- Repairing the damage has been achieved, but more has to be done
By: Abdullah Shahid
In an individual’s lifetime, a number of disputes take shape that arise from either one conflict or from a combination of multiple conflicts. The very psychological nature of a dispute calls for mediation, unless one decides to triumph over the other. When an individual expresses his or her emotions during a dispute, his or her rationality gets clouded which has the potential to escalate the dispute. Disputes either get solved or they become prolonged– a factor heavily determined by the personalities involved.
Just like individuals, nations have always been at odds with one another, most notably on territory. Bullets have been the ideal choice for solving such territorial disputes but as the economies of the world have globalized, diplomacy has largely replaced bullets. Through diplomacy, military might, economic strength or mediation, disputes have been solved between different countries.
The Kashmir dispute is another one of the global issues that seems to be out of this world, as this conflict has remained immune to the conventional “dispute-solving” methodologies. After the incumbent BJP won re-election in India, it immediately revoked Kashmir’s special status that had given it some form of legal legitimacy, but to India’s dismay the issue was accidentally internationalized.
Serving as a gateway to Central Asia, Kashmir holds a significant strategic position as it also possesses the tributaries of the River Jhelum. However, this was the second time in the year 2019 that Kashmir dominated the headlines. Earlier on, Kashmir had been in the headlines of every newspaper when India carried out air strikes in Balakot, to which Pakistan retaliated the next day by downing two Indian fighter planes and capturing one pilot.
To achieve diplomatic autarky, Pakistan will have to stabilise its economy if it wishes to project its strength over India. Achieving financial independence from the IMF and escaping FATF’s crosshairs must be Pakistan’s utmost priority as autarky in foreign policy will be impossible if it continues to rely on “allies” like Saudi Arabia which will hold financial leverage over Pakistan
The aftermath of Pulwama almost led two nuclear-armed countries to the brink of war. It was also a moment of glory for Pakistan, as major claims made by India after the Balakot strikes had been globally dismissed. India claimed that 300-350 terrorists had been neutralized, whereas the casualty had been 300-350 trees. Another major claim made by India was the downing of a Pakistani F-16, for which India has no concrete evidence to this day. The latter Indian claim was dismissed by Lara Seligman, a staff writer for Foreign Policy magazine, who revealed that the US count of Pakistan’s F-16 fleet shows that no plane had been downed, as claimed by India.
Prior to Balakot, Pakistan’s global repute was at its lowest as it struggled with militancy at home and isolation from abroad. In regard to terrorist attacks, be it Mumbai, Uri or Pathankot, Pakistan had vehemently denied its involvement, but it was of no use as Pakistan’s government (during 2008) was ill-equipped in foreign policy matters.
Pakistan’s foreign policy from 2008-2017 was entirely superficial as the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) had booted Shah Mahmood Qureshi for not being a “yes man” and had appointed a loyalist in his place. Even after the fiasco, the next government, of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), had neglected The Foreign Ministry which remained vacant till 2017. Pakistan’s neighbours (except China) accused it of harbouring terrorists and aiding cross-border terrorist activities, alongside playing a double game of victim as well as perpetrator.
Even on matters pertaining to Kashmir, the Parliamentary Special Committee on Kashmir remained defunct as the previous governments had appointed an individual who mismanaged the committee funds.
Though it has mismanaged many issues at home, the PTI coalition government under Prime Minister Imran Khan has made multiple attempts to seize the narrative in Pakistan’s favour. Right after his election victory, Khan made multiple overtures to India for reaching a concrete peace plan not only over Kashmir, but over issues that would ensure peace and security for the entire Subcontinent. The Indian Foreign Office responded by cancelling the already scheduled meeting with Pakistan at the UN.
Prime Minister Khan made further offers for peace but to no avail, thus choosing to wait and then make similar offers after the Indian general elections. Even after Pulwama, Prime Minister Khan made an offer to share evidence, nut India not only refused but straight up resorted to blatant accusations. The aftermath of the Balakot air strikes and Kashmir’s special status revocation has been a battle of perception, in which Pakistan seems to have an edge as it internationalized BJP’s fascist intentions and dismissed the Indian claims of Balakot.
However, it has not been an easy sailing for Pakistan as no nation came to its aid after India had abrogated Kashmir’s special status. Even countries that Pakistan considers to be its top allies had opted a neutral stance as they elected to prioritise monetary benefits over human rights. Turkey and Malaysia were two of the few nations that publicly berated India for its actions in Kashmir, unfortunately Pakistan could not return the favour as it had succumbed to Saudi pressure and was forced to cancel its presence at 0December’s Kuala Lumpur Summit.
The post-Balakot foreign policy might have been more adverse had Pakistan’s third consecutive civilian government chosen to ignore the Foreign Ministry like its predecessor governments, which either filled it with loyalists or left it vacant.
To achieve diplomatic autarky, Pakistan will have to stabilise its economy if it wishes to project its strength over India. Achieving financial independence from the IMF and escaping FATF’s crosshairs must be Pakistan’s utmost priority as autarky in foreign policy will be impossible if it continues to rely on “allies” like Saudi Arabia which will hold financial leverage over Pakistan.
