As India’s national security advisor Ajit Doval and his Pakistani counterpart Sartaj Aziz meet in New Delhi on August 23-24, Indian analysts, who are prone to viewing Pakistan as a state on the brink of collapse, must understand that this view is contrary to facts on the ground. Currently, Pakistan is backed by the world’s most powerful states.
First, with full knowledge of India, the US is arming a jihadist military State on its borders. The US Congressional Research Service, in a report last May, noted that Pakistan has received as much as $20 billion in economic and military assistance in the last 15 years. The US is also giving used weapons from Afghanistan to Pakistan. In the 1990s, Pakistan was close to being declared a state sponsor of terrorism. But now, a practical scenario unfolding in Pakistan’s near future is that Jamaat-ud-Dawa, led by the notorious Hafiz Saeed, will become part of the Pakistani state, much like Hezbollah and Hamas have acquired permanent presence in Lebanon and Gaza.
Second, the strong Saudi-Pakistan relations are well-known. Pakistani military contingents are already rented by Saudis to protect the royal family in lieu of free oil. About 2.2 million Pakistanis working in Saudi Arabia sent $5.6 billion in remittances to Pakistan last year. In 2014, Saudis gave $1.5 billion to Pakistan as a gift. The US-Iran nuclear deal will kick off Saudis’ search for nuclear weapons technology. Saudis will embrace the nuclear Pakistan with new vigour. Last April in Pakistan, Saudi religious affairs minister Abdul Aziz Al-Ammar declared: “Pakistan’s atomic bomb belongs to the world of Islam.” This is despite the fact that Pakistan did not come forward to back the Saudi-led war against Houthi rebels in Yemen. Roznama Jasarat, an Urdu daily, argued: “Saudi Arabia should acquire nuclear technology… against Iran’s expansionist designs.”
Third, Iran’s relations with India are prospering. However, it doesn’t mean that Tehran can allow India to box in Pakistan strategically. Tehran and Islamabad are walking a tightrope in their relationships, as Sunni jihadist groups based in Balochistan could pose a serious security threat to Iran, which in turn, can worsen the Sunni-Shia flashpoint in Pakistan. This was the reason Pakistan did not back the Saudi-led war in Yemen. Speaking in Islamabad on August 13, Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif stated that Tehran backs “the oppressed people of Palestine and Kashmir” and is “ready to play its role for a peaceful resolution of the Kashmir issue.” With regard to Iran-India relations, Zarif was clear: “Iran cannot offend Pakistan to please somebody.” Fourth, India and Russia will have strong ties in the foreseeable future.
However, as the US-India relations move on to the strategic level, Russia is inching closer to Pakistan. Russian firm, Rostekh, will build a 680-mile gas pipeline from Lahore to Karachi at a cost of $2.5 billion, the largest Russian project in Pakistan since the 1970s. “Our relations with Russia are on an upward trend,” noted Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in Minsk, on August 11. Russian-Pakistani relations could move into the military sphere. This year, Moscow and Islamabad discussed plans for Pakistan to use Russian engines for the JF-17 Thunder fighter jets. In the past, Russian firms have worked in Muzaffarabad, Multan and Guddu. Fifth, China’s economic and military support for Pakistan — in submarines, nuclear bombs and fighter jets — is too well-known and needs no explanation. During Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to Islamabad on April 20-21, a humungous project worth $46 billion was announced to build a rail-pipeline-road corridor from Kashgar in China to Gwadar, potentially transforming Pakistan’s future.
On August 12, 300 officials from both the countries gathered at Karamay in Xinjiang where 20 cooperation agreements worth $1.6 billion, as part of the corridor project, were signed to be implemented in the Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. Economic projects between nations must be welcomed as they benefit people. However, much like a neighbour who begins to behave differently after getting rich, nation-states too begin muscle flexing, a serious international concern with China’s rise. An economically and militarily powerful Pakistan will likely behave more adversarially against Afghanistan and India, as testified by its belligerent behaviour following the 1998 nuclear tests. For India, the key problem is this familiar pattern: attempts for peace talks essentially cause Pakistani-sponsored terror attacks against India. Let’s see some examples. One, AB Vajpayee’s historic Lahore bus diplomacy led to the Kargil war in 1999, arguably the largest jihadist war against India in recent memory. Two, when Pakistani military ruler Pervez Musharraf was engaged in talks under US pressure, his spies were simultaneously planning the deadly November 2008 attacks on Mumbai.
Three, before Nawaz Sharif assumed office in June 2013, he had begun talking of peace with India, which led to the terror attack on the Indian consulate in Jalalabad in August that year. Four, when Sharif expressed readiness to attend Modi’s swearing-in ceremony, the Indian consulate in Herat was attacked in May 2014. Five, soon after the July 10 meet in Ufa, where Modi told Nawaz Sharif he would visit Pakistan next year, terrorists from Pakistan arrived in Gurdaspur district on July 27. The pattern is clear: both under military and civilian governments in Islamabad, attempts for peace talks essentially cause terror attacks against Indian targets.
India’s youths, increasingly knowledgeable about Pakistani terrorism, are impatient and want that Pakistani attacks be fought back. This view is strengthened because India comes across as a weak state, dithering amid terrorism. To counter this view, New Delhi must definitely evolve a way of punishing bad behaviour at a time and place of its own choosing.
To Indian youths: have patience because India is a responsible state and cannot march into foreign territory at every provocation. India’s peaceniks tell: you cannot choose your neighbour. To Indian diplomats and policymakers: learn from how neighbours live in villages; sometimes, you boycott a neighbour’s wedding and at times, you persuade your neighbour to grace your daughter’s marriage; sometimes, a neighbour erects a fence and you do the same; sometimes, you break bread together and at times, you turn away when your neighbour is passing by; at another time, your neighbour encroaches on your land and you break your neighbour’s nose.