It is usually only the politically naive who are optimistic about the future of India's relations with Pakistan. The terms "enduring rivalry", "protracted discord" and "communal conflict in armour" have become part of the global political vocabulary because of the depressing saga of India-Pakistan ties. But can the Manmohan Singh-Pervez Musharraf recent meeting undo the damage of the last half-century? Is the peace process now really irreversible? There are no easy answers, but the good news is that India's prime minister and Pakistan's president can derive strength from the gradual transformation that is taking place in public opinion, in elite awareness and in the larger objective conditions. In other words, there is a unique coalition of forces creating an opportune climate for peace. Consider the evidence.
First, and most important, there is widespread acceptance within the political establishments of the two countries that military means cannot bring any tangible benefits. What had been obvious to strategic analysts after the nuclearisation of India and Pakistan in 1998 seems to have now been internalised by those who matter in New Delhi and Islamabad. It took, however, the Kargil war, Operation Parakaram and a number of simulated military exercises to finally bring home this realisation. What is equally heartening is the growing recognition within Pakistan that "proxy war" and the use of terror, violence and religious extremism in Jammu and Kashmir are not only globally unacceptable, but are counterproductive in almost every way. In sum, hard power can no longer be used by either India or Pakistan to earn major political dividends. It may not, therefore, be foolhardy to declare the end of war in South Asia if the violence continues to decline in Jammu and Kashmir.
Second, the political constituency for peace in South Asia has never been stronger. While in Jammu and Kashmir - located at the cutting edge of the conflict - the sentiment for peace is overwhelming, there is a strong movement all over the subcontinent for better bilateral relations, particularly among the youth. Almost every opinion survey of South Asia's "Gen Next" has revealed that they seek economic freedom and greater opportunities to carve out a niche in the global marketplace. Not even a small percentage of respondents sees any advantage accruing from political tension and military rivalry between Islamabad and New Delhi. The fact is that the peace constituency has expanded much beyond the peaceniks and the "candlelight vigils" to include the ordinary Indian and Pakistani. The ghost of Partition may finally be on the verge of being exorcised.
Third, globalisation demands greater unity in South Asia. It is clear that globalisation offers threats and opportunities. It is equally clear that an economically integrated and politically stable South Asia is better equipped to face up to the challenges of globalisation. Every sensible economist knows that a "united" South Asia will not just work to the advantage of India, but equally so for Pakistan . In contrast, further divisions and continued disunity will disadvantage the people of the region. Political pragmatism and economic prudence thus call for a new relationship based on the prime minister's vision of a South Asia where there is a "free movement of ideas, people, goods and services" across borders.
Finally, let us face it, India cannot entirely bypass its neighbourhood, and Pakistan cannot keep holding India back. In other words, India's march to great power status would be quicker if it was at peace with its neighbourhood. For Pakistan, a harmonious relationship with India would generate tremendous opportunities and position it finally as a moderate, liberal Islamic state. But even with continued hostility India would finally move on. Hence, both India's ambitions and Pakistan's goals could be most efficiently achieved by a stable political relationship between them.
What should be the recipe for moving the peace process forward? One, expand the constituencies for peace by including stakeholders from all sections of the polity and society. Create new avenues of cooperation, especially in the softer areas. The real challenge, of course, is to see what incentives could be provided to Pakistan's army in order to ensure that it does not have a vested interest in continued enmity. But this too is not an impossible task given the right blend of political imagination and determination.
Two, open up institutions, markets and societal spaces to groups and people from both sides. Let businessmen, scholars, artists, journalists become agents of change by being allowed to live, work or study anywhere in India or Pakistan. Three, further delegitimise violence, the use of force and extremism through commonly agreed to legal, political and social measures.
Finally, the dialogue must be sustained at all costs. The dialogue and the peace process will encounter many hurdles, especially in the next few months. But it must go on. And for the dialogue to become effective, it must be solidly institutionalised. For this to happen, new structures and multiple channels must be created.
The truth is that hard power and hard borders have failed to resolve the India-Pakistan conflict for 58 years. In contrast, soft power and soft borders may have the capability of transforming the relationship in a way that issues of territory, identity and resources can be resolved to the benefit of all the people of the subcontinent.
The writer is Vice-Chancellor, Jammu University and Honorary Academic Advisor, Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi.
Courtesy: Times of India, New Delhi, April 19, 2005.
* Views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Observer Research Foundation.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
PREV
