There is confidence in Islamabad that its new importance to international interests in the region can be leveraged to secure its own interests vis-a-vis India.
As New Delhi prepares to put the Mumbai attacks behind for a re-engagement with Pakistan, there is confidence in Islamabad that its new importance to international interests in the region can be leveraged to secure its own interests vis-a-vis India.
After years of being seen as part of the problem in Afghanistan, Pakistan is savouring what it calls a vindication of its position on how to end the conflict in that country, and is confident it holds the key to the proposed new plan of “reconciliation” with the Taliban.
As evident from two sets of remarks by the Pakistan Army chief last week about what it seeks in Afghanistan and how its perceives India, New Delhi will need to factor in a resurgent Pakistani military, assertive about its concerns and self-assured of the resonance these carry in the halls of power in the U.S. and Europe.
From Pakistan’s point of view, the flurry of recent diplomatic moves on the Afghan conflict, culminating in the London Conference, was definitely the game-changer. Certainly, the new international mood seems to have played some role in drawing India back to the negotiating table.
London Conference
The details of the new approach in Afghanistan formalised at the 60-nation conference are still hazy. A cash-for-peace plan aimed at weaning away non-ideological and “moderate” Taliban fighters is one part of it, but the broad consensus emerging from the conference was that there is no way forward in Afghanistan without engaging the Taliban in dialogue, perhaps towards its eventual participation in the governance of that country.
“The outcome of the London Conference has been overall positive. It is a vindication of Pakistan’s position that we need to focus on all aspects of the strategy of the three D’s [dialogue, development and deterrence],” Abdul Basit, spokesman of Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, told The Hindu. “The international community now realises that without moving forward on the reconciliation aspect, it is not possible to achieve peace in Afghanistan.”
The decisions at the London Conference were not a total surprise. There were plenty of signals that the U.S. and its NATO allies in Europe no longer believed in the possibility a military victory over the Taliban, and were looking for a dignified exit. Except that the military operations in Afghanistan will now be aimed at persuading the Taliban to negotiation, the next steps in the new roadmap for “reconciliation” and “reintegration” of the Taliban are still hazy. The main actors themselves seem unclear about many things.
Is dialogue to take place with only “moderate” sections of the Taliban? How far have talks, already reported to have begun, progressed? What will be offered to the Taliban? Will there be other parties on the table?
The U.S. remains apprehensive about the idea of talking to the top Taliban leadership. In any case, the big question for any such effort is whether the Taliban can cut off their links with Al Qaeda, give up their extremist views and reconcile with the political and social values of a democratic set-up.
Still, it is hoped that by mid-2011, when U.S. troops will begin withdrawing, enough reconciliation would have taken place for Afghans to run their country themselves.
Two countries are thought to have sufficient influence on the Taliban to be able to deliver on the London Conference decisions. Saudi Arabia, one of only three countries that recognised the Taliban-run Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan from 1996 until 9/11 — the other two were Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates — has already been asked by President Karzai to act as a mediator. The kingdom, which has no love lost for Osama bin Laden, has set the pre-condition that the Taliban must renounce Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaeda.
Pakistan still carries considerable clout with sections of the Afghan Taliban, some of whom were given safe haven on Pakistani soil when the U.S. started the war in Afghanistan after 9/11, and continue to remain in sanctuaries in the north-western frontier regions.
“Gatekeepers” to the Taliban
Described as the “gatekeepers” to the Taliban, Pakistan would have a crucial role in delivering the Taliban to the table, either through coercion or persuasion. But it is being careful not to be seen as muscling in to impose its own agenda in Afghanistan. The mantra in Islamabad is that the process should be “Afghan-led”.
“Pakistan is perhaps better placed than any other country in the world to support Afghan reintegration and reconciliation. Why? We speak the same language, we have common tribes, a common religion, we have a commonality of history, culture and tradition” Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi told the Guardian. “But it [Pakistani mediation] depends on whether we are asked to do so. If asked, the government of Pakistan would be happy to facilitate.”
But suspicious of its intentions, President Karzai has not been keen to involve Pakistan as a mediator, while the rest of the international community too is aware that while Islamabad could play a positive role, it could also use its influence over the Taliban to play “spoiler.” But, most observers say, no country except Pakistan can guarantee an end to the conflict in Afghanistan.
“If any country other than Afghanistan has any role, it is Pakistan. It may not be explicit right now, but it is implicit and goes without stating. Whether it is maintaining peace, security and stability of Afghanistan,” said Mushahid Hussain Sayed, secretary-general of the Pakistan Muslim League (Q), “or providing a face-saving exit for American forces, it has to be Pakistan.”
A constructive role by Pakistan is likely to come attached with the demand that the international community address its “legitimate” concerns and issues in the region.
Some of those concerns were articulated by the Pakistan Army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani when, in two meetings with journalists this week, he said India remains the primary threat to Pakistan and the focus of the Pakistani military. He spoke of the peace, security and stability of Afghanistan as the main element of Pakistan’s “strategic depth”, and said Pakistan had a more “legitimate” expectation in the matter of training the Afghan security forces than India.
