Security Détente Before Political Détente
08 Mar, 2010 · 3070
Mohammad Ashraf highlights the need for talks between the security agencies of India and Pakistan
In spite of media hype and outside pressures, the recent Indo-Pak dialogue has once again been inconclusive. In fact, it ended without even a commitment for a future meeting. Only promises to stay in-touch have been made. The main thrust has been on a blame-game usually prompted by the respective security establishments, amply demonstrating the huge trust deficit. All meetings end only with photo ops and the real issues remain unresolved. During the last decade these two countries came close to sorting out issues like the Siachin Glacier and Sir Creek but the general mistrust did not allow for clinching these.
During last 64 years the two neighbours have been alternating between war and peace. They have already fought three major wars and a fourth limited one on the Line of Control in Ladakh (LoC) could have almost triggered a nuclear Armageddon, if not for American intervention. The main reason for this is the irreconcilable mistrust between these two neighbouring countries from their very creation. One would have thought that like the Europeans, who after two world wars learnt the lessons of conflict, these two states would also learn from their conflicts. Unfortunately, that has not happened and nor does there seem any chance of it in the near future. This is because the already existing mistrust is compounded by external players and stakeholders. These talks facilitated by outsiders have remained more or less cosmetic, just for diplomatic consumption. Such instances of “facilitation” have been made a number of times in the past but no tangible solutions have emerged. One can judge the sincerity of these outsiders from the fact that they offer “facilitation” and not “mediation”. The former does not involve them in the process itself but the later does. Perhaps they feel the Indo-Pak conflict is a strategic asset.
The recent meeting gave a feeling that the countries were being forced into the dialogue process. Of course, it is very well known that the Americans along with their NATO allies are facing the music in Afghanistan and would like to get out of the quagmire at the earliest. This can only happen when they are able to get total cooperation and focused attention of the Pakistani Army and security agencies on the western front. That scenario requires peace on the eastern front which can come only by reducing especially in Kashmir. In addition, they too do not want to lose their strategic assets if things do not work out with India. The same is the case with the Indian side. It does not want to give Pakistan strategic depth and is trying to achieve that by keeping Afghanistan in their economic fold. Thus the tussle goes on.
How to end the mistrust? The real trust or mistrust builders on the two sides are the security bosses. Everything is subservient to what is perceived as “national security” by each side. The final say in everything is with the security establishments. On the Pakistani side nothing can move unless Army and ISI give the green signal. Similarly, on the Indian side the security establishment has an edge over the politicians. The most sensible thing for moving ahead on the peace process would be to first arrange a dialogue between the two security establishments. There should be a free and fair interaction with no-holds barred between the heads of the Army and security agencies of two countries. If they are able to freely understand and sort out the strategic apprehensions of two sides, politicians will have very little work to do to move ahead. To be successful in building mutual trust, the two sides will also have to forego the intervention of external players or stakeholders. They have to work out a solution on their own without external prompting.
In the real sense, it is the Kashmiris who have become hostages to the Indo-Pak mistrust. Their taking sides with one or the other will only increase the mistrust. The Kashmiris have to be absolutely neutral and project their case strongly, but not violently, to both the sides for their ultimate emancipation. Instead of waiting for western players to bail them out, they have to create their constituency within civil society on both sides. There are indications that the Kashmiris are succeeding in this. This is evident from the fact that even a person like Chandan Mitra is prepared to offer virtual independence to Kashmiris. There is only one solution to the problems of the sub-continent, including the festering sore of Kashmir, and that is the building of mutual trust - between the two countries and between Kashmiris of all regions. To achieve this, the next round of talks should be between General Kayani and General Kapoor and the respective intelligence heads of the two countries. If we are able to arrange that, the dialogue will move ahead and peace will prevail. Till such a thing happens, we will continue to remain hostage to the mistrust.
During last 64 years the two neighbours have been alternating between war and peace. They have already fought three major wars and a fourth limited one on the Line of Control in Ladakh (LoC) could have almost triggered a nuclear Armageddon, if not for American intervention. The main reason for this is the irreconcilable mistrust between these two neighbouring countries from their very creation. One would have thought that like the Europeans, who after two world wars learnt the lessons of conflict, these two states would also learn from their conflicts. Unfortunately, that has not happened and nor does there seem any chance of it in the near future. This is because the already existing mistrust is compounded by external players and stakeholders. These talks facilitated by outsiders have remained more or less cosmetic, just for diplomatic consumption. Such instances of “facilitation” have been made a number of times in the past but no tangible solutions have emerged. One can judge the sincerity of these outsiders from the fact that they offer “facilitation” and not “mediation”. The former does not involve them in the process itself but the later does. Perhaps they feel the Indo-Pak conflict is a strategic asset.
The recent meeting gave a feeling that the countries were being forced into the dialogue process. Of course, it is very well known that the Americans along with their NATO allies are facing the music in Afghanistan and would like to get out of the quagmire at the earliest. This can only happen when they are able to get total cooperation and focused attention of the Pakistani Army and security agencies on the western front. That scenario requires peace on the eastern front which can come only by reducing especially in Kashmir. In addition, they too do not want to lose their strategic assets if things do not work out with India. The same is the case with the Indian side. It does not want to give Pakistan strategic depth and is trying to achieve that by keeping Afghanistan in their economic fold. Thus the tussle goes on.
How to end the mistrust? The real trust or mistrust builders on the two sides are the security bosses. Everything is subservient to what is perceived as “national security” by each side. The final say in everything is with the security establishments. On the Pakistani side nothing can move unless Army and ISI give the green signal. Similarly, on the Indian side the security establishment has an edge over the politicians. The most sensible thing for moving ahead on the peace process would be to first arrange a dialogue between the two security establishments. There should be a free and fair interaction with no-holds barred between the heads of the Army and security agencies of two countries. If they are able to freely understand and sort out the strategic apprehensions of two sides, politicians will have very little work to do to move ahead. To be successful in building mutual trust, the two sides will also have to forego the intervention of external players or stakeholders. They have to work out a solution on their own without external prompting.
In the real sense, it is the Kashmiris who have become hostages to the Indo-Pak mistrust. Their taking sides with one or the other will only increase the mistrust. The Kashmiris have to be absolutely neutral and project their case strongly, but not violently, to both the sides for their ultimate emancipation. Instead of waiting for western players to bail them out, they have to create their constituency within civil society on both sides. There are indications that the Kashmiris are succeeding in this. This is evident from the fact that even a person like Chandan Mitra is prepared to offer virtual independence to Kashmiris. There is only one solution to the problems of the sub-continent, including the festering sore of Kashmir, and that is the building of mutual trust - between the two countries and between Kashmiris of all regions. To achieve this, the next round of talks should be between General Kayani and General Kapoor and the respective intelligence heads of the two countries. If we are able to arrange that, the dialogue will move ahead and peace will prevail. Till such a thing happens, we will continue to remain hostage to the mistrust.
POPULAR COMMENTARIES
