In this Idea Exchange, Pakistan?s High Commissioner to India Salman Bashir speaks about the recent flare-up at the LoC, need for strengthening mechanisms of dialogue and the internal situation in Pakistan. The session was moderated by Pranab Dhal Samanta of The Indian Express
Pranab Dhal Samanta: Please describe the diplomatic developments since your foreign minister offered talks to the Indian government in light of the recent LoC incidents?
We in Pakistan?the government, the people?sincerely desire good, friendly, neighbourly relations with our close neighbour, India. I believe that sentiment is reciprocated by India and both countries have, at the highest levels, agreed to work to make this happen, and we have succeeded to a very large extent. Of course, recent weeks have seen a certain anxiety. What are the lessons we learnt from this? The first lesson I learnt was that we may need to have a better framework or a better standard operating procedure to deal with issues which could inflame passions and become unmanageable. In times of difficulty, it?s important that we gather the right lessons on how to handle certain contingencies or exigencies. We ought to do this using the mechanisms that exist between Pakistan and India. We are fortunate to have placed in the past so many decades the framework that ought to be used. Things communicated through mutual channels could lead to quicker and better resolution or to a better understanding of each other instead of communicating through the media waves. Both the governments are well in control of the situation. There have been good contacts at the military level, especially the recent conversations between the two director generals of military operations which has resulted in a reaffirmation of restraint and respect for the ceasefire on the line of control. Two, at the diplomatic level, we have been in contact and I must acknowledge with a great degree of appreciation, the exceptionally important role played by the external affairs minister, Mr Salman Khurshid. I think his remarks have been particularly helpful in diffusing the situation in the public domain. A lot needs to be transacted at the diplomatic level. We have always felt that the foreign ministries clearly have the mandate and they should steer the course of relations. It is very important, irrespective of any event or series of events, that the direction is maintained and the direction is positive. I think there is enough wisdom, enough capability on both sides, therefore, to handle this particular situation on the LoC with the care and attention it deserves. Now what are the essentials? From the Pakistani perspective, the requirement is to de-escalate. Anything that contributes to a de-escalation is welcome and this has to be done at all levels. Two, dialogue and there we have the offer from Pakistan to reach out and to get into conversations even if required at the level of the foreign ministers to deal with all the concerns. That process has to go forward. We need to create the right atmosphere to move forward and that means creating an atmosphere of positivity. The third element is my appeal to everybody to allow such a conducive atmosphere to take shape. It is very important that both Pakistan and India pursue the future course of our relations in every aspect. Matters of concern need to be addressed. Where our interests converge, and there are many areas where our interests converge, we ought to proceed with confidence. Where there are issues, we need to demonstrate restraint. We must believe in the inherent civilisational values, the wisdom that we can take care of a lot of issues by demonstrating a lot of maturity and responsibility. So de-escalation, dialogue, maturity, responsibility, creating a positive atmosphere is what is required.
Coomi Kapoor: Considering that the hostilities between India and Pakistan flare up so instantaneously and people speak in so many different voices, has there ever been an attempt to create a hotline between the Indian Prime Minister and the President of Pakistan, so there can be direct talks?
I am not aware of any proposal of a hotline at the summit level. Last month, when the experts met here in New Delhi on conventional CBMs, there was some discussion on how to make the foreign office-to-foreign office hotline more assured and more workable in the technical sense. Some thought has been given by both sides to make that happen. In any case, picking up the telephone and speaking to counterparts is not very difficult these days.
Muzamil Jaleel: Soon after this incident, Pakistan talked of the UN looking into it-we have the UNMOG (United Nations Military Observers Group) on both sides. Recently, India?s representative at the UN spoke about withdrawing UNMOG. What does Pakistan think about UNMOG? And is there any report by UNMOG on what happened at the LoC?
I know that the incident of January 6, as well as previous violations of the ceasefire along the LoC have been regularly reported by Pakistan to the UNMOG. This is one of the oldest peace-keeping missions of the UN and as far as the reference made by Pakistan to UNMOGIP (United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan) is concerned, in the context of what was alleged regarding Pakistan, we had said that if required, this matter could have been investigated by the UNMOGIP. So yes, there was a formal statement in that respect. UNMOGIP is a UN Security Council-mandated peace-keeping set-up. We feel that for almost six decades, it has played an important role and like any other peace-keeping mission, it provides an avenue, if required at times, to address concerns which cannot be resolved through India-Pakistan mechanisms. The recent flare-up of tensions and incidents only underscores the need to have whatever is required to reinforce mechanisms which contribute to lowering of tensions and the prevention of ceasefire violations.
Manu Pubby: The flare-up at the LoC is not the first such incident. They have happened frequently in the last few years. So why have tensions risen so fast and so dramatically in this instance?
Very personally speaking, I can say that I was very saddened, also shocked and surprised. I will continue to refuse to believe in a personal sense that the relations between our two countries are so fragile that one thing or another could bring everything to a standstill. This sense of fragility warrants introspection at all levels on both sides.We cannot allow ourselves to succumb to everything. I think as important countries and people with a lot of history and culture, Pakistan and India have been able to demonstrate a great degree of understanding. I have been witness, first hand, to meetings of India and Pakistan and their conversations were always constructive and positive. So is the affinity at the level of the people of the two countries. We need to reason out why we allow certain things to take a grip of us, excluding everything else.
