PAKISTAN-INDIA RELATIONS BASIC PREMISES

For Pakistan, the ideological, moral and political aspects of the Kashmir dispute are supreme and cannot be sacrificed for material gains. Yet, there is no denying the fact that economic aspects are also important and should not be simply overlooked. There is however, need to be fully aware that trade and economy sans Kashmir or before Kashmir, is a misleading suggestion. Our leadership should not offer itself to be trapped. Kashmir, in any case, comes first and foremost in the list of our national priorities. Everything else being talked about is secondary in importance.

No matter what India thinks, we believe our nation is alert and will not be misguided. Pakistan will sincerely welcome to reopen the chapter of good neighbourly relations, provided India sincerely agrees to honour its own pledges and the UN resolutions, according to the wishes and aspirations of the Kashmiri people. That depends not on uttering empty words but seriously initiating a clearcut action programme.

Concerning Pakistan-India relations, certain basic facts should never be forgotten. These facts were summarily embodied in the historic resolution of the Pakistan Senate, adopted unanimously on 18th September, 1989. The present leadership should thoroughly understand and assimilate each and every word of that resolution which says: “The Senate of Pakistan:

• Regards with concern the disproportionate military build-up of India and shares the anxieties of other countries about the effect of this on peace and security in the region and their apprehensions regarding India’s hegemonistic designs;

• Affirms that peace and tranquility in the region depend on sincere and scrupulous adherence to and observance of the principles and values enshrined in the charter of the United Nations;

• Further affirms that the people of Pakistan want to live in peace and friendship with honour, with all the countries of the world in general and with their neighbours, including India in particular;

• Declares that friendship, cooperation and good neighbourly relations with India can be strengthened and consolidated by preserving our ideological and cultural values, safeguarding our economic interests in view of differing levels of development and by resolving those disputes and problems which have plagued Pak-India relations for the last four decades and have aggravated over the years primarily because of the absence of a more positive attitude from India;

• Resolves that lasting peace and sustainable friendship with India can be built only on the following principles:

1. Acceptance of all countries of the region, irrespective of their size or military strength, as equal participants in the region, shunning all signs of hegemonic attitude and behavior;

• Immediate withdrawal of Indian troops from the Siachen Glacier, occupied by India in violation of all norms of international law, including the Simla Accords in which India committed herself to the control line as at 1972;

• Resolution of the problem of Kashmir, through a plebiscite to be held under UN auspices in accordance with the resolutions of the Security Council and demand of the people of the State of Jammu and Kashmir for their right to self- determination;

• Respect for the sovereignty, integrity, independence and ideologies of the countries of the region and their right to decide for themselves what type of security arrangements they require for their defence;

• Affirmation of the right of these countries to develop all forms of technology to meet their economic, energy and other needs;

• Non-interference in the domestic affairs of other countries and stopping all overt and covert activities;

• Further resolves that:
• The complex problem of Pak-India relations needs to be handled with vision, realism and caution;

1. While pursuing contact and dialogue with India, we should seek an early solution of fundamental problems;

1. the Government should pursue with even greater vigor a policy, along with negotiations, to mobilize support for the objective and the principle position of Pakistan from the countries of the region and the world by imaginative policies at national and international levels;

1. Pakistan should continue to express solidarity with the Muslims of Jammu and Kashmir in their struggle for self-determination;

• the Government should inform and discuss in the two Houses in Parliament important developments in relation to foreign policy;

• Assures:

the Government of all possible cooperation in maintaining a foreign-policy in keeping with Islamic ideals and aspirations of the people of Islamic Republic of Pakistan; safeguarding the sovereignty, integrity and unity of the country and in keeping with its role in the world affairs.”

The importance of this resolution is multi-dimensional:

1. In the context of Indo-Pakistan relations, it is the only resolution unanimously approved by a representative body. Whereas it was tabled by the writer (Jamma’at-e-Islami) and Senator Raja Zafar-ul-Haq (Muslim League), it was supported by Sahibzada Yaqoob Ali Khan and leadership of the Peoples Party and other parties then present in the Senate. The resolution thus reflected national consensus.

• Pakistan-India friendship was desirable, but not at the expense of vital national interests. The resolution, therefore, pinpointed factors that deteriorated the relations. Foremost among these is the historic behaviour of India which is based on the insult of values on which Pakistan is founded and the negation of Pakistan’s ideological and cultural identity. We, on our part, never object the Indian secularism (as it is). Indians on the contrary scornfully reject our religious and moral identity, declaring it unnatural. It is the worst example of imperialist mind that does not permit others to live as they feel good for themselves. We also do not deny that India is a big country. This is a geographic and economic reality. Yet it never means that small countries around India must necessarily accept its hegemony and submit to live like vassals. This, in fact, is imperialism and as long as India insists on such hegemonic agenda, there is no possibility of peace in the region.

