Nawaz Sharif Manmohan Singh
Prime Minister-elect of Pakistan Prime Minister of IndiaNew Delhi
15 May 2013
M
|
anmohan Singh, already the third longest serving prime
minister in India’s history, is hunting for a legacy ahead of the next
elections scheduled in 2014. A new government has just been elected in Pakistan
in what is the first ever transition from one civilian government to another in
that country. Prime Minister-elect Nawaz Sharif has identified rescuing the
economy as his number one priority. He has also shared his vision of peace and
prosperity with India. We got a glimpse of his vision in his party’s, the
Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz)’s, election manifesto, which is entitled,
“Strong economy – Strong Pakistan”. It reads: “The country could be a bridge
between energy rich Central Asia and Iran on one side and energy deficit
countries like China and India on the other. Pakistan’s coastal belt
facilitates access to warm waters and oil rich Gulf, as well as international
oil supply lines passing through the Strait of Harmuz (sic). Pakistan can also
develop a flourishing transit economy because it provides the shortest land
routes from Western China to the Arabian Sea, through the Gwadar Port, while
linking India with Afghanistan and CAR and providing land route from Iran to
India and access to the Central Asian Republics to the Arabian Sea and India
for oil/gas pipelines.” Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has already spoken to Mr
Sharif, congratulated him on his election victory and invited him to visit
India. Mr Sharif, who expressed his desire to visit India in an interview to
Barkha Dutt of NDTV, followed it up by saying that he would be happy if
Manmohan Singh visits Pakistan for his inauguration. The Indian Ministry of
External Affairs (MEA) kept up the conversation by suggesting that there is no
specific proposal of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh visiting Pakistan as no
formal invite has been received The DNA newspaper cited government “sources” as
indicating that the Prime Minister could travel to Pakistan at a later date.
The attendant euphoria in a section of the media and the spinmeisters in the
Congress party and the government, all seem to make a point that while Manmohan
Singh may have said in January this year after the beheading of an Indian
soldier that “there cannot be business as usual” with Pakistan, Nawaz Sharif is
a man India can do business with.
A sense of déjà vu cannot be helped here; it is only to be
expected in any consideration of the history of India-Pakistan relations.
The year was 2008. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was about
to complete four years in office when Pakistan went to the polls. Thirty-six
days after the elections, and the evening after inauguration, Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh telephoned Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani and greeted him on his assumption of
office of the Prime Minister of Pakistan. By May 20, Pranab Mukherjee had
landed in Islamabad for foreign minister-level talks with Makhdoom Shah Mehmood
Qureshi , who was to declare the following day at a joint news conference that “our
government is ready for grand reconciliation for the resolution of longstanding
issues that need to be resolved peacefully through dialogue and in a manner
that is dignified and commensurate with the self-respect of the involved
parties”. Qureshi asserted for good measure that “it has been decided that this
visit (of the Indian Prime Minister) will take place this year,” adding that “No,
we cannot say it will happen this month. Both sides want that before the visit,
there should be sufficient progress, for which the chances are very bright.”
The
then Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) chairman Asif Ali Zardari revealed his mind on
his vision for relations with India in an interview to the Press Trust of India
(PTI). Asked if he saw economics as being the driving force in bilateral
relations, Mr Zardari told PTI's Pakistan correspondent: “Yes, I can’t afford
180 million people with the poverty level today, but I have got water, millions
of acres of virgin lands ... I can feed India and the world. On the border with
India, I have got gas and oil. I can convert all that into product and market
it to myself and to India. Then, I have a 1,100-mile coastline, which is
virgin.” Mr Zardari doesn't stop at that. He said Pakistan could act as a “force
multiplier” for India’s economy through increased cooperation in key sectors
like energy. Mr Zardari went on to suggest: “You can’t expand Kolkata port.
With today’s technology, I can make 20 deep sea ports and an economic zone in Gwadar.
I can have high speed cargo trains, have a 17-18 hour turnaround period from
your railway lines and the products will be available to you. You cannot put up
gas containers on Mumbai beach, but I can put up (on the Pakistani coastline)
any number of gas containers (and acquire gas from) all sorts of friendly Muslim
countries where I, the PPP and the Government of Pakistan have influence. And we
dovetail it, we create economic zones owned by the people.” Mr Zardari also said
in the interview that his “model for India-Pakistan relations” was to create
economic zones along the India - Pakistan border, use Pakistan’s coal reserves
in Thar to generate power that could be exported to India and even acquire gas
from “friendly Muslim countries” that could be supplied to India. (Here it is
interesting to note the statement issued after the foreign minister-level talks
took care to state India and Pakistan “reiterated their commitment to the
Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project and had a useful exchange of views in
this regard.”)
