Faced with the unimaginable, unlike India, Pakistan united across the party divide, never losing sight of the need for de-escalation and the goal of normalisation. Amid all issues, the one point that resonated in parliament was a testament to our policy maturity. It is a truism worth repeating: Wars never resolve political disputes. If they could, Afghanistan after 17 unending years of conflict and turmoil would not be in the throes of violence today. This stands truer for countries like Pakistan and India.

The costs of war, both human and material, remain too great.

Also read: Balakot and beyond

Pakistan and India have fought four wars since 1947 that have seen a combined death toll of 22,600 and 50,000 wounded and maimed. While reliable data on disappearances and civilian casualties is not available, at least 100,000 families have suffered direct human costs. The last major troops mobilisation in South Asia in 2001-02 cost the two countries a combined $3 billion.

According to a study by the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, a full-scale conflict between India and Pakistan will have unimaginable consequences. Scientists have estimated that if 100 nukes having the same size as that of the one dropped on Hiroshima are detonated, nearly 21 million South Asians will die from direct impact and half of the ozone layer will be destroyed. They estimate that the impact on agriculture from the black aerosol kicked up into the atmosphere will result in a famine of global proportions resulting in the deaths of nearly two billion people. Even a “demonstration” nuclear strike will result in 50 per cent fatalities within a five-mile radius.

While the Line of Control (LoC) in Kashmir ceasefire has all but died with artillery guns continuing to blaze since 2012, it combines with the low-intensity conflict on the Siachen glacier to result in the deaths of several hundred civilians and soldiers over the past five years. Even more have been injured, with homes shelled and communities periodically evacuated.

Despite such heavy costs in both human lives and material, both countries have drifted dangerously away from dialogue. This has been perpetuated by a misplaced Indian belief that coercion can beget dialogue only on cross-border terrorism allegedly originating from the state of Pakistan.

Based largely on Indian self-assessments of growing power, such analysis has ignored the very real conventional capabilities at play today, the resolve of Pakistan when challenged to war, and the plight of the Kashmiris. What India also chooses to ignore is the public conversation against terrorism within Pakistan and renewed steps to disrupt networks. Conversations with Delhi on how to sort through borderless challenges like dismantling militancy and climate stress issues is crucial.

While many in India argue that previous attempts at dialogue have not borne fruit, we must not let past failures overshadow our future. Pakistan does not glorify conflict. Not in the way majoritarian India does today, and not the way we used to. Having lived through more than a decade of the war against terrorism and having lost 70,000 citizens to conflict, Pakistan is very cognizant of the death and destruction caused by war. There is clarity of thought in Pakistan on pursuing normalisation, if not peace, with India. The gesture to open the Kartarpur corridor speaks to this unanimity of thought in charting a new destiny for South Asia.

As we wake up to the very real possibilities of war, we must give dialogue another chance. A dialogue that is neither preconditioned nor selective, but a dialogue that must encompass the whole gamut of our troubled relationship. A dialogue that sees Pakistan, India and the Kashmiris as equal stakeholders in finding a path towards a brighter millennial future.

Sherry Rehman is Chair of Jinnah Institute. She served as Pakistan’s Ambassador to the USA and federal minister.



Enjoyed this story? Share it.


Dawn
About the Author: Dawn is Pakistan's oldest and most widely read English-language newspaper.

Eastern Briefings

All you need to know about Asia


Our Eastern Briefings Newsletter presents curated stories from 22 Asian newspapers from South, Southeast and Northeast Asia.

Sign up and stay updated with the latest news.



