Latest news with #ManojJoshi
The Wire
3 days ago
- Business
- The Wire
Two Systems, Two Spheres: The Slow, Painful Divorce of the US and China
Menu हिंदी తెలుగు اردو Home Politics Economy World Security Law Science Society Culture Editor's Pick Opinion Support independent journalism. Donate Now Top Stories Two Systems, Two Spheres: The Slow, Painful Divorce of the US and China Manoj Joshi 6 minutes ago Given the level of interdependence, the process is likely to be slow but will manifest itself through higher costs, slower innovation and geopolitical tensions. US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. Photo: X/@Maks_NAFO_FELLA Real journalism holds power accountable Since 2015, The Wire has done just that. But we can continue only with your support. Contribute now The US-China negotiations on a trade deal have stalled for the moment. According to reports, the US is angry that while it came up with a 90-day tariff truce at the start of the negotiations, China has not reciprocated, as it had promised to resume exports of rare earth minerals. Last week's tirade by President Trump – accusing China of violating the interim agreement which he had provided to 'save' China from a bad economic situation – is a pointer to the intensity of the negotiations which could well be standing on the brink of a breakdown. Even if a deal is struck, it is clear that a gradual decoupling of the United States and China is well underway, encouraged by the policies that began in the Trump-I administration, carried on by President Biden and now being adopted by Trump II. This comes at a time when China has established its capabilities as a near-peer competitor of the US in a range of areas. In recent months, we have seen China testing two or maybe three sixth generation fighter jets, less than a decade after the US did so. We have seen the arrival of Deep Seek, an AI large language model with significantly lower training costs as compared to its peers like Open AI's GPT-4. It also used one-tenth the computing power consumed by Meta's Llama 3.1. Last week, the news portal Axios reported that China was now 'setting the pace in life sciences R&D', conducting more clinical trials and licensing new drugs as compared to US companies. This comes at a time when Trump is gutting the National Institutes of Health and bio-medical research in US universities. The news from China on the technology front has been generally upbeat. In October 2024, Bloomberg News, in a special analysis, said that of the 13 key technologies tracked by their researchers, the Chinese had a world leadership level in five of them and was catching up fast in seven others. The first list included UAVs, solar panels, graphene, high speed rail, electrical vehicles and batteries. In the second list were semiconductors, AI, robots, machine tools, large tractors, drugs and LNG carriers. The one area where the Chinese lagged was commercial aircrafts. In June 2024, the Economist cited the Leiden Ranking of the volume of scientific research output, there are now six Chinese universities or institutions in the world top ten. The Nature Index put the number at seven. Last week, the US announced that it would revoke visas for members of the Communist Party of China or for those studying in 'critical fields.' The administration has also announced a general policy of vetting future student visas, including their social media posts. This could see a sharp decline in foreign students, especially the Chinese, in the coming years. As of 2024, there were some 277,000 Chinese students in the US. The US alleges that China uses US universities to advance its military and technological capabilities. The number of US students in China has already declined sharply from some 11,000 in 2019 to just 1,000 in 2024. Trump's National Security Strategy of 2017 first identified China as a strategic competitor rather than a partner. The Biden NSS built on this notion and its NSS of 2022 declared 'The People's Republic of China harbours the intention and, increasingly, the capacity to reshape the international order in favour of one that tilts the global playing field to its benefit.' It was the first Trump administration that launched a tariff war on China that morphed into a campaign of technology denial, a strategy that intensified in the Biden years. Trump II took office with a promise to hit China with the highest tariff rates. After reaching the absurd point of 145% American tariffs on Chinese goods, and a reciprocal 125% on American products, the two countries are currently trying to work out more reasonable trade arrangements though the prognosis is not good. But it is clear that the US policy of denial of certain high technologies, especially those relating to semiconductors and jet engines, as well as Chinese restrictions on some exports to the US will stay. In