• Instead of step-by-step and piecemeal approach, the Senate resolution offered a package deal, which is practical and result-oriented. The piecemeal approach has been followed again and again and which lead us nowhere. It will be foolish to give it yet another test.

• The resolution accepts the principle that matters once decided should not be reopened. Siachin issue was settled in 1989. All that was needed to date was to honestly implement the decisions. It was agreed that pre-1972 position was to be resumed. Why then re-discussing demilitarization? With respect to Kashmir, India has never honoured what is agreed. How long are we going to hold fruitless discussions? Is it a matter of killing time?

• The resolution covered seven basic principles, all equally important, and provide the minimum condition for the success of a lasting friendship. Their importance be judged in the light of Indian military build-up and its deep desire and plans to become a regional and global power.

• The resolution clarifies the pivotal position of Kashmir issue: First, by way of its very importance, and second, in relation to assist and rally world support for the resistance movement and ‘jihad’. The position has not changed since 1989; Kashmir is as central as it was and nothing can change this position.

• The resolution also highlighted the principle of non-interference in one another’s internal affairs, the rights of the Muslim minority and the permanent nature of the right of self-determination for the people of Jammu and Kashmir all these were the essential demands and consequences of the Pakistan movement.

• Last and very important, the resolution clearly defined the role the nation and its elected representatives were to play in the policy-formulation and decision-making. This was the appropriate mechanism to shape policies and to monitor them. The Resolution provided the proper strategy and acceptable package and must be closely and thoroughly studied and followed in letter and spirit in the current series of talks.

To make the discussion fruitful, there is need to devise a working system which is tied with practical actions and that there should not be deadlock in case of failure at any stage and we should have rather a mechanism of mediation to keep the process alive. This, in fact, is the wisdom we notice in the negotiating politics of Quaid-e-Azam and Liaquat Ali Khan. The most significant aspect of the Quaid’s dealing with Hindu leadership and the British rulers was that he would never let them indulge in secondary and peripheral issues and always bring them back to the core. Look at the correspondence between Quaid-e-Azam and Gandhi. After every talk the Quaid compels Gandhi to bring the mattes on record and never lets him to escape what he had already agreed. More important is the fact that Quaid-e-Azam, who practically ruled the souls of the Muslim masses, never made any commitment before consulting and obtaining proper approval of his Working Committee, because he knew the importance of consultation and collective decisions.

Similarly, we can learn a lot from Liaqat-Nehru dialogues. Nehru would not let things move an inch after tens of letters. Quaid-e-Millat at last tried to tie him through his letter of Feb 14, 1950. That fully exposed Nehru who then went completely silent. That was the point of stalemate. Nehru was insisting on ‘No War Pact’ before the Kashmir solution. Liaqat Ali Khan replied: OK, we are ready, but let us work out a clear and detailed mechanism rather than issuing a simple statement. We both have then to stay by the agreed approach and clearly confess that such and such are the disputes to be resolved. Then, there should be a timetable within which the issue is solved or else it gets automatically referred to an arbitrator whose decisions would be binding on both parties.

This is the type of wisdom and clarity which is essentially needed even today to deal with the Indians. Otherwise, experience tells that they do agree to talk under certain compulsions but never cease to entrap the opponent in peripheral matters. This is what they have been doing since 1949.

This note was initiated with an appreciation that economic aspects of the current negotiations were also important. Yet viewing the matter from purely economic angle, we at once see that the whole Pakistan economy is dependent on the water streams emanating from Kashmir. One of the basic Indian target has always been to control the sources of these rivers, so that it controls the flow. Exactly the same game was played against Bangladesh through possession over Frakha. India wanted to do the same with Pakistan. After the Indus Treaty, India built Volar Barrage for the same purpose. If India has so far failed to do any harm to Pakistan, it was only because the Mujahideen have upset the whole Indian design. All evidence speak that India did not do any favour to Pakistan in the planning of the structure. It was not without reason that the Quaid-e-Azam declared Kashmir as the jugular vein for Pakistan. It is not merely a political vein, it commands our economic blood streams. So, unless Kashmir is liberated, our plans and programmes for economic well-being will also be mere illusions.