NP Singh: Do you subscribe to the view that both the countries have allowed their media to set the agenda rather than their foreign offices?
I would rather not comment on the role of the media, but what you said is quite self-evident. Unfortunately, this happens in today?s age everywhere?it?s the media that sets the agenda anywhere. Media plays a very important role and, of course, that is a good thing because every day you are engaged with so many issues and governments are obliged to take note of these issues. But if you have power, you must have responsibility. In an academic sense, that is a question that we all need to ponder in the context of our times?the need for some sort of code of ethics or values. Once the media attributes something to you or me, then you are helpless even if you may have been quoted out of context. And if that is allowed, it could be very, very damaging.
YP Rajesh: Can you give us a sense of the internal situation in Pakistan because we read a lot about the country being in turmoil on several fronts and that affects your relations with your neighbours?
Pakistan?s society is like any other society. The impact of technology and information is evident and it?s changing societies and attitudes, whether it is families or communities. That is true also of governments and institutions. What we call the Arab Spring, in a sense we have had our Arab Spring five-six years ago. Since then, and before that time, our society is on fast-forward. Civil society is vibrant, the media is absolutely free, the state machinery?be it the judiciary, the executive or the legislature?they are all finding their space. The public discourse is very self-centred. Today?s media in Pakistan is not focussed on external issues: the episodes of the past few days between our nations hardly got any coverage in the Pakistani media, they were so self-absorbed on the national issues. The substance of public attention and debate is more inward in Pakistan today. We are now almost in an election mode with a broad spectrum of political parties. What is most important to understand is that the results of the elections would not affect policy, especially the policy vis-?-vis our neighbours. Today, if you talk to any political party in Pakistan?the mainstream, emerging or regional?there is a general consensus that we have to improve our relations with all our neighbours, Afghanistan in particular, because it has been in a difficult situation, and especially India.
Anubhuti Vishnoi: Will Pakistan specifically probe the beheading of an Indian soldier that has led to the flare-up? Also, civil rights groups often talk about the hate material in school textbooks in Pakistan. Is that an issue of concern?
What are people the world over aspiring for? They are aspiring for a better tomorrow, and that would mean, fundamentally, values. A value-based society is all that matters. So, anything that is negative in that context, like intolerance, hate, is distasteful and should not be there. It is very important to place the Pakistan-India relationship in a broader context. Because if you continue to visualise each other in the old mould, then unfortunately we will never be able to extricate ourselves. It?s a question of elevating ourselves. There is no doubt that we are to proceed on values that are rightly ours and coming from our respective past cultures. There is introspection now in Pakistan, and we are looking at all these things?the question of minorities, the question of rights of women, things that have been legislated by our national assembly. I think the present government of Pakistan can rightly take credit for this because they are the ones who have brought about these reforms. All of this is part of the process that is reshaping Pakistan today.
On the beheading, the way forward is that we get it off the cover pages and let the people who are relevant in the governments deal with it. That?s what the foreign ministers had proposed. Let?s discuss these concerns and matters with a view to enforce the ceasefire. And I agree with minister Salman Khurshid saying that there are certain things that pertain to the domain of the militaries and they are qualified to handle these things at their level.
Ranjeeta Ojha (EXIMS): Why do Pakistani leaders speak to separatist leaders from Kashmir instead of talking to the elected government there or to the Indian government?
Our stand is very clear. This should be resolved and in a manner that meets the aspirations of the Kashmiri people. I would not like to go in to the question of separatists or elected governments. There have been several rounds of talks at the foreign-secretary level on Jammu & Kashmir, and we think that it is important for that process to continue. It is Pakistan?s stated position: let Kashmiris be associated with the process. The rest is a question of deeds, and I think as we go along, there is a lot that has happened in the past, the ceasefire CBM, the travel-trade things.
Nayanika Chakraborty: You said civil society is progressing and Pakistan is on a fast-forward mode, but the whole effort at progression is being thwarted by militant outfits. A young girl was shot in the head and more recently, polio workers were shot and killed. How can the country progress until the militant outfits are dealt with?
I think the government and the nation have been dealing with the outfits that indulge in terror. Those who are responsible for the attempted assassination of Malala Yousafzai, those who prevent polio vaccinations, these are elements we are very determined to deal with. I think in India there is some realisation of what Pakistan has done and is doing in this regard. I don?t think it is a rhetorical point because I can give you the casualty figures in terms of the civilians killed, the number of suicide attacks, the number of atrocities. Malala Yousafzai is seen as an icon for women?s education in Pakistan. So I think instead of trying to be judgmental about any society or community, we ought to see where people are going, and what efforts they are making and I assure you that the intention is to put all this behind us.
Akriti Pandey (student, DPS RK Puram): For the first time, perhaps, Pakistan?s elected government will complete a full term in office. Is this a reaffirmation of democracy? What explains it?
I can say that democracy is the norm, it is the way forward. Democracy, for India and for Pakistan, has been a reality. I think there is very deep realisation in Pakistan that democracy must function, must consolidate, must deliver.
Transcribed by Apurva and Geeta Gupta
