.
.
.
.
Pranab Mukharjee as foreign minister once frustratingly asked who was in charge in Pakistan. That was in late 2008.
A pertinent question if you are dealing with serious issues of state terror, involving the ISI and you want clear immediate answers. It is also a pertinent question because it is a constructive path towards resolution of ALL problems that are related to Pakistan. Obviously India wants to make sure such events are never repeated again, and thus avoid the necessary situation which may arise in the future where India takes more pro-active action against Pakistan, fraught with all the uncertainties such situations pose for essentially a Third World democracy.
India needs to know that when dealing with Pakistan, they are not talking to a brick wall, with no hope of progress on anything.
Who is in charge and who runs Pakistan?
It depends on the area of state you are talking about. Zardari and his merry band of crooks run the day to day affairs of the state. He came into power in rigged elections fixed by the USA through the ISI. He is morally and intellectually corrupt, and the USA loves him (same in Afghanistan) Zardari and his cronies are not popular in the country, and Zardari isn't even popular within his own Party, but because he has the tacit backing of the USA he is the President of the country.
Zardari, as with his late wife are not strongly anti-Indian, and would probably like some kind of accommodation with India, BUT since he is a figure head president with no real power, surviving on the largess of the USA ($25 billion aid by various American dominated agencies in the pipeline), Zardari doesn't have any real room to maneuver on the BIG ISSUES that India rather optimistically offers to negotiate. Indeed it is the other way around. The USA through daily briefings by Anne Paterson, as next door neighbor tells the President of Pakistan what to do, and what to say. Many of Zardari's speeches are formulated in the American embassy.
Behind the puppet politicians is the Punjabi dominated Pakistan military numbering unofficially at 800,000 and backed by 300,000 paramilitaries, and the all powerful and notorious ISI, staffed exclusively again by Pakistani military officers and their civilian operatives. Their sustenance accounts for between 6--8% of the actual GDP. The corps commanders wield the actual power, and is the unofficial cabinet of Pakistan, and the head of the army is the unofficial President. The Pakistan military decides on all matters of national security, and foreign policy; period...............so I suppose Khrisna and Pillai have been talking to the wrong crowd.
Here I go again.......
Pakistan is a failed state created by the departing British Raj. The departing power under the guidance of General Cawthorne created the ISI to centralize the power of the military in that failed state. "The ISI was the brainchild of Australian-born British Army officer, Major General R. Cawthome, then Deputy Chief of Staff in the Pakistan Army"(1948)..............since there was no other powerful organizing force to match the might and size of the Pakistan military within that failed society, it naturally thus became the main "political party" within Pakistan. The Muslim League was not a proper party, it was a mere elitist club given some energy by Jinnah, and covert British finance and freedom to mobilize from 1940. It's wholly artificial character with only one issue in mind meant that the Muslim League quickly dissolved from the political scene in Pakistan, once it achieved its one objective..................unlike Congress, under Nehru at least.
The UK nudged failed state Pakistan towards the USA, and by 1954 a security Pact was signed and from then on the Pakistan military started developing close relationships with the USA, naturally. Most senior officers of the Pakistan military are trained in the USA/UK, which fundamentally affect their out look on most matters. Pakistan under the control of the military has been an aggressive anti-India power, even though there are no clear justifications for this. Pakistan attacked India in 1948, 1965, 1971 and finally in 1999, just when the Indian PM had arrived in Pakistan with great fanfare and expectations of reaching a final agreement with Pakistan over Kashmir and all other issues.
India has always responded to such Pakistani illegal international provocations with moderation...........so the pre-occupation and paranoia of the Pakistan military about the threat from India is substantively unfounded. However the relationship of the USA with Pakistan has over 50 years metamorphosed to the point where it is clear to all that Pakistan is a wholly client state of the USA. The USA is the final arbiter of all major matters related to Pakistan................and this the people in the MEA, like Krishna and Pillai need to understand.
This is the real situation.
It is a sad spectacle that masterji USA does the dirty and implicates (26/11) on the ISI through their agent David Headley, which I happen to think is not true, but nary a word or whimper of protest from the servile Pakistani generals about their masterji doing the dirty YET AGAIN since 1965. But their political fronts in negotiation with India huff and puff when the MEA repeats the obvious conclusion from Headley's admission. This is the sort of people they are........people not fit to lead Pakistan, let alone negotiate complex International issues with India, as representatives of Pakistani national interests.
Pillai jumped the gun. His rather simplistic accusation against the ISI based on the American agent Headley's, 'Timely' admission should not have been publicly uttered whilst in the full process of negotiating with Pakistan. Newspapers can make such broad accusations, but not politicians involved in sensitive negotiations. You should avoid intentionally and unintentionally playing to the domestic and international gallery. Such accusation even if true, puts the opposite side on the defensive and the proverbial corner.
What was Pillai implying by such a broad public statement? Was he saying that General Suja Pasha, down to the tens of thousands working in the ISI were responsible for 26/11? Is the whole Pakistani military culpable because the ISI is an integral part of the Pakistan military......including Kiyani, the former head of the ISI? In such a situation what is the obvious response of the Pakistani state going to be?
Everybody knows the Pakistani military is no good, one only has to see how the USA treats it with utter disdain........and the ISI is at the center of the malaise that creates problems for the Pakistani state, never mind what they do against India. The Pakistani military with the ISI leading is the main cause of Pakistan's national crisis over 63 years of independence.