March, the Trump administration added over 80 companies, mainly Chinese, to the American blacklist making it tougher for US high-tech companies like Nvidia to do business with China. For its part, China has long sought an autonomy of sorts with regard to technological dependence on the West. It has strategically promoted certain industries through its policies which range from subsidie to demands for forced technology transfer and outright espionage. In addition, through its 'Thousand Talents Programme' it has obtained the services of scholars from foreign universities, including overseas Chinese, to push its own domestic research and development in critical areas. The Make in China initiative of Xi Jinping that began in 2015 sought to have China dominating in 10 advanced industries that would have a 70% domestic market share by this year. In addition to robotics, it included advanced rail equipment, high tech maritime vessels, aerospace and aviation equipment, electrical vehicles and information technology. Not surprisingly, this policy was strenuously opposed by western countries which had dominated the Chinese and global markets in these areas. According to the Financial Times, the Chinese used a unique combination of industrial policy, subsidies and other state support coupled with private sector entrepreneurism and 'ferocious competition in China's vast market' to match and, in some cases, best foreign competitors. It was the Chinese dominance of the industrial supply chains and exports that persuaded Trump to negotiate, rather than fight with China on trade last month. China today commands a full 29% of global manufacturing by value. Equally importantly, it controls critical supply lines for a range of key products. The FT report also indicates that China has some way to go in achieving all four of its goals – reducing import dependence, cutting reliance on foreign companies, becoming the technological leader and achieving global competitiveness. It has done so only in high speed rail and electric power equipment. It has displayed a strong performance in robots, machine tools, agricultural machinery, electrical vehicles, aerospace equipment and biomedicine. The one area in which China is weak is in the manufacture of commercial aircrafts. This is the reason the US has now decided to embargo supplies to the Chinese Comac C919, a commercial jet that is similar to the Airbus 320 and which entered service in 2023. The aircraft depends on western engines as well as other major components. The Trump administration's policies appear to have chosen the worst path available to them. Instead of gathering an alliance of partners to confront China's trade practices, the US alienated most of them by targeting them first. Trump enunciated a policy of calling on industry to manufacture in the United States, yet, through his policies, he has sought to gut the US R&D establishment and its famed universities which were the source of the intellectual capital that has underwritten US technological dominance. His attacks on elite US universities are likely to drive talent to other countries, especially China. Whatever be the case, the world seems headed for a decoupling of the two great powers, a policy that will result in the creation of two techno-spheres. This will be a messy and costly process and will inevitably extract a price from the global economy when countries have to confront two technology standards and two antagonistic supply chains. Even so, given the level of interdependence of the two economies, the process is likely to be slow but manifest itself in the coming years through higher costs, slower innovation, supply chain disruptions and geopolitical tensions. Manoj Joshi is a distinguished fellow with the Observer Research Foundation in Delhi. This piece was first published on The India Cable – a premium newsletter from The Wire & Galileo Ideas – and has been updated and republished here. To subscribe to The India Cable, click here. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments. Make a contribution to Independent Journalism Related News US to Impose Visa Restrictions on Foreign Officials Accused of Censoring Americans Abroad India and China: Two Contrasting Models of Dealing With Trump's US Has Trump 2.0 Deprioritised India? The Evidence is Clear. As US Steps Back From Tariff War With China, What You Need to Know Harvard's Indian Students Are Trapped in Trump's Visa Crossfire US Targets Indian Travel Agents with Visa Bans as Part of Immigration Policy Trump Terms US-China Tariff Talks in Geneva a 'Very Good Meeting', Says Negotiated 'Total Reset' Trump Admin Pauses New Student Visas as it Mulls More Social Media Vetting US Cites National Security Grounds, Procedural Errors to Reject India's Notice at WTO About Us Contact Us Support Us © Copyright. All Rights Reserved.
