 "Comprehensive dialogue with Pakistan has run its course: Sushant Sareen")
Pakistan expert Sushant Sareen tells Aditi Phadnis to keep expectations from the India-Pakistan thaw low
How do you see the future of the resumption of the India-Pakistan dialogue that is being described as a big breakthrough?
Undeniably it is a breakthrough, but only to the extent of starting a dialogue and not in the sense of some paradigm shift. Beyond that let’s look at it a bit more closely. It was the Pakistani side that was hankering for a dialogue. There is no initiative taken by it or any indication that it has already – or is ready – to address the real concerns that have stymied dialogue in the past.
Perhaps the first meeting had to be publicised because it signaled a return to what was decided at Ufa with the concession that Pakistan was seeking for a meeting between FSs to broaden the dialogue. But future meetings should perhaps be out of the public gaze until there is some solid understanding that can be made public and in the meantime the public opinion can be prepared to be more accepting of an engagement between the two countries.
And third, let’s face it, a comprehensive dialogue, while it puts things back on track, has pretty much run its course. I am talking about the way it is structured. To keep it to the level of officials. For instance, water sharing is a very difficult political issue. Can Secretaries Water Resources really push anything through? It hasn’t happened in the past, I don’t see it happening in the future. Officials by definition have a very limited mandate. so perhaps there is a case for rethinking the structure of the composite dialogue.
The speed at which everything was done was quite spectacular...
Well, in the joint statement after Narendra Modi and Nawaz Sharif met, there is one sentence that reads: ‘Pursuant to the meetings…” Meetings? so was there more than the 160 second one that we saw in Paris? What happened at these meetings? The NSAs met to sort out preliminary issues. But the joint statement issues after Sushma Swaraj’s visit suggests there was some assurance that caused great comfort/satisfaction to India. What was this? The second paragraph suggests both sides were very happy about something. What was this?
But the issues around 26/11 remain. Have not seen anything on the ground to suggest there is a breakthrough in any of the issues India is concerned about.
Call it cynicism. But in the past we have seen that Pakistan has offered a lot on paper but when it comes to delivering on the ground they tend to renege on it. Maybe it would have been better for the NSAs to talk out of the media glare and implement verifiable forward movement…more than verbal assurances.
If you look at what Pakistan has been doing in the meantime, not only has its rhetoric been bizarre but it has also been going all over the world handing out dossiers about what India has been doing. Fiction spy stories in the form of dossiers don’t make for good diplomacy. On media, it has virtually been forcing its Generals to go on TV and repeat the Pakistani line. So I am not convinced Pakistan is entirely sincere about its commitment to a more fruitful relationship with India.
So this is another round of optics? To what end?
Although the reason for the initiative to talk might not be to create optics, the initiative itself might end up as just that.
These moves are being watched closely in several world capitals: Washington, Beijing and Kabul to name just three, with varying degrees of optimism but also disquiet…
The US will be happy at least the two sides have started talking. We know that lately the Chinese have also been trying to knock some sense into the heads of the Pakistanis because they are working on their own project of expanding their influence in the region and that can’t happen if the region is perpetually disturbed. In Kabul I don’t think there will be disquiet, but there will be distrust of Pakistan and its intentions.
Pakistan has a Hobson’s choice. Giving up the Taliban in Afghanistan has its implications. But not giving it up also has implications. Because all this is involved, we should not expect outcomes at the same speed as time taken to get the initiative off the ground.
How do you see the future of the resumption of the India-Pakistan dialogue that is being described as a big breakthrough?
Undeniably it is a breakthrough, but only to the extent of starting a dialogue and not in the sense of some paradigm shift. Beyond that let’s look at it a bit more closely. It was the Pakistani side that was hankering for a dialogue. There is no initiative taken by it or any indication that it has already – or is ready – to address the real concerns that have stymied dialogue in the past.
Also Read
Second, the degree of haste with which the Indian side responded is a bit puzzling. I wish Delhi had taken a bit more time to sequence the steps that have led to the resumption. That would have prepared public opinion for it. It was clear that Sushma Swaraj had to go to Pakistan, and even meet the Pakistani establishment. But was an announcement of resumption of dialogue immediately necessary? I don’t know. Similarly, the National Security Advisors (NSAs) had a meeting. Was there a case for this set of NSAs to announce they were meeting?
Perhaps the first meeting had to be publicised because it signaled a return to what was decided at Ufa with the concession that Pakistan was seeking for a meeting between FSs to broaden the dialogue. But future meetings should perhaps be out of the public gaze until there is some solid understanding that can be made public and in the meantime the public opinion can be prepared to be more accepting of an engagement between the two countries.
And third, let’s face it, a comprehensive dialogue, while it puts things back on track, has pretty much run its course. I am talking about the way it is structured. To keep it to the level of officials. For instance, water sharing is a very difficult political issue. Can Secretaries Water Resources really push anything through? It hasn’t happened in the past, I don’t see it happening in the future. Officials by definition have a very limited mandate. so perhaps there is a case for rethinking the structure of the composite dialogue.
The speed at which everything was done was quite spectacular...
Well, in the joint statement after Narendra Modi and Nawaz Sharif met, there is one sentence that reads: ‘Pursuant to the meetings…” Meetings? so was there more than the 160 second one that we saw in Paris? What happened at these meetings? The NSAs met to sort out preliminary issues. But the joint statement issues after Sushma Swaraj’s visit suggests there was some assurance that caused great comfort/satisfaction to India. What was this? The second paragraph suggests both sides were very happy about something. What was this?
But the issues around 26/11 remain. Have not seen anything on the ground to suggest there is a breakthrough in any of the issues India is concerned about.
Call it cynicism. But in the past we have seen that Pakistan has offered a lot on paper but when it comes to delivering on the ground they tend to renege on it. Maybe it would have been better for the NSAs to talk out of the media glare and implement verifiable forward movement…more than verbal assurances.
If you look at what Pakistan has been doing in the meantime, not only has its rhetoric been bizarre but it has also been going all over the world handing out dossiers about what India has been doing. Fiction spy stories in the form of dossiers don’t make for good diplomacy. On media, it has virtually been forcing its Generals to go on TV and repeat the Pakistani line. So I am not convinced Pakistan is entirely sincere about its commitment to a more fruitful relationship with India.
So this is another round of optics? To what end?
Although the reason for the initiative to talk might not be to create optics, the initiative itself might end up as just that.
These moves are being watched closely in several world capitals: Washington, Beijing and Kabul to name just three, with varying degrees of optimism but also disquiet…
The US will be happy at least the two sides have started talking. We know that lately the Chinese have also been trying to knock some sense into the heads of the Pakistanis because they are working on their own project of expanding their influence in the region and that can’t happen if the region is perpetually disturbed. In Kabul I don’t think there will be disquiet, but there will be distrust of Pakistan and its intentions.
Pakistan has a Hobson’s choice. Giving up the Taliban in Afghanistan has its implications. But not giving it up also has implications. Because all this is involved, we should not expect outcomes at the same speed as time taken to get the initiative off the ground.