A Foreign Ministry official, who wished not to be identified, was blunter: “We do not really see India playing any role in Afghanistan. Any role for India in Afghanistan can only be problematic”. On the other hand, he said, Pakistan could not be wished away from Afghanistan, and had “a more natural role” in Afghanistan, given the shared border and other links.
Also, U.S. demands to “do more” against the Afghan Taliban holed up in Pakistani territory no more hold any logic, said Imitiaz Gul, author of a book on Al Qaeda and head of the Islamabad-based Centre for Research: “These demands have to a back seat. If we have to talk to them, why antagonise them?”
The Pakistan military said last month it would not launch new offensives against militants for six months to a year as it was overstretched. The declaration was evidently meant to pre-empt any demand during the recent visit by the U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates for military operations in North Waziristan. Now, said Mr. Gul, the Pakistan Army would want to wait to see how the situation unfolds in Afghanistan.
As Pakistani observers see it, their country has never been better positioned in recent times. At a recent seminar in Lahore’s Punjab University, Mr. Sayed spoke of how the Obama Administration is dependent on Pakistan for its Afghanistan strategy, and on China, a close ally of Pakistan, to maintain regional stability, while India has been downgraded a couple of notches by the Obama Administration from its status during the Bush years..
“The regional situation is moving towards Pakistan’s advantage. We have a strategic opening and we should use it to our advantage,” Mr. Sayed told The Hindu. This, he said, should include reining in India from using Afghanistan for what he alleged were its covert activities in Pakistan, and pushing for a solution on the Kashmir issue.
So is Afghanistan going to turn into a battleground for the competing interests of India and Pakistan? Not necessarily, said Mr. Sayed.
“In my view, Pakistan and India do not have to compete in Afghanistan,” he said, suggesting that the two countries hold bilateral talks on Afghanistan, and “see how we can co-operate instead of compete” in that country.
At the moment, as India and Pakistan do a tug-of-war over what their renewed engagement should be called, that seems easier said than done.
Keywords: India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, London conference, Taliban, Afghan conflict, Lahore’s Punjab University
The comment asking India to leave Kashmir is ridiculous and stupid. If the democratic wishes of Kashmir are to be honoured then so also the democratic wishes of the people of Jammu and Ladakh who have no wish to truck with the Kashmir people. And which democratic country is making this request. Pakistan. Pakistan, become democratic first yourself, then ask for people's wishes to be respected in other parts of the world.
With its deft maneuvering of the arrest of some key Taliban functioneries Pakistan has managed to be indipensible for US. If Pakistan was indispensible on its fight on terror now on its search for making peace honourably with Taliban also Pakistan's help is most crucial. So Pakistan has US where it wants it to be. Pakistan's help is necessary to keep Afghanistan in peace. Then so it is in case of weak administration the help of local don to keep peace in a lawless locality. Not to do anything bad is as good as doing something good. Pakistan with all its strategic assets on its pay-roll can keep the area constantly on the boil. For the present Pakistan is sitting pretty.
The Afghans have shown in history that they are nobody's serf, whether the US or the Soviets. It will be the same if Pakistan tries to twist their arms to their needs. After the exit of the West in Afghanistan, the situation is most likely to return to what it was in the 1990s, thereby facilitating many extremist groups to take shelter there and plot again. India must try to keep to its historical friendly relations with the Afghan people and not worry about the temporary ceding of power to the Taliban.
What india lacks here is leverage; we simply have to do what is very good for Afghanistan and what Pakistan can definitly not do. And elsewhere it's time India tried to play dirty with the US. Put a premium on everything.
The last time the Taliban was in power in 1996 we know exactly how Afghanistan was run. Why is it going to be different this time? The Taliban has not changed its views nor its outlook in 14 years. If anything their position has hardened. The major concern of the West is that there should be no links between the Taliban and Al Qaeda. If this possibility can be guaranteed, no matter how remote, then the West does not care who really runs Afghanistan. And if the Taliban goes back to re-engineering Afghan society, as it did in 1996, the rest of the world will look away. "Do what you want, but no Al Qaeda!" is the sole mantra.
This is what Pakistan is gambling on. And by keeping India out of negotiations it will guarantee that Afghanistan returns to 1996. Then the military and ISI will go back to things as they were. It is an outrage to keep India out of the negotiations, because with Pakistan it also shares history and culture with Afghanistan. It is also the largest and most dominant power in this region, and not including it in negotiations is a travesty and dangerous for the future of the region. It is sad that Pakistan should suddenly feel important to the West. They are important by virtue of being "gatekeepers" to a backward and violent nation. That we have to rely on Pakistan to once again be the primary negotiator, and to prop up a discredited regime, should make all of us worried.
By sidelining India, the West wants to make a quick getaway. In doing this they will pass the future cost on to India, as it did when the Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan. We Indians are going to pay the price for this for a long time to come unless we get on to the negotiating table, with all the others, right now. What we need to do is work with Afghanistan and Pakistan to ensure that South Asia remains peaceful and militancy comes to an end.
India as a country has demonstrated its willingness to buckle under pressure and this started from the moment a government of a billion plus people was held to ransom by a bunch of Taliban and this nation surrendered meekly.This has not gone unnoticed by the jehadi groups.