Entrepreneur
4 days ago
- Business
- Entrepreneur
Data Breaches Now Cost More Than Just Data
"The 8% drop in Victoria's Secret's stock, translating to over USD 150 million in lost market value, shows that cybersecurity breaches are now perceived as significant financial risks," says Manoj Joshi, Group CEO, SA Technologies Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own. You're reading Entrepreneur India, an international franchise of Entrepreneur Media. One of the primary reasons ransomware remains the favourite cyberweapon among malicious actors is its sheer profitability. In 2023 alone, ransomware gangs extorted over USD 1.1 billion in cryptocurrency payments from victims globally, according to blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis. In India, nearly one million ransomware detections were reported in the past year alone. According to Palo Alto Networks' Unit 42 Extortion and Ransomware Trends (Jan–Mar 2025), the country experiences one ransomware incident for every 595 detections and one malware incident for every 40,000 detections, underscoring the volume and scale of cyber threats. The volatile geopolitical climate makes the threat landscape even more complex. The industry is observing more trends in state-backed actors than ever before. "In a rapidly transforming country like India, organisations are navigating a complex mix of modern and legacy changes. The rapid adoption of AI has empowered organisations and threat actors alike. This highlights the urgent need for organisations to bolster their cybersecurity framework and incorporate comprehensive security measures to fortify their defences against complex ransomware campaigns," said Huzefa Motiwala, Senior Director, Technical Solutions, India and SAARC, Palo Alto Networks. Business fallout: the Victoria's Secret case The impact of ransomware isn't limited to temporary technical disruptions; it strikes at the heart of business continuity and brand trust. On 28 May 2026, lingerie retailer Victoria's Secret took its website offline following a cyberattack. Though the exact nature of the incident remains undisclosed, such outages are typically attributed to ransomware. Commenting on the outage, officials said on the website, "Valued customer, we identified and are taking steps to address a security incident. We have taken down our website and some in-store services as a precaution. Our team is working around the clock to fully restore operations… We appreciate your patience during this process. In the meantime, our Victoria's Secret and PINK stores remain open and we look forward to serving you." Following the incident, Victoria's Secret saw an 8 per cent drop in its share price. "The 8 per cent drop in Victoria's Secret's stock, translating to over USD 150 million in lost market value, shows that cybersecurity breaches are now perceived as significant financial risks," explained Manoj Joshi, Group CEO, SA Technologies. Joshi further noted that investor reactions are swift and driven by anticipated disruptions to operations, potential regulatory liabilities, and reputational damage. "With the average cost of a data breach reaching USD 4.45 million in 2023 (IBM), it's evident that robust cybersecurity isn't just an IT concern—it's fundamental to investor confidence and long-term enterprise value," he added. Long-term damage The brand reputation damage from a single cyberattack can be long-lasting, especially in trust-driven sectors like retail, healthcare, and BFSI. "Absolutely," confirms Joshi. "A single attack can have a lasting impact on brand credibility. Yahoo's data breach, for instance, slashed USD 350 million from its acquisition value during the Verizon deal," Joshi said. While citing the example from Ping Identity, Joshi emphasised, "Consumers aren't quick to forgive—81 per cent say they would stop interacting with a brand online after a data breach." Echoing the same sentiment, Amit Jaju from Ankura Consulting said, "Cyberattacks can cause irreversible harm to brand trust and consumer loyalty. In Victoria's Secret's case, the reputational hit is significant. Studies show up to a third of customers may abandon a brand following a breach. In India, where consumer trust is built gradually, brands must invest in transparency and long-term recovery strategies to avoid lasting damage." Lessons in data protection The Victoria's Secret breach is a textbook example of why organisations must go beyond perimeter security. "This breach is a wake-up call for proactive cybersecurity," says Joshi. "Businesses must invest in real-time threat detection, adopt zero-trust frameworks, and maintain clear, transparent communication when incidents occur. One often overlooked aspect is third-party risk—Verizon's 2025 DBIR shows that vendor-related breaches have doubled to 30 per cent. Strong vendor governance is essential," Joshi explained. For consumers, Joshi suggested simple but consistent practices like using strong passwords, enabling two-factor authentication, and avoiding suspicious links.