Pillai does not need to rub it in with such an obvious fact, especially if you are in the middle of negotiation with the offending Party, and you are trying to extract some meaningful concessions from the state of Pakistan which is already on the defensive and on their back feet courtesy of Headley's recent admission. India has received some concessions from Pakistan even though they have been frustratingly long incremental efforts by the political leadership in Pakistan.
I am in favor of undermining the ISI and down sizing it, and its importance in Pakistani national life, but such strategies should be subtle and in coordination with the Pakistani civilian leadership. Bold sweeping statements of Pillai's kind merely forces the Pakistani civilian politicians to close ranks with their military counter-part...........naturally. Otherwise they will be painted as unpatriotic.
But India has come a long way since the early days of 26/11 in late 2008 when the sum total of Indian diplomacy were several wish list of demands for Pakistan to hand over to India certain undesirable people as perceived by the Indian security state.
Why then waste time negotiating with such a puppet corrupt regime?
For the sake of Public consumption? Or the history books? For the sake of diplomacy? To be seen to be reasonable in the international arena? Or to be seen to be doing something in response to 26/11, because the alternative of military action much favored by the BJP/Israel is unthinkable?
India always needs to engage Pakistan, no matter what. Pakistan is the neighbor India didn't choose. Pragmatically, failed state Pakistan has to be managed for India's best interests. Negotiations is the only avenue through which gradually SAARC member countries, slowly dragging and kicking, full of mistrust sown over many decades, come closer together as a regional bloc. With India as the leading player in that bloc, and Pakistan a major country within that bloc.
India still an amateur has to learn to play the game of the bloc leader........as of now India has excellent relations with Bhutan and the Maldives, and thats it. Various degrees of mistrust and animosity exist with the rest.
There is also the issue of momentum. If you keep talking to the Pakistanis, eventually, eventually this will bear fruit. Eventually some common ground can be found to build on. Mechanisms for security cooperation, intelligence sharing regular meetings of senior intelligence, ministers, military from the two countries and so forth..........these significant things can only be implemented through negotiations, which reduces the sea of distrust between the security of India with the security of Pakistan. For every visit by an important official from a gora country, India should make two to Pakistan.
Money matters......morals, argument, information, who is right who is wrong, the application of logic and rational are all important, but money also does wonders in a failed state like Pakistan. If India is serious about bringing Pakistan under its wings, India needs to buy Pakistan to the tune of $8--$15 billion of low interest loans over long periods. This money will buy peace and settlement over Kashmir finally, as will an FTA there after. The Pakistan military won't be able to argue that India is threatening Pakistan again this time from Afghanistan. The facts will speak for itself. India is rich. India's real economy is between $3600 billion to $3800 billion, with FCR at $285 billion. The rich in India have deposited $1500 billion in off shore accounts.
THE GUILT AND WEAKNESS FELT BY PAKISTAN, through Headley's admission must be used to extract meaningful incremental concession's from Pakistan in relation to their security apparatus and how it operates within Pakistan, and how it relates to India.
Procedures for negotiation between the two countries should be transparent and agreed well before the actual meeting so that time is not wasted and all parties involved are clear about their allotted role. I would suggest the model involving civil dispute cases, and specifically Civil Procedure Rules as standard practice for negotiations. In this case the aggrieved Party(India) submits all the documentation of its case(discovery-------including Headley's affidavit implicating the ISI, Ajmal's case, statements of Pakistanis who know Ajmal and his linkages with the LeT; general facts publicly accessible which state that the Pakistani state since at least the 1970's has been active in sponsoring regional terrorism).......and sets out in detail the intended focus and discussion of what it wants to explore and negotiate about with Pakistan in the forth coming meeting.
The Pakistanis are given the dossier, and the copy of the letter from the MEA covering the agenda of the forth coming meeting. The Pakistanis are then free to add any additional points they want to discuss on top of the Indian suggestions, but these should STRICTLY be within the confines of what India wants, and in no way should go off into a new direction wholly unrelated to the agenda set by India.
India is the aggrieved Party, and it is the one taking the effort to come to Islamabad...........and it makes sense that the negotiations should be focused on 26/11 and state funded terror by the Pakistani military. What are the clear cut steps which Pakistan can take, which are verifiable and REAL that reduces Islamic terror from Pakistan against India?
Pakistan must not be allowed to muddle and deflect from this core issue, by bringing in other matters such as Kashmir. This is what India wants and Pakistan must abide by. India is the aggrieved Party which is making the repeated efforts to talk to Pakistan in Islamabad.
It is not Pakistan's job to be "clever" with Delhi based on such a tragedy. Pakistan's job is to cooperate with India. After all Pakistan is also a victim of Military funded Islamic terror, more so than India. The two countries thus must find common cause.....and create greater bilateral cooperation in this area.
Once the two parties are satisfied that they have achieved anything meaningful, then they can embark on more ambitious projects such the final resolution of the Kashmir Dispute. The resolution of the Kashmir dispute will take the wind out of the sail of the Pakistan military in projecting India as enemy number one. But one must get there incrementally, where both parties are ready and fully prepared.
Pakistan needs to understand that India's position is much stronger........$1300 billion economy to Pakistans $170 billion, and militarily 4-5 times stronger even after spending a paltry 2.5% on defense.........such advantages should be brought to bear on the Pakistanis in a constructive manner so that Pakistan eventually follows India's line of thinking.......simply terrorism is destroying Pakistan itself............it too is a victim, at a greater level. India needs to find common ground with Pakistan in quiet, out of the public gallery steady long term negotiations.
________________________________________
Indian Pakistani relations
Kashmir
Kashmir
Kashmir
