TheEditPage
express
Nations have gone to extreme measures for lesser insults, but India is likely to carry the dialogue with Pakistan forward. Our patience is limitless, and our capacity to absorb shocks unparalleled
f reducing trust deficit was a principal objective of the Indo-Pak foreign ministerial talks then we couldnt have failed more completely. There was no need to employ a face reader; the faces themselves said it all. Pakistani foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi sat grumpily in his chair, twisting his jaw this way and that. The only thing missing was a cane in his hand; otherwise he seemed ready to thrash the pupil who had dared to fall out of line. Our external affairs minister kept looking meekly away from the meat eating feudal sitting by his side. Occasionally when he did turn in the direction of the ferocious Qureshi, it was almost in the manner of a perplexed pupil wondering as to where he had erred. Pakistan had outmanoeuvred, outsmarted and outwitted us completely. To put it plainly, Pakistan had pulverised us. Our spin masters may want us to believe differently after the event; and they have been busy pedalling face saving constructs. But their efforts convince none, because the entire nation could see for itself the crude and crass manner in which Qureshi subjected our minister to humiliation. Nations have gone to extreme measures for lesser insults, but we are likely to carry the dialogue process forward. Our patience is limitless, and our capacity to absorb shocks unparalleled. It would be hard to find another example in the world of diplomacy where a nation has walked into a trap with its eyes wide open; not just once but twice and in quick succession. The disaster of Sharm elSheikh had barely been forgotten when Qureshi decided to queer the pitch again. In the run up to the ministerial talks we were smugly patting ourselves on the back for having separated the issue of terrorism from the overall dialogue. Nuancing one from the other was touted as a major new diplomatic trick. Our trump card being the Headley confession which we were going to use like a talisman to squeeze timebound compliance out of Pakistan. But, how nave can we get? Did we really believe that we would get cooperation of any sort, or in any defined time frame, from Pakistan? Did we seriously expect them to damn the ISI? And where was the need to agree to a joint press conference? It defies belief that we didnt consider the possibility that Pakistanis might fend off our verbal sallies
M o n d a y, J u l y 2 6 , 2 0 1 0
TUHIN CHAKRABORTY
The only constituency that matters in Pakistan is its army. The only way we can satisfy them is by pressing the self-destruct button, because the disintegration of India is their aim. If in doubt then please read the oath that each officer is required to take at the time of passing out of Pakistans defence academies
unanimously passed a resolution about it in 1994, and our maps have always shown the entire state of J&K as a part of India. Why then are we squeamish about stating our case? It is this reluctance on our part to put forward our case that the Pakistanis take advantage of. This generosity of our spirit in letting them get away with the illegal occupation of a large part of J&K is not the only self-deception we indulge in. Very often when critics point to the excess of generosity on part of Indian politicians and negotiators in dealing with Pakistan, the Indian spin masters advance the hypothesis that Pakistanis have to appear to be tough in dealing with India because of pressures from their domestic constituency. This is strange logic. And this must be a unique case where a nation worries more about promoting a bitter rivals dubious interests rather than protecting itself, and its citizens, from the depredations of that rival. Are we to believe that by bending over backwards we will actually satisfy the domestic constituency of the Pakistani rulers? Do we seriously think that any effort, however generous on our part, would influence any constituency in Pakistan? The blunt answer is that we are deluding ourselves, because the only constituency that matters in Pakistan is its army. And the only way we can satisfy that constituency is by pressing the self-destruct button, because the disintegration of India is their
