The search for a tailwind

Vivek Katju
Ex-secretary, ministry of external affairs

India-Pakistan relations are in the doldrums. There are no tailwinds to propel them, howsoever briefly, in a positive direction; the Kartarpur Sahib corridor ‘fizz’ had the durability of a Navjot Sidhu quip in the larger context of bilateral ties. There is a danger of headwinds arising out of heightened tensions and intense exchanges of fire along the Line of Control (LoC) and the international border (IB) in Jammu and Kashmir but neither government would like these winds to gather momentum in the Lok Sabha election season. The Indian media, too, has presently no great appetite for India-Pakistan issues as political matters offer far more lucrative prospects for grabbing eyeballs, though the Kulbhushan Jadhav case hearing at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on February 18-21 may be an exception.

These points made, the present stage of preparations for the Kartarpur Sahib corridor, the situation along the LoC and the IB in J&K and upcoming Kulbhushan Jadhav hearing merit serious attention. So do the verbal volleys hurled by Prime Minister Imran Khan against India and his Indian counterpart as does the sparring between the two foreign ministries on Afghanistan and Pakistan’s Supreme Court’s order on Gilgit-Baltistan.

Both governments will have to put in place the physical infrastructure to enable Indian pilgrims to visit Kartarpur Sahib. A Pakistani official told an Indian newspaper recently that 35 per cent of the work has been done. The first phase, expected to be completed by September, would enable the pilgrimage to commence. Union Minister for Urban Development Hardeep Singh Puri assured the media recently that the main road to the international border and the specific corridor will be completed in a ‘time-bound manner’. There is little doubt that neither government would like to give the other a handle for propaganda on account of incomplete physical works. Hence, infrastructure of some kind will come up.

The more problematic aspect would relate to working out the modalities of the pilgrimage. Indian officials would have to ensure that Pakistan does not misuse the pilgrimage for damaging India’s security and promoting anti-India sentiment, especially by giving free play to Khalistani propaganda. Reports indicate that Pakistan has already given a draft agreement to India, limiting the number of daily pilgrims to 500 in groups of at least 15. The pilgrims would need passports but no visas for India would have to give advance lists of names for Pakistani vetting. Puri has correctly said these issues need to be discussed between the two sides, though according to a section of the media, PM Modi indicated that Indian pilgrims would be able to go to Kartarpur Sahib without visas. In this season of elections, the PM could also not resist implicitly blaming the Congress for allowing Kartarpur for going to Pakistan in 1947, though Puri pointed a finger at an ‘insensitive cartographer’.

India has blamed Pakistan for 2,936 ceasefire violations in 2018, the most since 2003 when both countries agreed to desist from such transgressions. On this New Year’s Day, Pakistan lodged a formal protest against the ‘ruthless’ firing by Indian security forces which killed a woman. Pakistan also claimed ‘ceasefire violations by India are a threat to regional peace and security and may lead to a strategic miscalculation’. India formally protested against Pakistani firing that led to the death of an Indian woman. It also said, ‘We protest Pakistan’s continued support to cross-border terrorist infiltration into India, including supporting cover fire provided by the Pakistani forces.’ Both countries’ statements are in keeping with their traditional positions on the issue.

During the first three weeks of this year, sniper and general firing as well as IEDs have caused fatalities, including those of a BSF Assistant Commandant and an Army Major, besides several civilian deaths. India’s responses have led to Pakistani deaths too. However, the situation, while regrettable, is not alarming and both countries will not allow it to go out of hand, though spikes may take place.

The Jadhav case hearing will be focused on the applicability to the Vienna Convention’s provision of consular access to him in the context of Pakistani charges (clearly false) of espionage and terrorism against him. Pakistan will press the precedence of the bilateral consular agreement over the convention. The case will give India and Pakistani media an occasion to trade charges on terrorism and political actors in both countries will get involved in statements and counter-statements. Pakistan has desisted from publicly giving out the names of the 13 Indians it wants to interrogate in connection with this entire concoction. It is believed that National Security Adviser Ajit Doval and senior R&AW officers figure on the Pakistani list. Will Pakistan show prudence and avoid making the list public? This will be a test of its intentions.

Imran Khan’s invective against the BJP and his uncalled-for allusions against Modi have not been in consonance with his proclaimed desire for a serious dialogue to improve ties. He told a US newspaper that the BJP has ‘an anti-Muslim and anti-Pakistan’ approach. He was critical of India’s treatment of its minorities. He also said the Indian elections prevented a dialogue. Modi has done well to reiterate that the resumption of the full dialogue process depends on Pakistan giving up terror.

In a far-reaching order, the Pakistan Supreme Court upheld that Gilgit-Baltistan can be given the status of a provisional province of Pakistan through a Presidential order and in so doing, Pakistan will not be in violation of UN resolutions. In reality this seeks to permanently change the area’s status. India has correctly rejected the move and recalled that it is Indian territory in Pakistan’s continued illegal occupation. The Pakistani step requires detailed attention.