Last Friday, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi ‘dropped by’ in Lahore after deciding to add Pakistan as the third country to his then two-legged tour of Russia and Afghanistan. This was the first visit to Pakistan by an Indian prime minister since Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s trip in 2004.
Modi tweeted from Kabul on Friday that he’d spoken “to PM Nawaz Sharif & wished him on his birthday” adding in the next tweet that he would “drop by” in Lahore to meet Nawaz.
Modi was received by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif and other officials, at Allama Iqbal Airport, with the two premiers holding a brief meeting at Nawaz’s Raiwind residence. Modi also attended the wedding of PM Nawaz’s granddaughter and reportedly wore the pink turban that the prime minister had gifted him.
“It was a goodwill visit. They decided to understand one another’s reservations and restart the comprehensive dialogue in a positive manner,” said Foreign Secretary Aizaz Chaudhry while briefing reporters last Friday. Chaudhry revealed that the two countries’ foreign secretaries will meet in January.
PM Modi’s ‘surprise trip’ comes following Indian Minister for External Affairs Sushma Swaraj’s visit to Islamabad where she attended the Heart of Asia conference, dedicated to discussing Afghanistan’s security situation earlier in December. In November, Nawaz and Modi had met at the sidelines of the COP21 Climate Change conference in Paris, which was perceived by many as an ‘ice breaker’ following a tumultuous diplomatic year for the two neighbours, with cross-border fire and aggressive statements exchanged intermittently throughout 2015.
“I think there’s some genuine rethinking of policy with regards to Pakistan in India, spearheaded by Mr Modi,” says Lt Gen (r) Talat Masood, former secretary of defense production in the Ministry of Defense. “Modi believes India needs to play its role as a world leader and a regional leader. And hence it is important to have at least functional relations with neighbours.”
Ejaz Haider, columnist for Newsweek and editor of national-security affairs at Capital TV, however warns against dubbing the meeting a diplomatic breakthrough.
“It’s a ‘breakthrough’ to the extent that India has come round to discussing all issues and disputes without any preconditions, which was her previous position,” he says. “Beyond this point it will be back to hardnosed negotiations. A lot of work has been done by Sherpas from the time the composite dialogue began in 2004.”
Security analyst Ayesha Siddiqa, who is the author of Military Inc.: Inside Pakistan’s Military Economy, agrees that reading too much into this trip could be counterproductive.
“Let’s not forget it’s a nuclear weapon environment. You cannot afford to have hostility, and can’t let any misunderstandings escalate,” she says, adding that it would be unrealistic to expect anything dramatic out of this visit. “But it is a positive step. We needed it,” she maintains.
Gen Talat Masood asserts that India’s economic focus has played a major part in what he deems is a strategic shift. “India is really focusing on its economy,” he believes. “At the moment, India is the fastest growing economy in the world, and I think the government realizes that hostility across the border is an unneeded distraction.”
Aarti Tikoo Singh, Assistant Editor at The Times of India, says the visit has raised hopes in Jammu and Kashmir. “The Indo-Pak issue, as it is, remains important only in Jammu and Kashmir, the New Delhi intelligentsia, and elites of the country,” she says. “In Jammu and Kashmir, this unprecedented step has obviously raised expectations. This is because the BJP is in alliance with the local Kashmir-based party PDP.” The PDP will sell this point to its electorate and supporters. “Also, the fact that Modi is beginning to look like Vajpayee on the issue, raises hope,” she adds. “What I am hearing is that the RSS and the BJP have arrived on the conclusion that they need to make peace with Pakistan and cut down on their rhetoric against Pakistan.”
But Aarti Singh believes Modi will have a tough time explaining his friendly gestures towards Pakistan to his hardcore Hindutava constituency. “He’ll probably use the same explanation that Vajpayee used. That in his lifetime, he would like to resolve the issue, because neighbors can’t be replaced. And that trade and business relations are more important than hostility.”
Gen Talat Masood warns against expecting too much on the Kashmir front, however.
“I think those expecting a resolution of Kashmir will soon be disappointed,” he says. “My view is that there are three parties to the issue and all three have conflicting demands and expectations. And hence they might not be able to bring about the needed compromise for quite some time. But of course the environment between India and Pakistan needs to conducive for that compromise, whenever it is deliberated over.”