deftly and strike back venomously. Sadly, we walked into a trap to be ambushed and thrashed publicly. In all this we also accepted mutely, and in full public view, the bad mouthing by Qureshi of a fine Indian home secretary who was only saying what must be said and repeated even more forcefully. Did the foreign ministers meet achieve anything? Well, as far as we are concerned, must we even try to answer that? Pakistan, however, must be overjoyed. It had the pleasure of pulverising us, and of grinding our face in dust gleefully. More concretely, it has brought the focus back on issues it wanted to be given priority. If reports are to be believed, it has introduced a time element to issues such as Kashmir and perhaps even water. It has also brought in Kashmir, all over again, as a core issue. We may protest and deny that such a thing has happened, but the fact is that at the press conference Qureshi asserted boldly Pakistans, and indeed the wider worlds, right to ask questions about developments in Kashmir. Our response that Kashmir is democratic, etc, may only confuse the viewers. What is the need to apologetically explain our case on an issue that we regard as our internal affair? Why cant we assert forcefully that the only part of Kashmir which India wishes to talk about is that under the illegal occupation of Pakistan? Isnt that our constitutional obligation? Our Parliament had
aim. If a doubt in their favour still persists in our trusting minds then please read the oath that each officer is required to take at the time of passing out of Pakistans defence academies. We have also been taken regularly for a ride by the Pakistanis who claim that concessions by India would help stabilise Pakistan. The reality is that no sacrifice, and India has been giving concessions repeatedly, however great on part of India can help stabilise a Pakistan that has perfected the destabilisation of others into an art form. The earlier we realise this basic truth the better it will be for our own stability. A growing number of people in India are beginning to ask that if Pakistan has a domestic constituency which its rulers worry about; what about us, why dont we figure as a factor? The Indian domestic constituency is starting to stir; the press conference in Pakistan left it puzzled. It seeks fundamental answers to some questions. What will we do in case of another 26/11? What will happen when USA withdraws from Afghanistan, easing the way for Pakistans proxies to return? What will we do in case Pakistan decides to actively push into India those Taliban who are found surplus to work in an Afghanistan run by them? How far can we get with appeasement as policy? Do we have an effective plan B? We are living in a tough world, where terrorism is rewriting many rules of state conduct. In this rough new construct only the tough get results; as Sri Lanka has shown recently and as Pakistan is demonstrating repeatedly. In this fundamentally changed space the meek are unlikely to inherit the earth
Mike Mullen:
Chairman of the US joint chiefs of the staff
I worry a great deal about a repeat attack (of 26/11) or something like that. One of the things that struck me then, and is still of great concern, was how 10 terrorists could drive two nuclear-armed nations closer to conflict... Shah is innocent.... he will fight a legal battle. During the 2007 Assembly elections, the Congress had projected Sohrabuddin as a national hero. But the party was defeated very badly in the elections. The case (against Shah) is an attempt to take revenge by the Congress. Congress needs to learn that the more they try to scratch Narendra Modi, it will boomerang on them.
Narendra Modi:
Gujarat chief minister, on Amit Shah
Clueless Rahul
Sir, Apropos Aditya Sinhas Rahul vs NaMo in Bihar (TNIE, July 24), there is a quip: Dont be misled if a child sits quiet; he might be planning another mischief . However, Rahuls acting the Sphinx implies the opposite. He is plain clueless and right now has no plans. To credit a kid still wet behind the ears with the genius to solve political problems of the type even his great-grandfather could not effectively tackle is to indulge in daydreams. C Divakaran, Thiruvanathapuram
Undue reactions
Sir, This refers to V Sudarshans Krishna & Gopi: a new twist (TNIE, July 23). To brand Gopal Krishna Pillais remarks as something like albatross or millstone is preposterous. It is more so when one looks it in the context of the fusillade by Hillary Clinton right under the nose of the Pakistani authorities while she was in Pakistan alluding that Pakistan was still home to Osama bin Laden. The startling revelation of a murky and macabre anecdote including some conversations involving the families of Headley and Hafiz Saeed regarding 26/11 carnage clearly exposes the conspiracy and connivance aspects that went across terrorist dens. Sudarshans
Ignore Pakistan
Sir, I think India always over-engages itself with issues relating to Pakistan. The amount of interest and the number of attempts and steps taken to better its relationship with Pakistan have only been futile. Whereas half of these attempts if taken to resolve issues like Naxalism would have been fruitful. Today Naxalism is a great hurdle to Indias progress. India should pay equal attention to internal and external issues. Hara Mohan, e-mail
Please send your letters to: letterschennai@expressbuzz.com