Looking back into the recent history of the sub continent one finds
that last time the region witnessed the kind of hectic diplomatic moves in
the capitals of India and Pakistan in the wake of the non-going civil unrest
in Jammu and Kashmir. Those were the days that followed Yahya Khan’s
clampdown on the uprising in Dacca which resulted in a massive inflow of
refugees into eastern India from the erstwhile East-Pakistan. During those
days, too, there were veiled suggestions in the speeches of public
personalities on both sides of the border of a possible outbreak of armed
hostilities.
Within months of the beginning of the diplomatic moves in 1971
which saw the visit of Dr. Henry Kissinger to Islamabad and latter his
secret visit to Beijing and the then Idian Prime Minister Indra Gandhi’s
embarking on a whirlwind tour to seven West European capitals, the third
Indo-Pak War broke out.
That war itself was brief and decisive. But, its wounds have left a
permanent scar. Pakistan, for one, cannot forget till today either the
military defeat or the humiliation of having to part with the land we know
today as Bangladesh. Thus, Bangladesh was added to the list of items that
could create a further psychological rift between the two countries. The
most impartment of those items, of course, the dispute over the valley of
Kashmir whose accession to India was questioned by Pakistan from the
day it acceded to India.
On 16th July (new prime minister) 1996, Indian External Affairs
Minister Inder Kumar Gujral told the Parliament that his country is ready
to sign a non-agression pact with Pakistan. This statement issued by Indian
foreign office calling for improving Indo-Pak relations. This consultation
was also attended by Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Sahibzada Yaqub Khan.
Almost every speaker at the meeting stressed upon the need to improve
relations between these two countries.
More than six months have passed since this was stated by foreign
office. There is an India desk in our Foreign Office whose role and
exclusive task is to formulate Pakistan’s policy towards India. Its proposal and strategies must always be ready. It is also a well known fact all over
world that the diplomats are always soft on the countries they are
and it is almost always their wish to improve relations. This is
demand of their profession and perhaps this trait comes automatically to
Pakistan is taking such a longtime to respond to India Premier’s response
them as part of their profession. It thus does not make sense as to why
Pakistan’s Foreign Office must admit that it is slow to respond; and
y lose this opportunity. This India government, being a coalition, is
to Pakistan PM’s message. it may unstable and cannot last for ever.
During his visit to Pakistan, American Ambassador in India Dr.
Frank Wisner, has further brought the subject of Indo-Pak relation in the
time light. No miracles may be expected from the Wisner’s visit as
it was a fact finding mission to access the views of various
institutions and impartment persons in Pakistan. The Ambassador,
, offered to meditate between the two countries if both of them
to it. It is a big ‘if’ because India does not agree to mediation; it
only calls for bilateral talks.
The bilateral talks have basically been stalled since January 1994
over the issue of Kashmir. Pakistan wants this core issue to be discussed
while India is willing to discuss everything except this dispute.
Notwithstanding what Gujral says it is unlikely that India would discuss
Kashmir with Pakistan, particularly when it is a pre-condition to the talks
and also because the Indian Government is politically weak. Pakistan now
has two options. Either it opts for the `nothing approach’ and sticks to its
present position and waits for the miracles when India is willing to discuss
Kashmir. The other approach is to at least talk on issues other than
Kashmir; and strive for improvement of relations in these areas. This
approach actually has no negative feature except that a segment of the
population, regardless of what people say it is not the majority, may
criticize it for talking to the enemy while the Kashmiris suffer at the hands
of the India army; and that the Kashmiris fighting the Indians and the
Kashmiri population in general may feel betrayed. The fighters may get
new; I say Indian because will only consider it normalization when the UN
demoralized and the things may start to normalize from an Indian point of
resolution are implemented. India wishes to start relationship on a new footing. Otherwise ko
could one explain Gujral’s unilateral decision to issue maximum number
of visas to Pakistanis wanting to visit India. He promised that his country
would be “quite liberal in issuing visas”. And this cannot just be describ
as a playing to the gallery, as expressed by a section of the Urdu press,
There are reports in the press that Pakistan may allow Indian to open a
We also expressed his wish to reopen the Indian Consulate in Karack,
‘visiting consulate; whatever it means in Karachi. The government mus
realise that majority of the people desiring to go to India are those who
I need to visit their relatives and they are mostly based in Karachi or is
south Pakistan; difficulties are being encountered by them in the abse
of a Consulate in that area.
The negatives are definitely important but are not leaving the people
of Pakistan with much choice. Who knows it better than the government of
Pakistan that the Kashmir dispute is not on the top of world’s agenta.
What to talk of presenting a resolution in the UN General Assembly on
this issue Pakistan now does not even contemplate to raise this issue, is
the UN Human Rights Commission. The reason is simple; countries,
including the United States, are aware of the human rights violations
there, but they do not wish to spoil their relations with India for economic
and political reasons and that they also do not approve of Pakistan aiding
the militants even if its just political help. This is the practical reality
regardless of what the government tries to argue domestically: UN
resolutions and rights of self-determination are not making and headway.
TRADE WITH INDIA:
Reports originating from India show that the growth in export from
that country has substantially declined, from 24 percent to 9.2 during the
first five months of the current fiscal year as compared to the
corresponding period of the previous year. In contrast, the growth rate of
Pakistan’s exports has doubled to 14 percent during the first three months
of the current year as compared to the same period last year. This
favourable development took place before the additional advantage P
occurring from recent devaluation came into play. The reports from India
suggest that the decline has been due to the sharp cuts in measures of
protection (provided earlier to the domestic industry) as a result of IMF
sponsored economic reforms aimed at globalisation of the Indian economy.
Foremost among the liberalisation measures is the cut in tariffrate which
in general was 200 percent, and has now been reduced to 25 percent, the maximum being 50 percent. This obviously has reduced the capacity of the
local industry to cut prices far exports and provide internalized subsidy.
Among the items affected by the decline in export growth rate are
textiles and leather and leather goods. These are the items which have
international market. According to reports, tanneries have been closed
registered growth in our case. In these items we compete with India in the
down in Uttar Paradesh and Tamil Nado the two big centres of industry,
as a result of court orders on grounds of environmental pollution. The
demand for closure may extend to other states of India as well on the same
ground. Textile and leather goods are our main products and constitute
over 65 percent of our export. Then now situation that is developing
should set at naught our apprehensions about being disadvantaged in
competition with India. This is the time we should consider opening up
normal trade with the neighbour. Apart from getting an access the
market of 950 million people with a prospering middle class of 200
million, Pakistan will have an opportunity of getting raw material and
capital goods from a cheaper source. In addition, government revenue will
receive a immediate boost as, along with trade creation, much of the
existing illegal trade our Rs 1 billion each may will flow into legal
channels.
There are certain Pakistani industries which are still in infancy like
automobiles, two wheelers, electronics, domestic appliances, etc. These
rightly fell threatened in the event of generally liberalised trade being
allowed the two countries. It is encouraging that India is not insisting on
perfect reciprocity. While it has already granted Pakistan the most
favoured nation (MEN) statue, it has left it to Pakistan to choose its own
time opt for either an across the board or an item wise approach in trade
with that country. In addition to retaining the sovereign right to protect its
own interests, Pakistan may negotiate with New Delhi the exclusion of
such items which it needs to protect. What needs to be realised is that
trade with neighbours brings in the advantage of an increased exchange of
goods at a lower cost, and promotes stability in prices in both partner
Countries.