The problem is even if Kashmir issue is resolved the jehadis-Pak establishment have said that this terror will continue next for Hyderabad.
We have to fight back and the only language they understand is violence.
We have to ruthlessly expose faultlines in Pakistan-Baluchistan, frontier provinces and Sindh.
We need India to show a bit of spine in dealing with this problem.
Pakistan truely is at cross-roads in its history. It is time that Pakistan came out of its sense of insecurity vis-a-vis India and use its wherewithal to a) define its own future and b) how it will co-exist with the comity of nations. If India allows Pakistan to have its way in Afghanistan and leverage its resourcefulness in that country against Kashmir, then Indian diplomacy can be deemed as a failure.
Time and again we have experienced this situation where Pakistan after letting forces inimical to India unleash acts of terror would somehow manage to turn things around in its favor.
Great. We(Indians & Pakistanis) leave no stones unturned to display our naivety. Do we need a lesson in Quantum Physics to understand the sinister design of West. The Divided Us and are Ruling Us. Believe it, Indo Pak reconciliation is not in their favour.
Right before a pole-vaulter starts running to make a jump, the possibilities are endless: he/she could set a record or might fail. Pakistan is like that pole-vaulter right now. It either delivers what it has been claiming it can do all these years or it fails. The prize of failure is very high. I don't think Pakistan realizes its precarious position. It can't play games this time. It has to deliver a deal with the Taliban. This is one last chance from America and if this fails, it is sure to ditch Pakistan and take things in its own hands (this does not mean it will send another 100,000 troops, but it will for sure stop depending on Pakistan). Pakistan, its Military and ISI are quite clever, but Obama is no idiot.
As far India, it can simply forget Afpak for 6 months or a year and concentrate on its economy and internal security. The whole deal-no deal drama would have come a full circle by then and international community would again be asking India for help.
The lack of vision in Pakistan is unfortunate. Even now (after its own experience with terrorism), all matters related to terror (Afghanistan, Taliban etc.) are seen as matters of gaining strategic advantage rather than fundamental issues to be dealt with.
Terrorism is just a fundamental issue to be dealt with (much like Polio).
If Pakistan is sincere about the wishes of the whole world it must cooperate with the rest of the world to remove extermism, not support it behind the back of the international community. The earlier Pakistan recognises this goal the better for the entire region, and the world. There is no other issue in this whole war in Afghanistan.
Wishful thinking! There is no such thing as a good Talian and and a bad Taliban.
As for Pakistan's rhetoric, it will keep the 'good' Taliban as a battering ram against India and try to fend off the 'bad' Taliban that are threatening its existence.
India's role in Afghanistan is not over, since India is a stakeholder there. It has a stake in peace in the region.
It has been known for a while that Indian diplomats are resented by their international counterparts. The usual pettiness and bad attitude towards even the diplomats from advanced nations is well documented. This is one of the reasons why Pakistan though at a questionable position wriggles itself out of situations. So much for the IFS.
Pakistan is not a solution, but a problem. You can try as hard as you want, nothing will change unless its Army and its jihadis are brought to their knees.
As usual, a good piece of literary work. But the ground realities are that the Indian leadership has been indulging in self-satisfying moral rhetorics to appease the voters. The approach has been more philosophical than pragmatic. That is why Pandit Nehru himself admited that it was a mistake to refer the Kashmir to UN. But the arrow and the word released, does not return or have the control of the marksman. UN is a platform controlled by the same bogeymen who once colonised the subcontinent. But the leadership remained oblivious
and intoxicated by the fasttrack independence, completely nescient of the remote consequences on the national as well as regional aftermath.
India should continue to engage more in regional and international diplomacy and Afghanistan is the key for India to extend its role. I think it's high time Pakistan stopped its anti-India stands. This is 21st century and if we base our ideas and values on 15th century we go backwards and lose stability.
It looks like Pakistan's focus is more on Kashmir than Afghanistan in the context of Taliban. It must realise it is high time it took positive steps to save lives of its own people and others.
@agthagola
You should take some classes in physics in order to understand the meaning of 'thermonuclear power' before uttering this word.
This is another instance of failure of Indian foreign policies. Obviously, the foreign policies are framed by totally incompetent bureaucrats, politicians and are heavily influenced by the so-called ''intellectuals''. The so-called intellectuals who were ranting to start talking with Pakistan don't realise where Indian interests are. For them, talking fancy and projecting them as so-called 'liberal' people is more important. I think there is no need to talk about our politicians. It is a pity that we are ruled by people who cannot protect Indian interests anywhere.
A very well articulated post giving a perfect bird's view of the Indo-Pak-Afghan trilateral security issues. There is more scope for dialogue and negotiation. Let's hope all things proceed that way....
The only best way for India to move forward is to let Kashmiris decide their fate. Action of India has made Pakistan a thermonuclear power, and now impossible to contain, even when India has far superior conventionl strength. If India had let 'Kashmiris' decide their fate 63 yrs ago, Pakistan would have never gone nuclear. However, if India continues its stubbornness then I see trouble for the region.
Please Email the Editor