Pakistan’s sudden decision to open the Kartarpur shrine for Indian pilgrims predictably raised suspicions in India. Pakistan had earlier opened other Sikh holy shrines, like in the Gurudwara Nankana Sahib and the Dera Sahib Gurudwara in Lahore, for pilgrimage, under a bilateral agreement.

The decision to open the Kartarpur shrine, located virtually on the India-Pakistan border, was, however, conveyed “informally,” by Pakistan’s Army Chief General Bajwa, to Punjab’s tempestuous Minister, Navjot Singh Sidhu.

Interestingly, General Bajwa’s sudden interest in opening the Kartarpur shrine was manifested much after repeated requests by Indian leaders, including former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, were ignored.

This unusual action by Pakistan’s Army Chief raised hackles in New Delhi, as the Pakistan army controls the running of Sikh Gurudwaras in the country, through a “Pakistani Gurudwara Prabandak Committee.” This “Committee’s” first head was former ISI Chief, Lt. General Javed Nasir — the mastermind of the 1993 Mumbai Bomb Blasts.

One has personally witnessed “Khalistani” flags being provocatively raised during the visits to Pakistan of Sikh pilgrim groups from India. Indian pilgrims are also constantly sought to be incited by specially invited “Khalistani” activists, from countries like Canada, the US and UK. Quite obviously, the ISI is now again looking to fish in troubled waters in Punjab. This is evident from the recent terrorist strike in Amritsar and the continuing smuggling of narcotics across the border.

These developments took place when Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan was engaged in organising countrywide celebrations for his first 100 days in office. Contrary to his expectations, his first 100 days have been marked by a less than satisfactory performance, in fulfilling expectations he had raised. This happened despite being the blue-eyed-boy of army, which had facilitated his election as Prime Minister.

Pakistan’s economic woes

Pakistan’s foreign exchange reserves have reached the perilously low level of $8 billion. With the country expecting to have a further $12 billion trade deficit in the current financial year, Pakistan had to go to with bended knees, to its past financial mentors — Saudi Arabia, China, US, EU, UAE and the IMF, for a bailout.

The Saudis were not quite as generous as they have been in the past. All that was on offer to Pakistan was a short-term deposit of $3 billion in a Pakistani bank and a similar offer of petroleum under a short-term, deferred payment arrangement.

The IMF imposed strict conditionalities, including asking for details of repayment liabilities on Chinese loans, for the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. Negotiations with the IMF are currently on hold. Pakistani expectations of long-term, low interest/interest free credits from China were not fulfilled.

The US has ended military and economic aid for Pakistan. Pakistan’s Finance Minister Asad Umar recently proclaimed: “Right now, we have a $18 billion deficit and $9 billion of debt repayment, due this year, which brings the total to $27 billion”. He added: “We cannot afford that.”

SAARC summit stand-off

Imran Khan has reached out to India, urging the resumption of “dialogue” and India’s participation in the earlier scheduled SAARC Summit in Islamabad. Our standard reply of “talks and terrorism cannot go together,” is not exactly endorsed internationally and conveys an impression of rigidity. It needs to be nuanced.

Detailed “back channel” negotiations after the Jaish-e-Mohammed attack on India’s Parliament, resulted in an agreement in which General Musharraf assured Vajpayee that “territory under Pakistan’s control” would not be used for terrorism against India. Pakistan abided by that assurance till 2007.

There was also a resumption of the “Composite Dialogue Process,” on all issues including Jammu and Kashmir. There was evidently progress on a framework to resolve Jammu and Kashmir, based on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s offer that while “Borders cannot be redrawn”, we can work towards making them “irrelevant”, by making them “just lines on a Map”. This process ended with the 26/11 terrorist attack on Mumbai in 2008. Pakistan sponsored terrorism has since continued unabated.

Pakistan would now like to resume the “Composite Dialogue Process”. This should be rejected, as terrorism is accorded a low priority in this process. This does not mean that India should cut off all diplomatic and “back channel contacts” with Pakistan. It is essential that we should stand firm on refusing to discuss Jammu and Kashmir, unless the sponsorship of terrorism ends.

But, we go wrong by equating the priorities of the Pakistan army, with the interest about India, across wide sections of ordinary Pakistanis. Vajpayee’s directive on liberal issue of visas, particularly to “Mohajirs” in Karachi and urban Sind, produced dramatic results in changing public opinion about India. It pays us richly to expose ordinary Pakistanis to realities in contemporary India.

We need to welcome exchanges of visits by students, academics, business organisations, cultural troupes and those with familial ties. There is no need to be paranoid about the security implications of such exchanges.

There also has to be firmness and realism in dealing with the Pakistani military establishment. Pakistan has to be told bluntly that it has rendered the SAARC non-functional and the SAARC Free Trade Agreement meaningless, by its severe restrictions on Indian exports and by denial of transit to Afghanistan.

Not just India, but Bangladesh and Afghanistan also have reservations on the next SAARC Summit being hosted in Pakistan. Moreover, Pakistan wastes time and resources in pushing for China, which is not a South Asian country, being admitted to SAARC. This is a proposal it knows India will not accept. We need not, therefore, be in a hurry to respond positively to Imran Khan’s call for an early SAARC Summit in Islamabad.

Apart from reaching out to people in Pakistan, “back-channel” contacts, free from the glare of publicity, between senior diplomats, army officials and intelligence agencies, are essential to deal with issues of terrorism and bilateral cooperation, while at the same time, maintaining pressures, overt and covert, to firmly and effectively respond to challenges of cross-border terrorism.

With the snows closing the Himalayan mountain passes, cross-border infiltration in the Kashmir valley inevitably falls. Prime Minister Imran Khan has shown some readiness to consider moving forward on proposals to address the issue of J&K, on lines akin to what happened between 2004-2007, when terrorism was minimal.

We can, however, address major issues only after general elections in India. But at the same time, we should spare no effort to raise the costs of sponsoring terrorism, for the Pakistani military establishment.

The writer is a former High Commissioner to Pakistan

Related Topics