US military aid & India’s false cry

Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia, Robert Blake has said that United States is taking appropriate steps to ensure that the military aid given to Pakistan is not used against India with a view to addressing Indian concerns. “I think they (India) understand that we are trying to build up Pakistan’s counter-insurgency capabilities and we are seeking end use assurances to ensure that the weapons that are provided will not be used against India in any case,” Robert Blake said in response to a question at a State Department Blog Forum. Blake said India and the US have a shared interest in stabilisation of Pakistan; and New Delhi supports the US’ Pak policy, adding that “New Delhi was in support of Washinton’s concerns with Pakistan as both the countries want to see stabilisation of Pakistan”. If one examines Blake’s statement, it sounds absolutely absurd that Pakistan will not use US weapons against India, because it is not logical and unfeasible. In case of palpable threat on eastern border, Pakistan’s military personnel will have to move from western border to eastern border, and it is not possible that troops would first deposit the arms and equipment including night-vision goggles with army headquarters in Rawalpindi.

As to the India sharing concerns with the US to see Pakistan stablised, it is the travesty of the truth because it is an article of faith with India to destabilize Pakistan. Anyhow nobody can befool Pakistan by issuing statements to appease or to make Pakistan lower its guard. Of course, India should realize that in case Pakistan is destabilized, terrorists and extremists will then create anarchic conditions. Would India like to have turmoil and violence next door? Indian leadership should has to understand that a strong and progressive Pakistan is not only in the interest of India but also in the interest of the entire region, as destabilization could transcend Pakistan’s borders and engulf India where in majority of its provinces either Maoists or other separatists are waging struggle. India should therefore look inside, and resolve the issues with minorities and other belligerent elements. However, it is heartening to note that tension between India and Pakistan has somewhat eased, and it is hoped that India would restart the stalled composite dialogue to take it to the logical conclusion.

Anyhow, India’s false cry is not new. In March 2009, India’s Defence Minister AK Antony had said: “United States decision to provide sophisticated weapons to Pakistan is a matter of serious concern to India. The US should ensure that these weapons are not targeted against India…The American explanation that Pakistan army has to be strengthened to fight terrorist outfits like Al-Qaeda and Taliban in Afghanistan was not convincing”. India on one hand says that Pakistan should destroy terrorists, and on the other cries hoarse that the US should not help Pakistan. Other Indian leaders are also expressing concern over Washington’s decision to provide sophisticated military equipment to Islamabad. Anyhow, aid or no US aid, Pakistan has to have minimum credible nuclear deterrence and also improve its conventional weaponry. Instead of expressing unfounded fears and concerns about use of US weapons against India, it should resolve all contentious issues with Pakistan. The problem is that India is not willing to go beyond its stated position. Secondly, India always found some pretext to roil the dialogue when it came to resolve the Kashmir dispute and other issues like Siachin, Sir Creek or violation of Indus Water Treaty. India has always ruled out any third party mediation because it knows that its position vis-à-vis UN resolutions is weak.

The world now is aware of India’s doublespeak. It rejects with disdain any third-party mediation but has been persuading America to pressurize Pakistan for taking action against so-called masterminds of 26/11 Mumbai attacks. On 25th November 2009, in a joint statement after the meeting between US President Barack Obama and Chinese Premier in Washington wherein US and China had welcomed all efforts conducive to peace, stability and development in South Asia and vowed to support efforts for improvement and growth of relations between India and Pakistan, India’s External Affairs Ministry spokesperson Vishnu Prakash had said that India did not envisage a role by a third party in what was essentially a bilateral dispute. Indian statement read: “The Government of India is committed to resolving all outstanding issues with Pakistan through a peaceful bilateral dialogue in accordance with the Simla Agreement. We also believe that a meaningful dialogue with Pakistan can take place only in an environment free from terror or the threat of terror.”

To pacify India, Rober blake had then clarified that it was not the intention to play role of a mediator but desire to see peace in South Asia. The problem is that world powers eye India’s big market, and they are impressed by the sheer size, population and so-called largest democracy in the world. The US should have asked India as to how long it will take to resolve the issues especially the core issue of Kashmir which has remained unresolved for the last six decades. The composite dialogue between India and Pakistan to resolve all outstanding issues started in 2004, but no progress was made on Kashmir, Siachen, Sir Creek, and on disputes over water under Indus Basin Treaty. It means that there is not even a remote possibility of success of bilateral negotiations on the Kashmir dispute. India seems to be perfectly happy by discussing all the issues under the sun, but balks at real issues: reduction of Indian army in occupied Kashmir, working out the methodology or considering various options to resolve the core issue of Kashmir to the satisfaction of India, Pakistan and Kashmiri leadership. There is no denying that people of India and Pakistan want peace and they do not want to live in trepidation and fear of war between the two nuclear states. Indians must acknowledge that Kashmir is a dispute that remains to be settled and one that should be settled through creative dialogues involving India, Pakistan and all major shades of Kashmiri opinion. By resolving Kashmir dispute, Pakistan and India could move forward and enter into a partnership in trade with Afghanistan and Central Asian republics.

Gandhi’s grandson Rajmohan Gandhi in one of his recent articles given a piece of advice to India, which is worth reproducing: “Leaderships in both India and Pakistan should realize that they have a stake in the triumph of the ballot over the bullet in Afghanistan. Successes for the extremists and militants in Afghanistan will hurt Pakistan before they can threaten India. New Delhi’s engagement in Afghanistan should mean for the benefit of the Afghan people and in the interest of Pakistan as well as India, not for pressurising or embarrassing Pakistan. Not only that. Indian Government should keep Government of Pakistan informed of Indian projects in Afghanistan”. Rajmohan Gandhi sounds as well wisher of India, and its leadership should pay heed to his advice.