Aarti Singh says Kashmiri Muslim separatists actually believe that only a right-wing Hindu party can settle Kashmir for them. “They know that the Congress will never concede on its traditional historic stance and secularism. So they keep hoping that Modi will do some give-and-take with Pakistan and settle it once and for all.”
But what about the core Indian concerns: cross-border militancy and action against perpetrators of the Mumbai attacks?
“Pakistan has already proposed measures to determine the veracity or otherwise of India’s claims,” says Ejaz Haider. “Ditto for incidents of fire exchange.”
“As for (Zakiur Rehman) Lakhvi, just like the many accused in the Samjhota terror attack, the case has to be determined by the courts,” he maintains.
Aarti Singh asserts that the India-Pakistan hostility will see no tangible alleviation unless the terrorism issue is resolved. “Indians across the country had marginal hostility towards Pakistan before 1990, because the partition horror was limited to Punjab and Bengal. Anti-Pakistan sentiment grew only after terrorists began attacking civilians not just in Kashmir but elsewhere in India.”
Gen Talat Masood suggests that targeting any kind of militancy shouldn’t be perceived as just an ‘Indian concern’. “Pakistan seriously needs to ponder whether it is in our own interests to support any militancy. We need to consider its effects on internal stability,” he says.
A Reuters report on Saturday, citing top diplomatic and government officials from both sides of the border, claimed that “Pakistan Army paved the way for reviving a stalled dialogue with India this year.” Follow-up reports elsewhere have since echoed that assertion.
Gen Talat Masood believes that civil-military interests might be aligning vis-à-vis India. “I think the establishment realizes that it is in Pakistan’s interests that we have functional relations with India. And they also realize that it will benefit Pakistan’s economy as well,” he believes. “Furthermore, it is in the army’s interests that external conflicts don’t escalate, considering the internal threats that they are still fighting. This could eventually help restore the civil-military balance as well.”
Ayesha Siddiqa is skeptical. “I don’t think military is quite there yet. They function on anti-Indianism and that’s not about to change any time soon. Even so, the visit shows that the military is being reasonable.”
She believes the ball is now in Pakistan’s court. “There’s MFN, there is the Mumbai attack issue… it is Pakistan’s turn to make the right move. Pakistan will have to show something to address India’s Mumbai concerns.”
Modi tweeted from Kabul on Friday that he’d spoken “to PM Nawaz Sharif & wished him on his birthday” adding in the next tweet that he would “drop by” in Lahore to meet Nawaz.
Modi was received by Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif and other officials, at Allama Iqbal Airport, with the two premiers holding a brief meeting at Nawaz’s Raiwind residence. Modi also attended the wedding of PM Nawaz’s granddaughter and reportedly wore the pink turban that the prime minister had gifted him.
“It was a goodwill visit. They decided to understand one another’s reservations and restart the comprehensive dialogue in a positive manner,” said Foreign Secretary Aizaz Chaudhry while briefing reporters last Friday. Chaudhry revealed that the two countries’ foreign secretaries will meet in January.
'Reading too much into this trip could be counterproductive'
PM Modi’s ‘surprise trip’ comes following Indian Minister for External Affairs Sushma Swaraj’s visit to Islamabad where she attended the Heart of Asia conference, dedicated to discussing Afghanistan’s security situation earlier in December. In November, Nawaz and Modi had met at the sidelines of the COP21 Climate Change conference in Paris, which was perceived by many as an ‘ice breaker’ following a tumultuous diplomatic year for the two neighbours, with cross-border fire and aggressive statements exchanged intermittently throughout 2015.
“I think there’s some genuine rethinking of policy with regards to Pakistan in India, spearheaded by Mr Modi,” says Lt Gen (r) Talat Masood, former secretary of defense production in the Ministry of Defense. “Modi believes India needs to play its role as a world leader and a regional leader. And hence it is important to have at least functional relations with neighbours.”
Ejaz Haider, columnist for Newsweek and editor of national-security affairs at Capital TV, however warns against dubbing the meeting a diplomatic breakthrough.
“It’s a ‘breakthrough’ to the extent that India has come round to discussing all issues and disputes without any preconditions, which was her previous position,” he says. “Beyond this point it will be back to hardnosed negotiations. A lot of work has been done by Sherpas from the time the composite dialogue began in 2004.”
Security analyst Ayesha Siddiqa, who is the author of Military Inc.: Inside Pakistan’s Military Economy, agrees that reading too much into this trip could be counterproductive.
