Indo-Pak - Articles

Indo-Pak: Cost of the Conflict

“There is little bit of Indian in every Pakistani and a little bit of Pakistani in every Indian”- Benazir Bhutto

India and Pakistan are no doubt losing out on a lot by not cooperating with each other. The story of their relationship with one another post 1947 seems like a circular never ending one, with predictable outcomes. A terrorist attack seems to deter leaders from coming up with effective solutions to their relationship ‘deadlock’ and they have in the past, not communicated with each other for months.

Move towards effective cooperation can also entail India using its ‘soft power’. It can strategically use aspects of its image in the international community to convince Pakistan that cooperation with it (India) is its best option, especially in the economic sense. The same goes for Pakistan in terms of strengthening its confidence building measures (CBMs) with India. If Pakistan can successfully and honestly convince India that it is using its resources efficiently and purposefully towards eliminating all anti-India extremist groups, cooperation can be strengthened.

But what can the two countries achieve if they cooperate besides security for the region and the rest of the world?

Three areas in which India and Pakistan are losing out on by not cooperating are: trade, efficient management of resources and environment. No doubt, cooperation is something that is beneficial to the entire region and in almost every field; the above three are areas that both countries are losing out the most. 

Trade
The Manmohan Singh and Musharraf talks in 2005 centered on trade were the talks that not only received the most attention but also generated the most optimism.  However post the setting up of the Federation of Jammu and Kashmir Chamber of Commerce and Control, in the same year, that focused on trade in the Kashmir valley, not enough substantial progress has been made. Both countries have consistently been losing out on large amounts of investment and joint ventures. Transit trade between the two countries through, for example, Dubai also increases the cost of trade and does not help in ironing out trade problems involving the two countries.

Prior to the Mumbai 2008 attacks, trade between the two countries stood at about US$2 billion per year. This was not an impressive amount considering the cultural similarities between the two. India’s showed statistics of much higher trade with Sri Lanka and other South Asian countries, despite their population being much less than that of Pakistan. Experts believe that the potential trade between the countries after getting rid of the high tariffs and other restrictions of trade could be about 10 times more than what it is. This means that India and Pakistan are both losing out on a large amount of revenue and resources that they potentially could acquire from trade- US$20 billion worth of revenue. The Chamber should be given the authority to recommend the members from their respective sides for multiple entry passes. Also free and open channels of communication and better roads and bridges connecting the two countries along the trade routes are bound to help boost the trade revenue.

Resources
India spent over 2.4% of their GDP on their military while Pakistan spends 3.9% in 2007. They both burn money on increasing the number of troops they have on their border, wrecking finances for areas that will actually benefit both countries positively. How these financial resources and large expenditures can be used in a different manner are areas of research that either government does not get the necessary time to find out. India and Pakistan’s ego-centric attitudes lead to a downward spiral in their potential future relationship.

Environmental
There are large costs that are associated when it comes to the environmental aspects of the Indo Pak conflict. If they cooperate and if their history of aggression is set aside, India and Pakistan can cooperate when it comes to sharing of the waters of the Indus and common use of the Siachen glacier as a research area and a laboratory. Pakistan and India both could use some additional help when it comes to times such as the present when it is being flooded. Kashmir’s environment too has taken a heavy toll due to the militancy. Lakes such as the Dal and the Wular are not only overwhelmed with eutrophication and degradation but their sizes have been steadily decreasing. Though militancy cannot alone be the sole reason for the above happening, it does make it largely difficult to carry out successful conservation programmes in the region.

Arguments have been made for decades about who is incorrect and who is acting unfairly. However the realist view of the arguably anarchic world that we live in has a clear argument. Smaller states listen to larger states. Powerful countries have the strategic ability to negotiate with the comparatively not-so-powerful countries. It is the way of the world. Unfortunately for India, Pakistan does not go by the way of the world. On the other side of the coin, fortunately for Pakistan, India has failed to convince Pakistan on anything, a country one-eighth of India’s size.