By providing us with your email address, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

View Today's Newsletter Here

Diplomacy, Opinion

Trump again cites questionable numbers related to Korea trade deal

Trump has used the trade deal to bolster his credentials back home. US President Donald Trump again cited questionable numbers on Tuesday as he touted his administration’s renegotiated free trade agreement with South Korea. Trump told the Economic Club of New York that the revised FTA, which took effect early this year, doubled the number of American cars that can be sold in South Korea under US standards and extended American tariffs on Korean pickup trucks by another 20 years to 2041. He then took a swipe at the previous administration of Barack Obama, which negotiated the original agreement. “The deal from the previous admini


By The Korea Herald
November 13, 2019

Diplomacy, Opinion

Uncertainty persists on US – China trade deal

This despite Trump’s comments that US and China close to trade deal. US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday (Nov 12) that the United States and China are close to a trade deal, but made clear that the prospect of tariffs was still on the table, with a warning that the US would raise tariffs on China if no trade deal was reached. His speech at the Economic Club of New York was closely watched by Wall Street but offered no new details on any signing of a much-touted “Phase One” preliminary trade deal with China. China, said President Trump, was dying to make a deal with their “supply chains cracking very badly” almost two years into the trade war. “We’re the ones deciding whether or not we want t


By The Straits Times
November 13, 2019

Diplomacy, Opinion

India should have signed up for RCEP

India has decided to put a halt on its joining the largest planned free trade area. Had India not pulled out at the last minute from signing the deal during the 3rd summit of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) in Bangkok on November 4, the RCEP would have been the largest free trade area in the world so far—comprising of 16 Asia Pacific countries that house 3.4 billion people, and constituting one-third of the global gross domestic product (GDP) and 40 percent of global trade. Ten member countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) along with Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea fo


By The Kathmandu Post
November 13, 2019

Diplomacy, Opinion

Ayodhya verdict is silent on why Muslims must prove exclusive possession of site

The Indian court has deprived Muslims of the disputed plot because they couldn’t show exclusive possession before 1857. On page 215 of the Ayodhya-Babri Masjid verdict, delivered by a five-judge bench on Saturday, the Supreme Court makes a crucial statement of logic: “It is true that in matters of faith and belief, the absence of evidence may not be evidence of absence.” But in its final findings, the court contradicted this same logic. The crux of the judgment that India has awaited since 1949 is that Muslims failed to show unimpeded possession of the disputed site in Ayodhya between 1528, when the mosque was supposedly built by Mughal emperor Babur, and 1857, when, after a clash between Muslims and Hindus, a railing was erected between the inner and outer courtyards at the disputed site. The inner courtyard is where the mosque demolished by Hindutva mobs in 1992 stood. The outer courtyard has se


By Dawn
November 12, 2019

Diplomacy, Opinion

Myanmar sued for genocide

On behalf of OIC, Gambia files the case at Int’l Court of Justice seeking orders to stop atrocities on Rohingyas immediately.  The Gambia has filed a case at the United Nations’ top court, accusing Myanmar of committing genocide against its Rohingya Muslim minority, more than two years after some 750,000 Rohingyas fled a military crackdown in the Rakhine State. “We have just submitted our application to the ICJ under the Genocide Convention,” Gambian Justice Minister Abubacarr Tambadou said at a news conference yesterday in The Hague, where the court is based. “The aim is to get Myanmar to account for its action against its own people: the Rohingya. It is a shame for our generation that we do nothing while genocide is unfolding right under our own eyes,” he said. The International Court of Justice (ICJ), also known as the World Court, is the U


By Daily Star
November 12, 2019

Diplomacy, Opinion

HK must hold the line, uphold democracy in elections

An editorial in China’s State Run Media. “Deliberate violence”, said the Greek philosopher Heraclitus, “is more to be quenched than a fire.” Although Hong Kong elections have traditionally been relatively peaceful affairs, this has now changed. After the anti-extradition protests morphed into urban guerrilla warfare, every institution is now at risk. A culture of violence has now taken hold, buttressed by a willingness to use crude intimidation of others, whether in politics, the universities, or on the streets. The latest victim of this phenomenon is legislator Junius Ho Kwan-yiu. Out campaigning for a District Council seat in Tuen Mun, he was stabbed in the chest by a stranger. The crime was obviously pre-meditated, and the suspected offender will hopefully be charged with attempted murder. Shortly before the attack, Ho’s local office had been hit by fire bom


By China Daily
November 11, 2019