The Coup in Pakistan: A zero sum scenario
30 Nov, 1999 · 296
Kanchan L. says with the military establishment now in a 'dejure' position, India's negotiating stance ought to be flexible
The contrasting political structures that have emerged in
India
and
Pakistan
is an indication of the new direction in which conflict resolution would proceed in the South Asian region. This new direction would require political and diplomatic space in which the actors, their interests and mutual relations can be recognized in a manner that would enable the control or elimination of a Kargil like imbroglio.
Kashmir
is still the core issue of the negotiating paradigm of
Pakistan
. The unlikely scenario of the Lahore Declaration being restored is significant because the Lahore Declaration ‘was’ an indication of a desire to manage the nuclear standoff in South Asia in a more reasonable manner.
India
while following a reactive approach has shown pessimistic tendencies about dealing with the Musharraf regime. In the aftermath of the Kargil imbroglio,
India
has become sceptical about the Pakistani intentions. Accordingly, it has linked up its prenegotiating stance with cross-border terrorism and
India
would like to see concrete evidence that
Pakistan
is desirous of desisting from its indulgence in cross-border terrorism. A debate appears to have emerged as to whether General Pervez Musharraf can be trusted or not and there are also conflicting opinions being circulated with regard to his background and relatedly his intentions and policy postures vis-à-vis India. At this juncture, the need is to refrain from falling into the trap of personalizing the scenario which is still evolving. The bottomline for
India
is that it would have to continue dealing with
Pakistan
irrespective of the character of the regime. Even on earlier occasions,
India
had maintained relations with
Pakistan
when there were military regimes. Even the
U.S.
has already indicated that it is ready to engage
Pakistan
albeit in a ‘different’ framework since
Pakistan
is still important for the
U.S.
Clinton
administration considers the Musharraf regime’s announcement of a unilateral withdrawal of troops as an important confidence building measure and wants
India
to respond positively to this.
India
’s position is that the troop withdrawal announced is of marginal significance and for it to have magnitude, the withdrawal should be from the Line of Control. On the issue of withdrawal , there appears to be relatively similar perceptions being expressed by the
U.S.
and
India
. The
U.S.
would like
Pakistan
to enlarge the proposed withdrawal along the international border with
India
. It also wants
Pakistan
to initiate other confidence building measures to ease the present tension. But, the announcement of a proposed withdrawal of forces by
Pakistan
has not been regarded by
India
as a incentive for resumption of the bilateral dialogue. The
U.S.
believes that the Musharraf regime would be in a strong position to tackle Islamic fundamentalism both internally and externally. The western block would like to replicate the Algerian and Turkish model (Wherein the military is seen as upholding secularism) in
Pakistan
and General Musharraf’s eulogisation of
Turkey
and Kemal Ataturk has only consolidated this thesis. Although
India
and the
U.S.
agree with each other on the fundamental aspects that have emerged after the coup in
Pakistan
, there are discordant notes on the question of responding to the new scenario. With regard to the Indo-U.S. dialogue, Indian diplomacy ought not to allow the Pakistan issue to undermine the efforts at constructing a new political and economic relationship with the U.S. Rather than allow the Pakistan factor to be a perpetual bondage, India needs to strengthen the diplomatic support it received on the Kargil issue.
Pakistan
is said to possess the final say in crucial matters regarding foreign affairs and defence and a section of Indian policy makers have held the view that the Pakistani military establishment in adopting hawkish postures has been a stumbling block for the negotiating dynamics of the democratic regimes. With the military establishment now in a ‘dejure’ position, the negotiating behavior of
India
ought to change and a more pragmatic posture needs to be adopted.
India
and
Pakistan
may choose to remain as competitors with a will to dominate each other, the more rational way out ought to be that they carefully manage their interactions without immuring themselves away from each other. There needs to be a desire to achieve each other’s outcomes through attraction rather than through the Kargil type imbroglios.
The Musharraf regime on its part has announced a unilateral withdrawal of troops along the 740 km long international border and has also made it clear that this withdrawal does not apply to the Line of Control. Quite expectedly, while reiterating the hawkish standpoint of the earlier regime, the new regime believes that
The
The military establishment in
The adoption of a pragmatic and a proactive approach towards resolving conflicts may encourage in delinking the issues from symbolism and would lead to a different kind of rationality vis-à-vis the new directions in conflict resolution in the aftermath of the coup in Pakistan. By controlling the significance of what is perceived to be at stake in the conflict in a rational manner, both the parties may be able to avoid the destructive path. Although, both
POPULAR COMMENTARIES
