Indo-Pak dispute

Business Recorder

2 days ago

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, while addressing a large rally last week in his home state Gujarat, said: the people of Pakistan, especially its youth, must step forward to rid their country of 'the disease of terrorism'. He added: 'Live a life of peace, eat your bread or else my bullet is always an option,' thereby drawing applause from the crowd.
'The Pakistan government has taken note of the remarks by the Prime Minister of India, delivered in Gujarat with the theatrical flourish of a campaign rally rather than the sobriety expected of the leader of a nuclear-armed state,' the Foreign Office of Pakistan said in a statement issued early this week. 'Such statements blatantly violate the fundamental principles of the United Nations Charter, which obliges member states to resolve disputes peacefully and to refrain from the threat or use of force against the sovereignty or political independence of other states,' it added.
The statement of Modi was undoubtedly meant for the appeasement of the Indian public. The downside of the statement is the message to the world that peace between the two neighbouring countries is far away. The statesmanship of a public leader demands management of public emotions and to provide the nation a meaningful way forward for dispute resolution.
Swayed by the euphoria of negativity and Pakistan bashing, India fell short to provide the world a realistic and transparent analysis on the cause, motive and to name the perpetrators of the Pahalgam incident. The worn-out script of finger-pointing at Pakistan, based on historical data, found no takers in the United Nations. Pakistan's offer for a joint investigation into the incident was rejected by India.
Disappointed with lack of world support for pinning down Pakistan for the incident, India last week sent a parliamentary delegation to 33 countries on a diplomatic mission to drum up support for Delhi in its narrative of countering Pakistan-behind recent cross-border attacks and that the Pakistan-based Lashker-e-Taiba (LeT) Islamist militant group was behind the attack. Reportedly, India has built up a case based on the historical data on the subject.
In parallel, Pakistan too has organised a parliamentary delegation on a diplomatic mission to these very countries to seek support against Indian involvement of terrorism in Pakistan. It has also prepared a dossier to present its case. In all probability, both sides would be sympathetically heard around the globe. But, nothing tangible is expected beyond this — as is evident from the outcome of some of the meetings Indian delegations already held.
India has placed its bet on the presumption that on the strength of its economic and geopolitical supremacy over Pakistan, and its far greater global outreach, its narrative would sail through with no question asked. This presumption may prove wrong.
The world is no longer the same as a year back. The geo-political landscape is undergoing a dramatic transformation with all countries, big or small, being in the midst of recalibrating their places in this change. There is a significant internal and external transformation on state governance, and new alliances are shaping up in the west. The geopolitical and economic priority of the US has moved to 'America first'.
China is now more assertive in world politics than ever before. Its support to Pakistan in the recent conflict with India is the beginning of a 'new normal' between Pakistan and China. The South Asia region is moving out of the orbit of India and is recalibrating a balance in its relations with India and the growing China's influence in the region. The recent neutral stance of the US towards the ongoing Indo-Pak conflict indicates Washington's enthusiasm in prompting India to challenge Beijing in the region is dwindling.
The evolving global economic and geopolitical dynamics lead to the conclusion that India and Pakistan have to resolve their issues by themselves and reset their relationship.
Political maturity would have been if the Indian delegations would have walked over from Wagah border into Pakistan or vice versa Pakistan delegation to India and sit together and work out the differences as best as possible. The results could have been far more rewarding and tangible than expected from aimlessly moving around the globe soliciting buyers of one's narrative. It is an exercise in futility with no takers.
There are no big issues which cannot be resolved between India and Pakistan. They are historically driven issues left unresolved for decades. Many times, Pakistan and India came close to resolving the Kashmir issue, but only to be aborted at the last minute. If Pakistan and India could sit together in 1960 to work out the complicated Indus Water Treaty, why cannot they sit together today to review the treaty in the best interest of both the countries. Solutions can only be worked out in a bilateral dialogue between Pakistan and India. The process can immediately roll out once India starts considering Pakistan as its equal partner and the self-inflicted animosity, meant for public appeasement, is put aside by both the neighbouring countries.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025