Mian Nawaz Sharif, prime minister for an unprecedented third term, has three areas of special interest on the domestic front: energy, infrastructure and dealing with the problem of terrorism.
He has prioritised three relationships in the domain of foreign relations: China, India and the interconnected challenges of dealing with the United States and Afghanistan. What kind of visual results does he expect from these high priority relationships? First, receiving Manmohan Singh at the Wahgah border (this could also be the other way round). Second, being received by President Obama in the White House and third, riding a train to Kashgar. I would call these the prime minister’s three wishes.
Why would anyone object to granting the country’s popularly elected leader his cherished wishes? It is true, though, that people are concerned about the rising cost of living, frequent power cuts and mounting insecurity from terrorism and other forms of organised crime. The country also has a surplus of cynics whose favourite pastime is hair-splitting, especially when it comes to political leaders trying to translate their grand vision into reality. Let them not overlook one thing Mian Sahib has demonstrated time and again – undeterred by technical objections, he has the tenacity to pursue his aims both on the domestic front as well as internationally.
The road/railroad to Kashgar may sound grandiose and even romantic. It will require infinitely greater resources than those needed for the Karakoram Highway. But the ambition of connecting a remote Chinese region to the Arabian Sea is tempting. Considering all that China has done to assist Pakistan, this would be the right way to show solidarity with the people of that great country, particularly those in the Muslim majority area. Opening up western China to international waters by a shorter route would rank among the great marvels of engineering and public works.
As before, it is travelling the road to Delhi which will pose the bigger challenge. One reason is that, viewed from the Indian side, it looks more like the road to Kabul and beyond, passing through Lahore and Peshawar. The Indians are longing to see this road full of lorries laden with Indian goods for Afghanistan and beyond. This is a strategic goal because if India has easy access to Central Asian markets, the country would become an even more attractive place to invest in.
Appearances can be deceptive. In terms of economic potential, the big prize for India is not the smaller markets of Afghanistan and its neighbouring republics that were formerly part of the Soviet Union. The real concern on our side should be the threat of a good part of Indian merchandise being smuggled back to Pakistan. Those who support expanding trade with India may scoff at this risk. But then they also advocate going ahead with completing the remaining steps for granting India the MFN status.
Nawaz Sharif is generally perceived to be on board with the trader lobby’s strong desire to take the plunge and open up trade with India. But he probably accepts the idea of more trade with India as part of a broader forward movement in the dialogue with India. That might explain the flurry of activity to resume secretary-level meetings. The centrepiece of renewed diplomatic action is a possible meeting between the two prime ministers in New York during the UN General Assembly.
The only negative aspect of this diplomatic surge is that Pakistan is again seen as seeking meetings and dialogue with India. New Delhi has quickly moved to the higher pedestal of considering whether to grant Pakistan the opportunity to talk, including a summit meeting. Islamabad, on its end, is left figuring a way out of this psychological gamesmanship.
An important lesson from the Mumbai attacks and the earlier one on the Indian parliament building was that instead of confidentially engaging Pakistan in meeting the challenge of terrorism, Indian efforts were geared towards portraying this country as a villain on the international stage. Brinkmanship was put into action, knowing that the government in Pakistan was not behind the attacks. After building public anger to an extreme, India could then claim that the opinion in the country was not conducive to resuming dialogue with Pakistan.
Mian Sahib can meet Manmohan Singh but he should not have great expectations. Singh is as much a representative of the Indian establishment as Obama is of US corporate and military interests. And let us make no mistake, the Indian nationalists or military establishment are in no mood to give Pakistan any concession. Their thrust is on extracting concessions from Pakistan. They believe that time is on India’s side and Pakistan has no choice but to acquiesce, over time, to India’s supremacy – if not domination – in the region. Those who advocate a more cooperative approach towards Pakistan are thus kept constantly in check.
The prime minister’s third wish is about the US but that is inseparable from what happens in Afghanistan and the bordering tribal areas of Pakistan. The best he can ask from the US may be a moratorium on drone attacks, which are not only increasingly unpopular in Pakistan but also among the international community. Drones have killed terrorists but also civilians. Their efficacy in defeating terrorism is questionable as the damage inflicted is used by militants to convince more young minds to resort to violence for eternal salvation – and a good compensation for their families.
A moratorium may strengthen the Pakistani government’s hand in seriously engaging the TTP in dialogue. But a good number of Pakistanis believe that the TTP is not interested in talking except maybe to buy time to consolidate its position. And past experience of truce accords substantiates this view. A temporary halt in drone attacks may be subject to the same logic. The US is, therefore, likely to press Pakistan for cooperation in containing the Afghan Taliban and their allies – whether Pakistanis or from other countries.
Like politics, diplomacy is the art of the possible but statesmen also like to be seen taking important initiatives. There may be virtue in the leaders of the two countries talking to each other but it is better to err on the side of caution. No result could be better than conceding on interests, a lesson Manmohan Singh has learnt too well despite his heartfelt desire to visit his birthplace in Pakistan.
Email: saeed.saeedk@gmail.com
M. Saeed Khalid, "The PM’s three wishes," The News. 2013-08-02.Keywords: Political science , Political leaders , Political relations , Political process , International relations , Soviet union , Wahgah border , Armed forces , Government-Pakistan , Drone attacks , Taliban , Diplomacy , Terrorism , Muslims , Nawaz Sharif , President Zardari , PM Manmohan , Pakistan , United States , Afghanistan , China , India , Delhi , Kabul , Islamabad , TTP