T
|
he current discourse on India and Pakistan reminds me of the
late K Subrahmanyam. I remember talking to him in 2008, when a prime
ministerial visit to Pakistan was a topic of discussion and debate within the
government and without. Mr Subrahmanyam argued that a visit by the Prime
Minister will strengthen the hands of the civilian government in Pakistan. “It
has much more to do with lending legitimacy and showing support to the new
government of Pakistan,” he said. However, he qualified it by noting that Pakistan
has not stabilised yet and visiting that country now might not allow India to
make full use of it. He urged patience, when I asked him about the likely
outcomes or deliverables from such a visit. “Where we must move forward
quickly, like the India-US nuclear deal, we don’t act fast. Where we have to be
patient, we show great hurry.” Unfortunately for Mr Subrahmanyam and Indians
like him, what unfolded in Mumbai on 26 November 2008 only served to test India’s
patience.
With Nawaz Sharif there is more historical baggage: Kargil,
1999; and Mumbai, 1993. Both took place in his two previous stints as Prime
Minister. Perhaps anticipating a sense of caution in India at Nawaz Sharif’s electoral
victory, a retired Pakistani general Talat Masood has told Hindustan Times that
“Nawaz Sharif is very serious about better relations with India. (President
Asif Ali) Zardari was thwarted by the establishment. Being a Punjabi and a
mandate from Punjab, Sharif can do much more.” Similar sentiments are shared by
a section of Pakistan watchers in India. However, what New Delhi needs to
appreciate is that doing a Sheikh Hasina on Nawaz Sharif can be
counter-productive: First feting him and later leaving him in the lurch,
similar to the manner in which India treated Sheikh Hasina of Bangladesh, could
give rise to unintended consequences. Therefore, India would do well to do its
homework properly. As Lt Gen Asad Durrani (Retd), a former chief of Inter
Services Intelligence (ISI), Pakistan’s intelligence agency, told me a few
years ago: “Making peace means compromises but India does not want to pay the
price. India believes Pakistan is suffering today and therefore India can wait and
not make gestures. What needs to be understood is that peace is give and take and
sometimes it involves changes in position.”
I
|
t can be reasonably argued that the Pakistani military will continue
to call the shots insofar as Afghanistan is concerned and/or that Nawaz Sharif will
allow the Generals to handle the Afghanistan affairs in the run-up to the withdrawal
of American combat troops by 2014-end. However, what cannot be said with any
degree of certainty is how he would ensure, as per his party’s manifesto:
i)
That the formulation and determination of foreign
policy remains the sole preserve of its elected representatives, while the
implementation and execution shall be assigned to relevant departments and
agencies by the Federal Cabinet”;
ii)
that “for
purposes of regular and systematic coordination and consideration of all
matters related to national security, a Cabinet Committee on Defence and National
Security, to be headed by the Prime Minister and assisted by a Permanent
Secretariat, will be established to maintain democratic oversight of all
aspects of foreign, defence and national security policies”;
iii)
that “all institutions, whether civil or
military, including those dealing with security and/or intelligence matters, act
in accordance with the law, and under the instructions and directives of the
Federal Cabinet”; and
iv)
“democratic and parliamentary oversight on
intelligence services”.
And then there are a host of other issues that would have a
bearing on domestic politics in Pakistan, such as:
a)
Relations between the PML(N) and the PPP;
b)
Nawaz’s choice for President of Pakistan (presidential
elections have to be held by September);
c)
Economy;
d)
Energy;
e)
Extremism and safety of minorities;
f)
Employment;
and
g)
Export of terror to India.
Pakistan-watchers in India will have little difficulty in conceding
that Nawaz Sharif is riding a tiger what with so many domestic challenges confronting
him, which will demand his attention for some time to come. Prudence dictates
that India will be ready when Pakistan is ready; until then he can do with India’s
benefit of doubt and time.
So, will Gah get lucky or Jatti Umra?
1 comment:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/SOU-02-170513.html
My article as published by Asia Times Online on 17 May 2013:
"Patience needed for Sharif's India goals"
Post a Comment