Home Contact Us  

Indo-Pak - Articles

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
#5165, 2 November 2016

IPCS Discussion

"Our Bilateral Relations"

On 24 October 2016, under its Twentieth Anniversary Plenum Series, IPCS hosted H.E. Mr Abdul Basit, High Commissioner of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to India, who spoke on “Our Bilateral Relations.”

The introductory remarks and transcript of Mr Basit's speech follow.

Introductory Remarks
Ambassador (Retd) Salman Haidar

Patron, IPCS, & former Foreign Secretary, Government of India

It is never easy to be a High Commissioner in either Islamabad or New Delhi. It is a high risk occupation. We are very eager to listen to Mr Basit on how he sees the state of relations between India and Pakistan, and thank him for his presence.

"Our Bilateral Relations"
H.E. Mr Abdul Basit
High Commissioner of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to India

Thank you very much, Sir. I thank the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies for this wonderful opportunity to discuss Pakistan-India relations. I look forward to a very constructive and useful discussion after the initial remarks. I am particularly grateful to Ambassador Salman Haidar for chairing the event.

I am glad that Karan Johar’s new film is out of mushkil now, and would add to the Diwali celebrations. I also wish you all a very happy Diwali.

As Pakistan’s High Commissioner in New Delhi, I draw some solace from the fact that the state of relations between India and Pakistan – despite the all the recent developments – are not yet back to square one. It is difficult to define ‘square one’ in the India-Pakistan context. The diplomatic avenue is still available and still open to resolve outstanding issues. But how diplomacy can be made full use of is a real challenge for both countries. There is no denying the fact that the two countries’ respective narratives about each other are poles apart. The foremost challenge for both countries is regarding ways to bridge the gap and put bilateral relations on an irreversible trajectory for our mutual benefit. Recently, as the BRICS Summit was underway Goa, a TV report suggested that Pakistan has finally been isolated. The reporter was also advising the Indian government that Pakistan should now be brought to its knees and that New Delhi should sever all ties with Islamabad till the time Pakistan behaves on the issue of terrorism.

Unfortunately, the official position in New Delhi is not very different. One often gets to hear that talks and terror cannot go together. Now it is an almost officially stated position that Pakistan should be isolated regionally and globally. There are two observations to be made here: first, that talks and terror cannot go together seems like a maximalist position because it leaves little room for diplomacy to fulfil its mandate or conduct itself meaningfully. Second, is it possible to isolate a country that is the biggest sufferer of terrorism? On the issue, Islamabad’s narrative is totally different. It does not see two countries having a normal relationship without first addressing the root cause of various problems.

The political representatives of both countries have time and again seen as to how the developments in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) have negatively affected relations. There have been times when relations between both countries have gone to a nadir, and yet, every time, the two countries have begun afresh.
What has been happening in J&K since 8 July 2016 and how it has affected our relations yet again needs no elaboration. It is doubtless that Pakistan is extending its diplomatic and moral support to the Kashmiris. But to claim that the hundreds and thousands of people who attended the funeral of Burhan Wani on 9 July 2016 were instigated by Pakistan - and the argument that they were there at the behest of Pakistan - does not hold water. The issue of J&K is neither territorial nor a terrorism issue. The great Chinese philosopher Confucius once said that if one uses wrong words, one can never derive the right conclusions. From Pakistan’s perspective, the problem arises when the J&K issue is viewed solely through the narrow lens of terrorism.

Pakistan has itself suffered massively from terrorism both in terms of life and treasury. Pakistan has lost close to 70,000 people in the past 15-16 years. According to World Bank reports, Pakistan has incurred losses to the tune of $120 billion to its economy in the past 20 years. There is no question about Pakistan tolerating terrorism in any form or manifestation. Pakistan would like to discuss issues related to terrorism because it has concerns vis-à-vis India when it comes to terrorism. Pakistan is not shying away from discussing terrorism with India.