India Gazette
5 days ago
- Politics
- India Gazette
Second phase of NAKSHA Capacity Building Programme to be launched across five National Centres of Excellence from June 2
New Delhi [India], June 1 (ANI): The Department of Land Resources (DoLR), Ministry of Rural Development, Government of India, is going to conduct the second phase of capacity-building under the NAKSHA (National geospatial Knowledge-based land Survey of urban Habitations) programme from June 2, across five Centres of Excellence (CoEs) in the country. The first phase of capacity building programme to train the 160 master trainers from NAKSHA participating states/UTs has been completed in the month of May 2025, according to the Ministry of Rural Development. This phase of training programme will be inaugurated virtually by Manoj Joshi, Secretary, Department of Land Resources on June 2. Under this training programme, 304 ULB-level and district officers have been nominated from 157 Urban Local Bodies (ULBs). These officers will undergo hands-on training in leveraging modern geospatial technologies for effective urban property surveys. The training will be conducted for a week starting from June 2 at the following Centres of Excellence institutions: Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration (LBSNAA), Mussoorie, Uttarakhand; Yashwantrao Chavan Academy of Development Administration (YASHADA), Pune, Maharashtra; Northeast Region Centre of Excellence, Guwahati, Assam; Mahatma Gandhi State Institute of Public Administration (MGSIPA), Chandigarh, Punjab; Administrative Training Institute (ATI), Mysuru, Karnataka The training aims to equip ULB officers and field staff with the technical and practical skills required to oversee high-accuracy land surveys under the NAKSHA programme. Modules cover the programme framework, GNSS and ETS-based surveying, Web-GIS application, land parcel mapping, and the legal-administrative aspects of land surveys. With India's urban population expected to exceed 600 million by 2031, the need for modern, verifiable, and easily accessible land records has become more urgent than ever. The NAKSHA programme addresses this challenge with a bold, technology-driven approach. NAKSHA programme is being implemented by the department of Land Resources (DoLR), Government of India in association with the Survey of India, NICSI, MPSeDC, and five Centres of Excellence, as a pilot programme. NAKSHA has been launched across 157 Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) in 27 States and 3 Union Territories. (ANI)
Hans India
5 days ago
- Business
- Hans India
Govt's NAKSHA initiative to ensure modern, easily accessible land records
The Centre's Department of Land Resources (DoLR) on Sunday announced it would conduct the second phase of capacity-building under the NAKSHA (National geospatial Knowledge-based land Survey of urban Habitations) programme across five Centres of Excellence (CoEs) in the country. With India's urban population expected to exceed 600 million by 2031, the need for modern, verifiable, and easily accessible land records has become more urgent than ever. The NAKSHA programme addresses this challenge with a bold, technology-driven approach. The first phase of the capacity-building programme to train the 160 master trainers from NAKSHA participating states/UTs was completed last month. The second phase of the training programme will be inaugurated virtually by the Department of Land Resources Secretary Manoj Joshi on Monday, the Department, which comes under the Ministry of Rural Development, said. Under this training programme, 304 ULB-level and district officers have been nominated from 157 urban local bodies (ULBs). These officers will undergo hands-on training in leveraging modern geospatial technologies for effective urban property surveys. The training will be conducted for a week, starting Tuesday, at Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration (LBSNAA), Mussoorie; Yashwantrao Chavan Academy of Development Administration (YASHADA), Pune; Northeast Region Centre of Excellence, Guwahati; Mahatma Gandhi State Institute of Public Administration (MGSIPA), Chandigarh; and Administrative Training Institute (ATI), Mysuru. The training aims to equip ULB officers and field staff with the technical and practical skills required to oversee high-accuracy land surveys under the NAKSHA programme. Modules cover the programme framework, GNSS and ETS-based surveying, Web-GIS application, land parcel mapping, and the legal-administrative aspects of land surveys. Being implemented by the Department of Land Resources (DoLR) in association with the Survey of India, NICSI, MPSeDC, and five Centres of Excellence, as a pilot programme, NAKSHA has been launched across 157 Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) in 27 states and three Union Territories.
