Following up on my earlier post about what is happening behind the scenes in the fraught relationship between India and Pakistan, it’s worth keeping track of this report that Islamabad is considering appointing former foreign secretary Riaz Mohammad Khan to handle the informal dialogue with New Delhi known as “backchannel diplomacy”.
As discussed in this story there has been much talk about trying to get the backchannel diplomacy between India and Pakistan up and running again, both to reduce India-Pakistan rivalry in Afghanistan and to prevent an escalation of tensions between the two countries themselves. So any forward movement on the backchannel diplomacy, if confirmed, would be important.
To recap (and with apologies to those who already know this), India and Pakistan have many different ways of engaging with each other. They have a formal peace process known as the composite dialogue, started in 2004 and broken off by India after last November’s attack on Mumbai. India has said it will not resume the composite dialogue until Pakistan takes more action against those accused of involvement in Mumbai.
Then there are Track II talks, in which politicians, journalists, administrators and others on both sides of the border meet in a private capacity to try to promote understanding between India and Pakistan.
Senior politicians also have a habit of holding bilateral meetings on the fringes of international conferences, as happened when Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh met President Zardari in Russia in June and Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani in Egypt in July. The foreign secretaries, or top diplomats, of both countries are also expected to meet on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly this month, ahead of a meeting between the foreign ministers.
But of all the different ways that India and Pakistan have found to engage with each other, the backchannel diplomacy carried out away from the glare of the media has arguably been the most successful. In 2003, the two countries agreed a ceasefire on the Line of Control dividing disputed Kashmir, and extended it to Siachen, where the two countries had fought a high-altitude war since 1984.
In 2007, Satinder Lambah, a special envoy to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, and Tariq Aziz, envoy to then president Pervez Musharraf, etched out a set of principles meant to allow them to work towards a resolution of the Kashmir dispute (Praveen Swami at The Hindu gives the details here.)
I’m told there is no evidence the deal would ever have worked - many crucial details had yet to be negotiated. And since the backchannel talks were held in secret, it has always been unclear whether either country could win over domestic constituencies which might resist or sabotage any peace deal. But the backchannel diplomacy, and the intellectual space it opened up even to consider an agreement on Kashmir, functioned as an important ”shock absorber” between two nuclear-armed countries which have already fought three full-scale wars since independence in 1947.
The tentative “roadmap” agreement fell apart as Musharraf’s own political fortunes deteriorated, and the backchannel talks have yet to find their feet again in any kind of structured format.
The signs are that many other informal discussions are going on. As discussed here, the Pakistan Army has moved a significant number of troops away from its eastern border with India to fight the Pakistani Taliban on its western border with Afghanistan. The head of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) broached what is effectively Indian territory by attending an iftar at the Indian High Commision in Islamabad. And the Indian government is trying to work out how to engage the Hurriyat, the main political separatist group in Kashmir, and that is something it can only do with Pakistani acquiescence.
But these informal contacts have lacked the structure of the backchannel diplomacy, whose main aim was to work out a way towards peace.
Until this week, it was unclear who would handle the backchannel diplomacy on the Pakistan side to replace Tariq Aziz, who was an appointee of Musharraf. On India’s side, Satinder Lambah could remain as a special envoy to the prime minister.
So the suggestion that Riaz Mohammad Khan might be appointed to fill that role for Pakistan would be a major step forward.
That said, there are plenty of spoilers in both countries who don’t believe in the peace process. So if India and Pakistan find a way back into their secret backchannel diplomacy, we might never know.
(Reuters file photos: A child at the funeral of Benazir Bhutto; Prime Minister Singh and President Zardari in Yekaterinburg; the gates closing on the india-Pakistan border; and a soldier at base camp in Siachen)
Trackback
54 comments so far
Previous | 3 | 2 | 1 | Next
[...] mention that progress could potentially reduce rivalry between the two countries in Afghanistan, [see Myra MacDonald's Reuters blog: Now or Never? for more]. Such an approach has been embraced by the current Pakistani administration, who advocate for [...]
- Posted by Wading in the Back-channels of Diplomacy « CHUP! – Changing Up PakistanDara, you said:
“There is much that I admire about the American system, yet as far as their foreign policy is concerned it is an unmitigated disaster. The main trouble with it, according to me, is that instead of basing their policy on the fact that foreign policy must look after US interests they also feel that the foreign policies of other countries should also look after US interests. They will eventually end up telling the two countries just what to do, how to do it and how to react to each others concerns instead of being being facilitators.