India and Pakistan should pursue a comprehensive quest to discuss outstanding issues instead of cherry picking selected ones. The problems between both countries did not begin with the Samjhauta Express attack or the Mumbai attack or the Pathankot attack. Pakistan and India have fought wars in 1948, 1965, 1971 and 1999. It is imperative to admit that the J&K issue continues to be the root cause of problems and mistrust between the two countries. It is good to know India has also recognised the centrality of the J&K dispute. The 1999 Lahore Declaration, which was issued after the then Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee’s visit to Pakistan, says, “an environment of peace and security is in the supreme national interest of both sides and that the resolution of all outstanding issues, including Jammu and Kashmir, is essential for this purpose." The Declaration further says the respective governments “shall intensify their efforts to resolve all issues, including the issue of Jammu and Kashmir.”  

It is also encouraging to see that there are many voices in India that are not necessarily consistent with the official position. Indian historian Ramachandra Guha said in an article in the Hindustan Times that “It is for Kashmiri militants to account for their own awful acts, such as the expulsion of the Pandits and the imposition of a dress code on women. But Indians who are not Kashmiris must equally account for the repression committed in their name by successive governments of India in the Valley, a repression that has a long history, and which in recent months has arguably been more savage than ever before.”

Former Indian National Security Advisor (NSA) MK Narayanan said in an article in The Hindu, published on 10 October 2016, that "Hackneyed arguments to explain the current upsurge in Kashmir can prove counterproductive. The presence of over 200,000 people at Wani’s funeral needs a satisfactory explanation. To try to retrieve this situation, it is necessary to recognise that, in marked contrast to earlier phases of trouble in Kashmir, the present movement is almost entirely home grown." In an open letter to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Santosh Bhartiya, a known journalist wrote that “the land of Kashmir is with us, but the people of Kashmir are not with us.”

Shobhaa De wrote in The Economic Times, “Let's see if the present government has the guts to go ahead with a referendum to resolve the Kashmir crisis once and for all. Let's end the lingering pain in the region and allow Kashmiris live in peace, with the dignity and harmony they are entitled to.”

These well known journalists and analysts have made a point that the J&K dispute has made both countries mutually antagonistic to each other. The time has come to make a sincere effort towards resolving issues so that both countries can unite in peace and prosperity. It becomes very difficult for diplomacy to create space for itself when maximalist positions are taken.
In December 2016, when India's Minister of External Affairs Sushma Swaraj visited Pakistan to attend the Heart of Asia conference, the two countries agreed to begin the comprehensive bilateral dialogue. It is good that the two countries already have a framework in place and whenever both sides agree to resume the engagement it can be done without spending time on talks about talks. It is time to move from symbolism to substance and from conflict management to conflict resolution because now it has been almost 70 years of both countries trying to manage the conflict. It is absolutely necessary for posterity’s sake to begin making efforts to resolve all outstanding issues.

It would serve the purpose towards a meaningful dialogue if both countries can somehow lower the rhetoric. There is consensus across the political spectrum in Pakistan on having a normal relationship with India on the basis of sovereign equality and mutual respect. Also, India is no more an election issue in Pakistan. If at all it is an election issue, it is in the positive context - that the political representatives in Pakistan would like to have a constructive relationship with India. Hence, the anti-India narrative is no more a vote-catcher for politicians in Pakistan.

 Both countries should not do anything to create more issues. Thus, in the coming months, it would be important for both countries to strictly adhere to existing Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) and other mutual agreements. It is easy to destroy relations but it takes years and years to build good relations. So it is important to observe the CBMs that have been agreed upon by both countries in the course of the past 70 years. It is absolutely imperative for both countries to preserve whatever both sides have been able to accomplish in the past seven decades. One step forward in this regard would be if both sides agree to fomalise the 2003 ceasefire understanding, as was suggested by Pakistan's Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in his September 2016 speech in New York. This would help prevent the situation from further deteriorating in the coming weeks and months till the time political representatives of both countries are able to commence bilateral engagement.

