The Hindu Business Line : Uncertain times ahead for Pakistan

Given the contradictory statements made in Islamabad on such complex issues as Jammu and Kashmir, New Delhi should avoid forcing the pace in relations with Islamabad.
Its efforts to address the J&K issue should be coupled with realism about the volatile political situation in Pakistan, says G. PARTHASARATHY

The February 2008 elections in Pakistan, in which Gen Pervez Musharraf’s loyalists were routed across the country, sent the diplomatic establishments in the White House in Washington and South Block in New Delhi into a tailspin. Despite warnings about Gen Musharraf’s growing unpopularity, the diplomatic establishments in New Delhi and Washington remained wedded to the “Musharraf is our best bet” syndrome and wrongly believed, till the very last mome nt, that Gen Musharraf was invincible and irreplaceable in Pakistan.

While India mercifully steered clear of dabbling in Pakistan’s internal politics, (though its pro-Musharraf tilt was plainly visible), Washington has been shaken by the extent to which its policies of supporting the General have backfired.

Washington assiduously sought to forge a Musharraf-Benazir Bhutto alliance to give the elections a measure of credibility. It was also perceived as an active participant when former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was bundled off to further exile in Saudi Arabia, when he tried to return to Pakistan from London.

Worse still, the wise lads in Washington’s diplomatic establishment made no bones about their suspicions of Nawaz Sharif being a closet Islamist.

In the event, a severely embarrassed King Abdullah was forced to step in and facilitate Sharif’s return to participate in the elections. Sharif has neither forgotten nor forgiven the Americans for the humiliations he was made to suffer. Since his return, Sharif has had two driving objectives. The first is to restore the judges, led by Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhury, who were sacked by Musharraf last year.

Secondly, he appears determined to force the Americans to recognise that they will have to pay a price for their unconditional support to Gen Musharraf and that they can no longer expect unconditional Pakistani support in Afghanistan.

Primary focus

For once, the ruling elite in Pakistan appear to be attaching only secondary attention to relations with India in the coming months. The primary focus of attention is going to be on dealing with the terrorism that Pakistan currently faces, let loose by pro-Taliban jihadis who had been armed and trained by the ISI.

Recent reports from Pakistan indicate that as foreign rescue teams poured into Pakistan Occupied Kashmir after the October 2005 earthquake, the ISI was forced to shift around 10,000 jihadis from PoK to the Northwest Frontier Province. These jihadis joined the pro-Taliban tribals to wage war against their mentors, the Pakistan army, since 2007. They have fought the well-armed Pakistan army to a standstill in the tribal areas bordering Afghanistan and carried their jihad into the Punjabi heartland of Pakistan.

Dealing with terrorist violence unleashed by the one-time protégés of the ISI has become the foremost challenge for the new Government. And the elected leaders have not taken kindly to public warnings from Washington that should NATO forces get “actionable intelligence” they will strike across the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

Taking note of the widespread public anger against the army, Gen Ashfaq Pervez Kayani has decided that, at least for the present, the army should lower its profile and appear deferential to the civilian rulers. Shortly after the first interaction between the army brass and the top political leadership, which was accompanied by a warning from new Foreign Minister Makhdoom Shah Mehmood Qureshi, that Pakistan would not “tolerate” American intrusions into its territory, some details of what transpired between the Army Brass and the politicians were made known by pro-Nawaz Sharif circles.

It was claimed that during the meeting there was “unanimity of views that a political solution to the problem of extremism and terrorism in the tribal areas would be sought, while the military option would be used as a back-up measure and that too would be managed exclusively by the country’s armed forces”.

Militants’ demands

While the politicians in Islamabad may favour a ceasefire and talks with militants, the reality is that having exposed the limitations of the Pakistan military, the militants will not end their support for the Taliban and Al Qaeda unconditionally.

A senior leader of the Tehriq e Taliban e Pakistan, Maulvi Faqir Mohammed said that the militants would not lay down arms, or end their jihad till the Pakistan Government ended its support for America’s “War on Terror”, the Pakistan army was withdrawn from tribal areas and all American and foreign forces left Afghanistan. Maulvi Faqir Mohammed also demanded that Sharia should be introduced fully in Pakistan.

The Taliban has now indicated that it will soon commence operations to disrupt supplies for American troops in Pakistan. A large number of petroleum tankers carrying fuel for NATO forces were recently destroyed at the Torkham post on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. American patience at its troops in Afghanistan being attacked from Pakistani territory, with Pakistani soldiers looking on passively will crack, sooner rather than later.

These crucial problems have to be addressed amidst differences that are emerging between Nawaz Sharif, on the one hand, and PPP leaders Asif Zardari and Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gillani, on the other. Mr Zardari does not share Mr Sharif’s zeal for the unconditional restoration of the Judiciary led by the mercurial Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhury, but has little choice other than going along with Mr Sharif.

Mr Zardari also wishes to avoid a confrontation with Gen Musharraf, which would almost inevitably happen if Justice Chaudhury is restored unconditionally.

Finally, Mr Zardari and his associates in the Pakistan People’s Party are far more America-friendly than Mr Sharif, who certainly would not share Foreign Minister Qureshi’s assertion that “the US played a pivotal role for the revival of democracy and transparent elections” in Pakistan. Mr Nawaz Sharif’s foreign policy aide, Tariq Fatemi, has asserted that it is critical “that the ruling coalition does not resile from its commitment to renegotiate the terms of our engagement with the US.” Failure to “manage contradictions” brought down a Government in India led by a politician as shrewd as Mr V.P. Singh. It remains to be seen how Pakistan’s politicians manage their contradictions.

India factor

Given the contradictory statements made in Islamabad on complex issues like Jammu and Kashmir, New Delhi should avoid forcing the pace in relations with Pakistan. While forging a consensus for resolving the Siachen issue would be difficult, India and Pakistan should find it possible to resolve their longstanding differences on demarcating the land border in the Sir Creek area.

While there now appears to be a growing consensus in Pakistan on improving trade and economic ties with India, two essential factors cannot be ignored.

First, Mr Sharif has remained conspicuously silent on how the issue of J&K should be resolved and how the dialogue on J&K should proceed.

Second, groups like the Lashkar-e-Taiba enjoy political patronage from high circles in the Pakistan Muslim League. One should not be surprised if efforts are made to relieve pressures the Pakistan army faces on its western borders by moving some its erstwhile Jihadi allies back to springboards for infiltration across the Line of Control.

A willingness by New Delhi to promote co-operation, enhance confidence and address the complex issue of Jammu and Kashmir has to be coupled with realism about the uncertain and volatile political and security situation in Pakistan.

(The author is a former High Commissioner to Pakistan.)