- Posted by Dara ”
–>The U.S. is not perfect, as far as it foreign policy goes. Most U.S. wars have been started by the Right Wing Neocon machine, with their own agenda and without the consent of the American people.(ie, Bush, Dick and Colon, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Pearl).
But one thing that nobody here can deny, is that without democracy and its institutions, humanity would not be where it its today, technologically speaking. All human advancements in every field whether it be medicine, aerospace, engineering, IT, computers for home use and many other things, to numerous to mention here, were developed and conceived of in democracies and societies, that value the right of the individual and have rule of law and most of those are western countries.
Non-democratic countries have their own agendas, that do not provide any room for democracy, rights of the individual, secularity, pluralism and rule of law.
Instead non-democratic societies often have institutions that have totalitarianism(theocratic or otherwise), dictatorships, communism, military juntas, or just plain tyrrany.
Those non-democratic countries with such institutions have proven incapable of following the will of the people, have no human rights, but often follow the agenda of a core filthy few, who live off the blood of others. Those types of countries, must be told what to do and how to act, as time and time again, they have proven themselves to be liars, genociders and destroyers of human rights. Rogue nations that proliferate nuclear weapons technology are a clear example of this. It is the responsiblity of super powers to ensure that checks and balances are kept in place with regards to smaller nations that are non-democratic and have weapons of mass destruction. Superpowers also keep each other in check.
These types of non-democratic countries lack the ability to act responsibly and in the interests of peace, mankind.(North Korea, Pakistan, Iran, Syria..), it is therefore the responsibility of superpowers to police them. Some of you from non-democratic societies will often call this:
“telling the two countries just what to do, how to do it and how to react to each others concerns instead of being being facilitators.”
Such nations will always find themselves on the wrong side, if they continually choose to not to follow and emulate democratic institutions. Democratic institutions produce the greatest happiness of the individual and society as a whole.
To function and remain cohesive, democratic societies do not require rampant propaganda, fear, paranoia, lies, tyrrany or religious hatred as tools of national unity.
Democratic societies have inherent checks and balances, that for the most part, make it extremely difficult for a cabal or religious group of people to rule and govern over the many, with absolute authority, tyrrany and fear.
- Posted by Global WatcherSingh,Umair,Myra :
It is Gilani, who has been saying that he is ready for an unconditional dialogue , when India has said they want a dialogue ? Do we really want an unconditional dialogue with a rogue state like Pakistan? Recent revelation by Khan has revealed evil designs of Pakistan. Like Nehru, Manmohan Singh also might have a personal agenda to have a dialogue with Pakistan, but whether Indian in general are interested in an unconditional dialogue? Right, the craving for peace on Indian side is far greater on Indian side, but post 26/11,whether Indians in general want delinking of terrorism from the peace process? what is happening in Pakistan, is not our concern, but to us in addition to our usual problem, security of the country is also our main concern be it in villages or in cities?
- Posted by Manish@Singh, you said:
“Your leadership knows that the anti India false propaganda injected in you over many years has made you too blind to accept the truth, And this venom cannot be sucked overnight.”
–>Singh, you are right, janab. Pakistan is so drunk on venom for the last 60 years that they will be almost incapable of seeing things in another light or another way, even if it is the truth, it will bring their artificial world of hate crashing down and that they are no prepared to deal with the fact that the bartender in Pakistan has in fact been feeding them mental poison and pure lies, for the last 60 years. That is when they start making conspiracy stories, to explain away the unexplainable.
People like Umair, are children of the mind-slave propaganda machine, which feeds children religious venom and hatred from a young age, a steady diet of A-Allah, B-Bullet, C-….K-Kaffir, or Kalishnikov…Z-Zindabad and the remaining levels of institutionalized hatred against India from High School to Army Cadet Training manuals.
I don’t believe that the current educated Pakistani’s will be incapable of breaking this mindrape they have had from childhood. It would take an act of God to change the Education system there and the sanitized and reformulated history that is taught to people there.
Everything starts with Education. If a proper education across Pakistan was given to all children, free from Madrassa venom and institutionalized hatred of Amreeka and India, Pakistan has a chance of surviving. In its current state, it is on a collision course with the graveyard and only time will tell will when that happens.
- Posted by Global Watcher@While Indians blame Pakistan for breaking down efforts to build friendly relationships, they never admit what their side is doing to sabotage the efforts. It is always “we are good and you are evil” mindset. Look at the following link in your own internet site.”
–Posted by Mohammed Anjum
Mohammed Anjum: If you read carefully,
1. this report is taken from Dawn report and put in the Indian site. So the original source is pakistani media. there are dozen such reports in Pakistani media.
2. Note the question mark in the title.
Is ISI that bad not to have any solid evidence of the Indian angle.