 It is only through sustained diplomacy that bilateral issues can be addressed, which will eventually help in forging an effective cooperative paradigm between India and Pakistan. Instead of erecting new walls, it is important to build bridges of trust and cooperation for the two countries’ mutual benefit. Sun Tzu once said, “Opportunities multiply as they are seized.” Let India and Pakistan try to seize whichever opportunity that comes their way and try building on that.

• As far as Pakistan is concerned, there is zero tolerance for terrorism. It is always helpful to encourage bilateral cooperation in this context. Without knowing the situation on the ground, when the Uri attack happened, some people in India had begun blaming Pakistan, which shut all doors of cooperation between both countries. Getting into a blame-game or raising fingers at Pakistan will not help India. Pakistan offered an international investigation into the Uri attack in order to establish irrefutable facts as to what really happened. Unfortunately, India did not find that suggestion amenable. Both countries should avoid drawing premature conclusions and should cooperate on the issue of terrorism.

• The 26/11 Mumbai attack trial is underway and the two countries are cooperating with each other on that. Last year, the Foreign Secretary of Pakistan wrote to his Indian counterpart seeking more evidence in order to expedite the trial in Pakistan. In September 2016, Pakistan received Indian response on the same. Hopefully, things will start moving forward in the right direction. At the end of the day, what is required is to retain the spirit of cooperation in these matters rather than pointing fingers at each other because that denies both countries the benefit of cooperating in serious matters.

• Pakistan has put elements indulging in cross-border terrorism behind bars in the past. But then they were set free by the courts. Pakistan has some evidence against those who were behind the Mumbai attack and some of them were put behind bars too. Pakistan is ready to take action against those elements in the future if provided with solid evidence of their involvement in attacks. Both countries need sincere efforts to resolve outstanding issues only through a meaningful process.

• Pakistan’s stance on the surgical strike is that cross-border firing took place on 29 September 2016. The Prime Minister’s Office in Pakistan issued a denial regarding the Dawn report that suggested that there was a rift between the Sharif government and the Army.

• India attended the Heart of Asia conference in Islamabad, and Pakistan was present at the senior officials’ meeting of the Heart of Asia conference that was held in New Delhi in April 2016. The two countries are part of such multi-layered initiatives.
Afghanistan is a very important country for Pakistan because the latter’s own economic growth and stability is directly linked to peace and stability in Afghanistan. It is trying in the best possible ways to contribute to these efforts and initiatives. At this stage, India and Pakistan should maintain cooperation at the multi-level forums, focusing on building peace and reconstruction in Afghanistan, and then see how things pan out from there.

• Pakistan does not take relations with China, Russia, and the US as a zero-sum game. As a matter of fact, the US continues to be Pakistan's largest trading partner. A large Pakistani diaspora is working in the US. Similarly, Pakistan shares time-tested and strategic relations with China. It would be better to have multiple relations that impact both countries’ relations positively. It is imperative to have these relations in place that will eventually help bridge gaps between India and Pakistan.

• The feeling in Pakistan is that while India and Pakistan have been able to put in place a framework for future engagement, it is high time that both countries moved from symbolism to substance. It is in the mutual interest of both countries to keep working towards achieving the common objective. The two countries should continue working in the spirit of building bridges and having more cooperation in all areas of life, and to see as to how this relationship is mutually beneficial. India and Pakistan have still not been able to exploit the enormous opportunities that have been unleashed due to globalisation. At the end of the day, it is the people of the region who suffer the most. Issues such as poverty, unemployment and diseases, among others, still exist, which need to be addressed in order to usher in a better time for not just India and Pakistan but the whole region.