“Let’s not forget it’s a nuclear weapon environment. You cannot afford to have hostility, and can’t let any misunderstandings escalate,” she says, adding that it would be unrealistic to expect anything dramatic out of this visit. “But it is a positive step. We needed it,” she maintains.
'Pakistan Army paved the way for reviving the stalled dialogue'
Gen Talat Masood asserts that India’s economic focus has played a major part in what he deems is a strategic shift. “India is really focusing on its economy,” he believes. “At the moment, India is the fastest growing economy in the world, and I think the government realizes that hostility across the border is an unneeded distraction.”
Aarti Tikoo Singh, Assistant Editor at The Times of India, says the visit has raised hopes in Jammu and Kashmir. “The Indo-Pak issue, as it is, remains important only in Jammu and Kashmir, the New Delhi intelligentsia, and elites of the country,” she says. “In Jammu and Kashmir, this unprecedented step has obviously raised expectations. This is because the BJP is in alliance with the local Kashmir-based party PDP.” The PDP will sell this point to its electorate and supporters. “Also, the fact that Modi is beginning to look like Vajpayee on the issue, raises hope,” she adds. “What I am hearing is that the RSS and the BJP have arrived on the conclusion that they need to make peace with Pakistan and cut down on their rhetoric against Pakistan.”
But Aarti Singh believes Modi will have a tough time explaining his friendly gestures towards Pakistan to his hardcore Hindutava constituency. “He’ll probably use the same explanation that Vajpayee used. That in his lifetime, he would like to resolve the issue, because neighbors can’t be replaced. And that trade and business relations are more important than hostility.”
Gen Talat Masood warns against expecting too much on the Kashmir front, however.
“I think those expecting a resolution of Kashmir will soon be disappointed,” he says. “My view is that there are three parties to the issue and all three have conflicting demands and expectations. And hence they might not be able to bring about the needed compromise for quite some time. But of course the environment between India and Pakistan needs to conducive for that compromise, whenever it is deliberated over.”
Aarti Singh says Kashmiri Muslim separatists actually believe that only a right-wing Hindu party can settle Kashmir for them. “They know that the Congress will never concede on its traditional historic stance and secularism. So they keep hoping that Modi will do some give-and-take with Pakistan and settle it once and for all.”
But what about the core Indian concerns: cross-border militancy and action against perpetrators of the Mumbai attacks?
“Pakistan has already proposed measures to determine the veracity or otherwise of India’s claims,” says Ejaz Haider. “Ditto for incidents of fire exchange.”
“As for (Zakiur Rehman) Lakhvi, just like the many accused in the Samjhota terror attack, the case has to be determined by the courts,” he maintains.
Aarti Singh asserts that the India-Pakistan hostility will see no tangible alleviation unless the terrorism issue is resolved. “Indians across the country had marginal hostility towards Pakistan before 1990, because the partition horror was limited to Punjab and Bengal. Anti-Pakistan sentiment grew only after terrorists began attacking civilians not just in Kashmir but elsewhere in India.”
Gen Talat Masood suggests that targeting any kind of militancy shouldn’t be perceived as just an ‘Indian concern’. “Pakistan seriously needs to ponder whether it is in our own interests to support any militancy. We need to consider its effects on internal stability,” he says.
A Reuters report on Saturday, citing top diplomatic and government officials from both sides of the border, claimed that “Pakistan Army paved the way for reviving a stalled dialogue with India this year.” Follow-up reports elsewhere have since echoed that assertion.
Gen Talat Masood believes that civil-military interests might be aligning vis-à-vis India. “I think the establishment realizes that it is in Pakistan’s interests that we have functional relations with India. And they also realize that it will benefit Pakistan’s economy as well,” he believes. “Furthermore, it is in the army’s interests that external conflicts don’t escalate, considering the internal threats that they are still fighting. This could eventually help restore the civil-military balance as well.”
Ayesha Siddiqa is skeptical. “I don’t think military is quite there yet. They function on anti-Indianism and that’s not about to change any time soon. Even so, the visit shows that the military is being reasonable.”
She believes the ball is now in Pakistan’s court. “There’s MFN, there is the Mumbai attack issue… it is Pakistan’s turn to make the right move. Pakistan will have to show something to address India’s Mumbai concerns.”