The recent encounter with terrorists in Garol area of Anantnag led to martyrdom of senior Indian Army and J&K Police officers, including Colonel Manpreet Singh, who was commanding the 19 Rashtriya Rifles Battalion, Major Ashish Dhonchack of the 19 RR, and Deputy Superintendent of Police Humayun Muzamil Bhat, who was recently posted in the area. The entire nation is grieving the loss of senior officers and admiring them for their immense courage and their resolve to lead their men from the front.
While the leaders across the party lines in J&K have paid tribute to the martyrs and condemned the terror attack, JKNC President Dr. Farooq Abdullah took an all together different political line by raising a ‘mistimed demand’ for engaging in talks with Pakistan, which, in his opinion, can act as a tool to bring peace among nations and curb terrorism. Assuming Dr. Farooq Abdullah raised the demand in good faith, the demand he raised has historically been proven wrong several times.
Since the existence of Pakistan, it has never agreed on the path of dialogue and diplomacy. While the history of Pakistan denying the path of dialogue and diplomacy goes back to 1947, when despite having a standstill agreement with the Princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, it launched an invasion in the valley through tribals, or in the 1960s, where despite having successful diplomatic initiatives like the Indus-Water Treaty, it launched a full scale invasion in J&K in 1965, or in the 1980s, where despite having continued dialogue and diplomacy, it started fueling militancy in Punjab and Kashmir. For the sake this article, let us discuss the events since 1998, which are still fresh in our minds.
In 1998, the global power dynamics changed as major South Asian powers became nuclear. This raised fears among the global community, with foreign media claiming that the Kashmir issue would become a ‘nuclear flashpoint’. At this
time, India decided to rely on dialogue and diplomacy, and as a gesture of bilateral and global peace, Atal Bihari Vajpayee Ji went to Lahore on a Bus journey. In Lahore, Atal Bihari Vajpayee Ji reiterated India’s commitment to resolve all issues through dialogue and diplomacy. However, despite this, India was backstabbed by Pakistan, as the Pakistan Army occupied Indian posts in the Kargil, Drass, and Batalik sectors, leading to war between the nations.
Despite the Kargil war, India did not give up the path of dialogue with Pakistan, but this could not deter Pakistan sponsored terrorism In July 2001 President Pervez Musharraf was invited to the Agra summit, but in the same year, in October, three militants carried out an attack on the Jammu and Kashmir State Legislative Assembly complex in Srinagar, in the month of December Pakistani terrorists attacked Indian Parliament in New Delhi.
In 2004-05 the dialogues again gained pace with several rounds of Foreign secretaries meeting, but the same period was marred by several terrorist attacks, like the 2005 serial bombings in Delhi, the 2006 Varanasi bombings, and the 2006 Mumbai train serial blasts, among others. It is believed that diplomacy wise the period of 1999 to 2008 was most engaging, but it was also the same time when terror attacks in India were at an all time high, and the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks completely stalled the process of dialogue in that era. The Modi Government again took the initiative to resume the dialogue, with PM Modi paying a surprise visit to Lahore on 25th December 2015, but it was immediately paid back with a terror attack on Pathankot airbase just next week.
Such a bitter experience makes the Indian diplomatic circle believe that dialogues with Pakistan are futile. Firstly, it is difficult to know with whom to talk in Pakistan—is it the Government, the Army, or any other institution? Secondly, there is no guarantee that the terms agreed upon in dialogues will be acceptable to all elements in Pakistan. Thirdly, there is no guarantee that it will keep its word at all.
Also, their is a basic reason why Pakistan will not give up its policy on terror. Pakistan is weaker than India in all aspects, be it economy, military, or global stature.
Whenever it enters into any dialogue with India, it can negotiate from a weak position. But using terror as tool for diplomacy gives Pakistan an edge.
While, for reasons best known to him, Dr. Farooq Abdullah believes that dialogue with Pakistan can be a tool to curb the menace of terrorism, history shows otherwise. It is possible that some day section of the development and peace
oriented people of Pakistan will be able to form such a state with whom we can think of having fruitful dialogues and diplomacy, but for now, avoiding dialogue and isolating Pakistan on global front can be the best foreign policy tool for India to pressurize Pakistan to crub terror.
(Writer can be reached on Nishantsharma2011@gmail.com)
ADVERTISEMENT