• Pakistan has never tried to snap cultural relations with India. Indian artists have never felt any problem while performing in Pakistan, and for over a decade, Indian channels have been telecast unhindered in Pakistan. Unfortunately, Pakistani channels were never available in India. Pakistan is more confident about releasing Indian movies and watching Indian TV shows. Frankly, Pakistani artists have been facing problems in India - from Ghulam Ali to Rahat Fateh Ali Khan in the past and more recently, when Atif Aslam’s concert got cancelled. As far as not broadcasting Indian channels is concerned, the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority does not directly come under the purview of the Government of Pakistan. In the current situation, the Pakistani government is under extreme pressure from the people. However, this is a short-lived phase and does not perpetuate beyond a certain point.
Rapporteured by Sarral Sharma, Researcher, IPCS

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
IPCS Columnists
Af-Pak Diary
D Suba Chandran
Resetting Kabul-Islamabad Relations: Three Key Issues
Can Pakistan Reset its Relations with Afghanistan?
The New Afghanistan: Four Major Challenges for President Ghani
Big Picture
Prof Varun Sahni
Understanding Democracy and Diversity in J&K
When Xi Met Modi: Juxtaposing China and India
Pakistan?s Tactical Nuclear Weapons: The Inevitability of Instability

Dateline Colombo

Asanga Abeyagoonasekera.
Sri Lanka: Moving Towards a Higher Collective Outcome
The Importance of Electing the Best to our Nation's Parliament
Sri Lanka: Toward a Diaspora Re-Engagement Plan
Dateline Islamabad
Salma Malik
Pakistan's Hurt Locker: What Next?
IPCS Forecast: Pakistan in 2015
India-Pakistan Relations in 2015: Through a Looking Glass
Dhaka Discourse
Prof Delwar Hossain
IPCS Forecast: Bangladesh in 2015
18th SAARC Summit: A Perspective from Bangladesh
Bangladesh in Global Forums: Diplomacy vs. Domestic Politics
Eagle Eye
Prof Chintamani Mahapatra
India-US: Significance of the Second Modi-Obama Meet
Has President Obama Turned Lame Duck?
Modi-Obama Summit: Criticism for Criticism?s Sake?

East Asia Compass
Dr Sandip Mishra
India-Japan-US Trilateral: India?s Policy for the Indo-Pacific
China-South Korea Ties: Implications for the US Pivot to Asia
Many ?Pivots to Asia?: What Does It Mean For Regional Stability?
Himalayan Frontier
Pramod Jaiswal
Nepal?s New Constitution: Instrument towards Peace or Catalyst to Conflict?
IPCS Forecast: Nepal in 2015
Constitution-making: Will Nepal Miss its Second Deadline?

Prof Shankari Sundararaman
IPCS Forecast: Southeast Asia in 2015
Indonesia's Pacific Identity: What Jakarta Must Do in West Papua
Modi in Myanmar: From ?Look East? to ?Act East?
Sushant Sareen
IPCS Forecast: Pakistan in 2015
Islamic State: Prospects in Pakistan
Pakistan: The Futility of Internationalising Kashmir

Looking East
Wasbir Hussain
Myanmar in New Delhi's Naga Riddle
China: ?Peaceful? Display of Military Might
Naga Peace Accord: Need to Reserve Euphoria
Maritime Matters
Vijay Sakhuja
Indian Ocean: Modi on a Maritime Pilgrimage
Indian Ocean: Exploring Maritime Domain Awareness
IPCS Forecast: The Indian Ocean in 2015

Nuke Street
Amb Sheelkant Sharma
US-Russia and Global Nuclear Security: Under a Frosty Spell?
India's Nuclear Capable Cruise Missile: The Nirbhay Test
India-Australia Nuclear Agreement: Bespeaking of a New Age
Red Affairs
Bibhu Prasad
Countering Left Wing Extremism: Failures within Successes
Return of the Native: CPI-Maoist in Kerala
The Rising Civilian Costs of the State-Vs-Extremists Conflict

Regional Economy
Amita Batra
India and the APEC
IPCS Forecast: South Asian Regional Integration
South Asia: Rupee Regionalisation and Intra-regional Trade Enhancement
South Asian Dialectic
PR Chari
Resuming the Indo-Pak Dialogue: Evolving a New Focus
Defence Management in India: An Agenda for Parrikar
Pakistani Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan: Implications for Asian Security