The Wire
30-05-2025
- Politics
- The Wire
Pakistan's Chimerical Quest for Parity with India Has Hit a Dead End
Menu हिंदी తెలుగు اردو Home Politics Economy World Security Law Science Society Culture Editor's Pick Opinion Support independent journalism. Donate Now Top Stories Pakistan's Chimerical Quest for Parity with India Has Hit a Dead End Manoj Joshi 6 minutes ago Seventy-seven years after Partition, Pakistan's four-pronged strategy to achieve 'effective parity' with India – through alliances, military spending, nuclear weapons, and terrorism – has left it weaker, not stronger. It's time for both nations to embrace reality over fantasy. Illustration: The Wire. Real journalism holds power accountable Since 2015, The Wire has done just that. But we can continue only with your support. Contribute now Few will deny that the roots of India's problems with Pakistan lie in the partition of the country in 1947. But just what a tangled growth those roots have yielded is difficult to grasp at times. When negotiations were taking place with the British, Muhammad Ali Jinnah sought to somehow ensure that Muslims, constituting a quarter of the Indian population, would be given political parity with the majority Hindus. Jinnah's views were based on the two-nation theory – that the Hindus and Muslims in India were separate 'nations'. Over the years, his demands varied, but it was always aimed at somehow squaring the circle – assuring 'Muslim' political and cultural equality in an unequal demographic situation. During the negotiations for the Interim Government in 1946 he demanded a 50-50 representation in the government between the Muslim League and the Congress. He initially engaged with the Cabinet Mission Plan of 1946 for a federal India with Muslim and Hindu provinces, and sought equal representation of such provinces in the federal legislature and the executive. Four planks for effective parity Since real parity was not possible, what Pakistan did after Jinnah was to pursue 'effective parity' whose central strategy was to somehow diminish India geographically, politically and economically, so that Pakistan could be, and be seen, as its equal. This policy has been based on four planks 1. External alliances to balance a larger India. 2. High military spending to build a force that can deter India 3. Fabricating nuclear weapons 4. Using terrorism as an instrument to promote separatism and civil war to breakup and destabilise India. As M.S. Venkataramani has shown, Pakistan approached the US in 1947 and requested an alliance and went to the extent of even asking the Americans to pay the salaries of their military. The US was not initially interested in South Asia and turned down the requests. But by 1953, the US had identified Pakistan as its partner in South Asia. In 1954, the US and Pakistan signed a mutual defence assistance agreement followed by Pakistan joining SEATO and CENTO. Its mutual defence pact has yet to be revoked. Pakistan sensed opportunity when India was humiliated by China in the war of 1962 and it began back-door talks with China which culminated in a border agreement. This was the beginning of the Pakistan-China relationship which has today reached the status of a quasi alliance. There have never been doubts that this alliance is based on the mutual interests of both sides to check India. In the 1965, Pakistan sought to wrest Kashmir from India through a war in which China played a bit role in aiding Karachi. In the 1960s, through its eastern wing, Pakistan helped a slew of north-eastern separatist groups in India. All this was with the view of breaking up India into manageable bits. However, karma struck back when Pakistan itself came apart following the rebellion in East Pakistan and Indian military intervention in 1971. Going nuclear Pakistan's leaders, military and civilians, now decided to get the ultimate deterrent, the nuclear bomb. In a project begun following a meeting in Multan in January 1972, President Bhutto authorised a programme to go full steam ahead. He had been an advocate of nuclearisation since the 1965 war. This is one area where Pakistan has been at par with India, if not slightly ahead. Though India conducted a nuclear test in 1974, Pakistan received assistance from China in terms of nuclear materials and weapons design in 1982. Further, in 1990, the Chinese tested a Pakistani device based on their designs at Lop Nor. Pakistan