- Posted by rajeevUmair Wrote:
“Mr Qureshi rejected any pre-condition for the dialogue and said that India wanted to keep Pakistan on the defensive.”
Umair, If you think India is making false allegations on Pakistan and there should be no preconditions, why are you guys dying to resume the talks. Its because everybody knows now that Pakistan is a terrorist country and free Dollars will stop pouring in if you don;t pretend that you are trying to solve issues peacefully.
Pakistanis have to remove terrorists from equation and then talk.
These statements are for keeping venom fed population happy. Your leadership knows that the anti India false propaganda injected in you over many years has made you too blind to accept the truth, And this venom cannot be sucked overnight. So they are desperately trying talk to India and issuing these Statements every once in a while to satisfy the false ego.
Its same drama as Pakistani confession of Ajmal Kasab, Your leaders tried to create a buffer by doing flip flop and giving contradicting statements, Just to keep you calm.
BTW under what capacity or capability Pakistani Govt. think they can get something out of Talks, Civilian govt has no power to make decision in Pakistan. Army always keep own agenda and they have sabotage peace process several times by sending terrorists without uniform and sometimes with uniform. Qureshi is nobody in your country, wait for another coup and see where these leaders go.
- Posted by singhMr Qureshi rejected any pre-condition for the dialogue and said that India wanted to keep Pakistan on the defensive.
“We understand the compulsions of their (Indians) internal politics. But if India thinks that it can make us bow to its pressure tactics, it is mistaken.”
Pakistan rejects precondition for India talks
- Posted by Umairhttp://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn -content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/fron t-page/pakistan-rejects-precondition-for -india-talks-899
A slap to Indian Government and Media
- Posted by Umair
LMAO! Slap by whom? 2 loony tunes who are laughed at by 98% of America. Such nut jobs who concoct conspiracy theories provide nothing more than comedic relief to the American public & they are only followed by other nut jobs as well. These are the same guys who said that 9/11 was planned & executed by the CIA (Umair, I’m sure you agree with that one too). If you are going to post a link with the title ‘A slap to the Indian Govt & media’, at least put someone with a little credibility up there.
Talking about slaps, have you ever counted the number of tight slaps Pakistan has received over it’s terrorism? And I’m not talking about smacks by idiots with no credibility, I’m talking about officials from the Govts of various countries. If I were to post links to all the times Pakistan has been smacked & beaten black & blue by the officials of various countries (US, UK, France, Germany, Russia etc), we would have to start another blog just for that.
- Posted by MortalWhile Indians blame Pakistan for breaking down efforts to build friendly relationships, they never admit what their side is doing to sabotage the efforts. It is always “we are good and you are evil” mindset. Look at the following link in your own internet site. Truth is coming out. You guys have been asking for evidence. Here it comes from your own sources.
http://news.rediff.com/report/2009/sep/1 9/indias-raw-trained-taliban-militants.h tm
Accept this. We are no angels. And you are no angels either. So if you really want Pakistan to make an honest effort, you do that first.
- Posted by Mohammed AnjumRajeev, you said:
“Simply put, Congress govt will be out of power if an attack of 26/11 scale happens and govt does nothing.”
–>I hope another 911 or 26/11 never happens ever again. It will change the world or relations with Pakistan all over again. This next time, if something like that ever happens, and it started from Pakistani soil, the U.S. will not spare Pakistan. Nukes will not prevent Pakistan bearing the full brunt of the might of the U.S. or Indian military.
- Posted by Global Watcherhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0FA_tWpr yI&feature=related
A slap to Indian Government and Media
- Posted by UmairDara:
@ I gave by suggestion, to start establishing trust first and foremost, the trial of those already charge sheeted needs to be taken up in earnest. That is the same point you made. The rest would then follow. One side keeps showing earnestness in curbing attacks on the other from its soil and the other is ready to take discussions further forward”
-posted by Dara.
—I agree. Both India and Pak move forward. But the exercise of building mutual trust has been done in the past only to be disrupted by major terrorist attacks—-so something different has to be done. The evolution of the process is India linked talks with terrorism, then India delinked talks and terrorism and says both should move ahead, and now Pakistan steps back and start using the words “unconditional talks”. Pakistan should show its sincerity by taking a tiny step forward by taking action against prime suspects in the Mumbai attacks. Why not try Azhar who is a proven killer and sheltered by Pakistan.