Spotlight West Asia
Amb Ranjit Gupta
Prime Minister Modi Finally Begins His Interaction with West Asia*
A Potential Indian Role in West Asia?
US-GCC Summit: More Hype than Substance
Strategic Space
Manpreet Sethi
India-Russia Nuclear Vision Statement: See that it Delivers
Global Nuclear Disarmament: The Humanitarian Consequences Route
Nasr: Dangers of Pakistan's Short Range Ballistic Missile

The Strategist
Vice Admiral Vijay Shankar
Jihadi Aggression and Nuclear Deterrence
The Blight of Ambiguity
Falun Gong: The Fear Within

OTHER REGULAR contributors
Gurmeet Kanwal
Harun ur Rashid
N Manoharan
Wasbir Hussain
Rana Banerji
N Manoharan

Ruhee Neog
Teshu Singh
Aparupa Bhattacherjee
Roomana Hukil
Aparupa Bhattacherjee


Browse by Publications

Issue Briefs 
Special Reports 
Research Papers 
Seminar Reports 
Conference Reports 

Browse by Region/Countries

East Asia 
South Asia 
Southeast Asia 
US & South Asia 

Browse by Issues

India & the world  
Naxalite Violence 
Suicide Terrorism 
Peace & Conflict Database 
Article by same Author
Women in Indian Politics

China-India Rivalry in the Globalisation Era

Ceasefire Violations in Jammu & Kashmir: A Line on Fire

Investigating Crises in South Asia

How the BJP Wins: Inside India’s Greatest Election Machine

The People Next Door: The Curious History of India's Relations With Pakistan

Tibetan Caravans: Journeys from Leh to Lhasa

Chinese Military Reform, 2013-2030

Dominant Narratives in Kashmir: Evolving Security Dynamics

The Nuclear Future

Dealing with Dirty Wars

India-China-Nepal Trilateralism

'25 Years of Diplomatic Relations Between India and Israel and the Way Forward'

The Roles and Dimensions of Science and Technology in India’s Foreign Policy

Maldives: Contextualising Freedom of Speech in the Murder of Yameen Rasheed

India’s Nuclear Strategy

Diplomacy and the Politics of Language

2017 Indian Assembly Elections: How Did the States Vote?

'Faith, Unity, Discipline: The ISI of Pakistan'

Women & Public Policy Journal [Vol. 2] Launch: 'Afghan Economy in the Decade of Transformation (2015-2024)'

India-Australia and Roles in the Indo-Pacific

Equality, Equity, Inclusion: Indian Laws & India’s Women

Regional Power Play and Rise of Radicalism in Afghanistan

Afghanistan-Pakistan-India: A Paradigm Shift

Security of Bangladesh in the South Asian Context

Y! MyWeb
Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
Year 2018
 January  February
 2017  2016  2015  2014  2013  2012  2011  2010
 2009  2008  2007  2006  2005  2004  2003  2002
 2001  2000  1999  1998  1997

The Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS) is the premier South Asian think tank which conducts independent research on and provides an in depth analysis of conventional and non-conventional issues related to national and South Asian security including nuclear issues, disarmament, non-proliferation, weapons of mass destruction, the war on terrorism, counter terrorism , strategies security sector reforms, and armed conflict and peace processes in the region.

For those in South Asia and elsewhere, the IPCS website provides a comprehensive analysis of the happenings within India with a special focus on Jammu and Kashmir and Naxalite Violence. Our research promotes greater understanding of India's foreign policy especially India-China relations, India's relations with SAARC countries and South East Asia.

Through close interaction with leading strategic thinkers, former members of the Indian Administrative Service, the Foreign Service and the three wings of the Armed Forces - the Indian Army, Indian Navy, and Indian Air Force, - the academic community as well as the media, the IPCS has contributed considerably to the strategic discourse in India.

Subscribe to Newswire | Site Map
18, Link Road, Jungpura Extension, New Delhi 110014, INDIA.

Tel: 91-11-4100-1902    Email: officemail@ipcs.org

© Copyright 2018, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.