thus had a verified design which enabled its prompt response to the Indian tests in May 1998. Militancy Pakistan started 'facilitating' the Khalistani militancy at its very outset in the early 1980s by enabling militants to acquire arms and go through the border to carry out their terror campaign in Indian Punjab. In the late 1980s, things started bubbling up in Jammu and Kashmir, and Pakistan 'facilitated' the growth of the Jammu & Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) and its uprising against India at the end of 1989 and early 1990. Thousands of Kashmiris crossed the border and returned with some training and arms provided by Pakistan. When this militancy was defeated, Pakistan, having learnt a great deal from the Afghan jihad against the Soviet Union, took up the Kashmir 'cause'. It sent in Pakistani terrorists who took on the security forces and conducted occasional massacres of civilians on the Indian side of the Line of Control. In the 1990-2000 period, Pakistan had also sought to link the Khalistan and Kashmir movements but it did not work out. The Khalistani militancy was quickly rolled up by military and police action by 1993, the year in which Pakistan facilitated the multiple bombing attack in Bombay aimed at unsettling India's economic growth. Pakistan also stepped up its support for the Kashmiri militancy by sending in ever-larger number of Pakistani fighters into the fray. Following a near war after the attack on the Indian Parliament in 2001, Pakistan, under President Pervez Musharraf, took a step back. By now it was clear that Kashmir was not about to break away from India. But the terror campaign did not ease off. Terror Following the destruction of the Babri Masjid, Pakistan had sought to capitalise on the angst of Indian Muslims by recruiting them for a terror campaign in an arc from Gujarat to Uttar Pradesh. Operating from Nepal and Bangladesh, ISI operatives sent a stream of terrorists and Indian recruits to destabilise India. But this campaign, peaked in 2008 when the so-called Indian Mujahideen carried out a trail of bombings and were eventually wiped out. Their leaders have always operated from sanctuaries in Pakistan, as have some Khalistani terrorists. The Mumbai attack of 2008 was the last major attempt to use terrorism to destabilise India. Whether in the messaging or in their get up, an effort was made to pass off the terrorists as Indians. But the capture of Ajmal Kasab and the interception of their communications in the 60 hour rampage made it clear that the planners of the attack were in Pakistan. The Mumbai attack in a sense also marks the point at which the terror monster began to bite back in Pakistan. Led at various times by Baitullah Mehsud, Hakimullah Mehsud, Hafiz Gul Bahadur and others, they turned their militancy against the Pakistani state. This was described by the Pakistani journalist Ahmed Rashid in his book Descent into Chaos in 2008. This period also marked the growing infirmity of the Pakistani state. Benazir Bhutto's assassination and the downfall of the Musharraf Presidency began a process that was marked by political instability, polarisation and a delicate balance between the military and the civilian government, even as militancy rose across the country. Opposition The rise and fall of Imran Khan's PTI only underscored the decline. The 2024 elections revealed that Imran was the most popular force in the country and his arrest sparked widespread rioting and an anti-military upsurge. The 2024 elections were rigged against him and since then instability has grown with a rising toll of terrorist attacks. The dominance of the military cannot even provide a band aid to stem the bleeding. We must see the Pahalgam attack in this context. The exaggerated Pakistani claims of its 'accomplishments' in the fighting that followed Operation Sindoor and its elevation of Gen Asif Munir to the rank of Field Marshal are a desperate attempt to stabilise the situation. But the military, as the experience of Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan, Zia ul Haq and Pervez Musharraf shows, can hardly provide solutions. Economy Over time, Pakistan's claims to effective parity with India have worn thinner and thinner. Now, on the economic front, there is nothing to claim. On the military front, too, nuclear weapons have not proved to be the magic wand under which terrorism could flourish. India