Recent statements by pak are not encouraging: On Sept 17th Pak’s Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi says “We want a dialogue (with India) but we are not willing to accept any conditions… We want talks in an open and friendly atmosphere. They (India) are mistaken if they think they can achieve anything by putting pressure on Pakistan,” He says India had been issuing statements and taking up issues like terrorism with the world community to “put Pakistan on the defensive. He blames it on India’s “internal political compulsions”—is there anything wrong woth taking he matter with intern comm!!! This is all ahead of his meeting with Indian Ex Aff Min Krishna on the sidelines of UN meeting in US. Typically, to reduce US pressure before the meeting, Hafiz Saeed has been charged under Pakistan’s Anti-Terrorism Act (not arrested yet) for making anti-state speeches where he urged activists of the JuD to wage a Jihad—but did not link him with 26/11. He will be released shortly like in the past or given a nice house arrest with pool and internet like JeM terrorist Azhar is enjoying.
This is getting back into its older ways. I feel that there is no other way than taking the issue of terrorism head on using the international community who also has a stake in the same terror groups with increasing global aspirations. Pakistan-terrorism stuff is not a issue post-26/11. It is of great interest to US. US Ambassador to India said “Going after Hafiz Saeed and dismantling terror infrastructure in that region is extremely important for both U.S. and India,” People to people contacts at different levels should be re-established to move the process forward. There is lot to be trivial stuff to talk about even before the more serious issues like Kashmir are discussed. Meanwhile watch for action on terrorism-related policies of Pakistan.
Oh yes, I did not say the most important thing: trust cannot be built up until democratic civil govt is in full charge of the military and ISI and spooks are not running the business within Pakistan. Zardari/Gilani will not put their neck on the block about that but PM Singh can do that.
All in all, I see little hope until Pakistan’s own interest—national security/existence is in danger due to these terrorists.
Agree with your plebiscite comment.
________________________________________ __
Myra:
- Posted by rajeev@ To those who say that India and Pakistan should work out how to build trust, how would you do this without talking? The alternative is to rely on the Americans, and to a lesser extent the British, to pass messages back and forth.”
—–It is not just about the mediator here. Right now it is about agreeing on the talks itself. India saying terrorism and talks not linked and both must move ahead, but Pakistan saying unconditional talks—are not on same page (pl. see above post to Dara). I am sure 3rd party help will be taken to get over little bumps but I will not like to see the extreme importance given to the 3rd party.
@So one thing that intrigues me is the question of how India and Pakistan talk to each other. In which forum, and in what format? Through secret backchannel talks that leave no room for public debate? Maybe that’s the way it will go, since doing anything else is politically difficult on both sides. But is that the right way to go?
—Believing the media, historically backchannel worked; so let that be. Debate without proper talks and plan means chaos. Post-talks, any solution can be debated in the public and parliament. In all this, Indians will like to see terrorism taken care off and some guarantees from Pakistan. Publically Pak never owned terrorism—I am curious if Pakistan owns it in backchannel talks or off the record? If that’s not happening, where will be the guarantee?
Also, the terrorism issue is real and whether or not the other issues of basic necessities mask it. Today, the economic recession/unemplyment in the US is the most important thing on US public mind—some in far off places in Americans do not even think off economy or 9/11, but the dangers of terrorism in US are real and have to be faced.
Simply put, Congress govt will be out of power if an attack of 26/11 scale happens and govt does nothing. People will vote for the alternative that they never thought of while Rahul Gandhi/Sonia Gandhi drool.
“To those who say that India and Pakistan should work out how to build trust, how would you do this without talking?” Myra.
To my mind the best way to do it is by actually talking on how this trust can be generated. Leave aside, for the time being, the more political issues that are the hurdles. Instead, sit down and discuss only how to rebuild bridges - what each side expects from the other so that people on both sides gain confidence in each other. Its won’t be easy, if it does succeed though, progress on the basic differences may seem easier to resolve.
Using the US or British as messengers has been tried and tried again and failed miserably. They insist on giving instructions and try to push their own agendas. The ‘we know best’ attitude gets both sides to pull down the shutters.
There is much that I admire about the American system, yet as far as their foreign policy is concerned it is an unmitigated disaster. The main trouble with it, according to me, is that instead of basing their policy on the fact that foreign policy must look after US interests they also feel that the foreign policies of other countries should also look after US interests. They will eventually end up telling the two countries just what to do, how to do it and how to react to each others concerns instead of being being facilitators.
- Posted by DaraMyra:
Here is a video (more than 1 hr long ncluding Q&A).
http://fora.tv/2009/04/13/Ahmed_Rashid_D escent_into_Chaos#fullprogram
Speaker: Distinguished Pakistani journalist Ahmed Rashid
The topic is: Descent into Chaos US Policy and the Failure of Nation Building in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Central Asia
It is very useful.
- Posted by rajeev