had earlier shown it can deal with all the terrorist attacks Pakistan can throw at it. And now it inclined to hit back as well. China remains as Pakistan's 'iron brother' but there are clear limits as to what the alliance can do. Pakistan's insecurities at the time of independence are understandable; it was a nation conjured out of the thin air by Mohammed Ali Jinnah. But today, though flailing, it is an established state whose security against its huge eastern neighbour is guaranteed by nuclear weapons and not by its over-weening Army. Now it needs to get beyond its national insecurities and learn to live as a normal nation with its neighbours. Both Pakistan and India need to realise that they are destined to be neighbours forever. A failing or failed Pakistan is not in India's interest, neither is a belligerent one. A country that is hoping to emerge as a major world power cannot be sharing a major portion of its border with a hostile power. As for Pakistan, it is geography and demography that make its effort at parity with India a chimerical quest. But there is nothing that says that it must not live in terms of sovereign equality. There is the matter of Kashmir, which has woven itself into the make-believe world of Pakistan. There was nothing in the Partition arrangements that said that the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir was to become part of Pakistan. Jinnah's acceptance of the (failed) accession of the overwhelmingly Hindu Junagadh indicated that he did not assume that the princely states were to be divided on religious grounds. Pakistan made a grab for Kashmir, but failed to capture the prized valley and has since woven the myth of it being the jugular of the Pakistani state. Peace Over the years, there have been tantalising glimpses of the possibility of a South Asia where India and Pakistan live in peace. The first was in 1953 when Prime Ministers Nehru and Mohammad Ali Bogra agreed to a plebiscite in Kashmir, but the issue foundered when the US appeared as a military ally of Pakistan. In 1972, India's hopes that its lenient handling of post-Bangladesh War Pakistan could lead to peace came to a nought as the Pakistan Army embarked on a long quest for revenge. In 2007-2008, through the so-called Four Point formula, the two countries worked out a way of handling Kashmir without changing borders, but the process collapsed along with the Musharraf presidency. Indeed, in 2004, at the SAARC summit, they had agreed on creating a South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA) by 2014, but all of it has come to nought. Good relations can only be built on realistic terms not on political fantasy. There are things India can do, and has tried to do, to aid this process – Gujral's composite dialogue of 1997, Vajpayee's Lahore trip in 1999, the Agra summit of 2001, Manmohan Singh's dialogue with Musharraf and forbearance (combined with using evidence to build a global case for Pakistan to act) after the Mumbai attack of 2008, and even Modi's outreach of 2014-15 – have been recent instances of the effort. Indeed, recall that the Modi government actually invited Pakistani officials to investigate the Pathankot airbase attack of 2016. Since we are neighbours who, as Vajpayee famously said you don't have the option to change, we seem destined to ride a relationship roller-coaster that is becoming steeper by the year. In recent years there has been little interest on either side to change the situation for the better. Like an open wound, the India-Pakistan situation is like a wound that can only fester. Manoj Joshi is a Distinguished Fellow, Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi Make a contribution to Independent Journalism Related News A Nation Is Known By the Enemy It Keeps 'Trade Offer Averted India-Pakistan War': Trump Administration Tells US Court Full Text | India-Turkey Relationship Before and After the Recent Conflict With Pakistan Five Questions That Indian MPs May Have to Face Abroad India May Push FATF to Revert Pakistan to 'Grey List' on Terror Funding Charges India, Pakistan and The Day After Pakistan's Slick US Strategy: It's Deja Vu All Over Again India's Outreach to Kabul Amid Simmering 'Pashtunistan' Demand Could Give It Leverage Over Pakistan Violent Pakistan Storms Trigger Floods, Landslides Killing At Least 10 View in Desktop Mode About Us Contact Us Support Us © Copyright. All Rights Reserved.
