South Asia Update: July 2003
Jun 30, 2003
by Scott Conroy
After a year dominated by bitter rhetoric and a tense military standoff, India and Pakistan are taking cautious steps toward peace and understanding. Recent positive developments between the nuclear-armed neighbors are overshadowed by potential pitfalls, particularly the issue of Kashmir. It is clear that the path to lasting peace in South Asia will be long and difficult to achieve.
The year 2003 did not get off to a promising start, as India expelled Pakistani diplomats that it implied were spying, further exacerbating tensions between the two nations (1). The first significant signs of an improvement in bilateral relations did not surface until early May, when Pakistani Prime Minister Zafarullah Khan Jamali declared that his country would reconnect air, road, and rail links with India. The move followed a similar announcement by India the previous week. “It is my hope that India will seize the moment, put aside the acrimony of the past and purposefully move forward with Pakistan to peacefully resolve all issues, including the core issue of Jammu and Kashmir,” Jamali said (2). This step was an important milestone, since diplomatic ties between the two nations had been cut off following a December 2001 assault on India’s Parliament complex that India blamed on Pakistan-backed Islamic militants.
Regarding the contentious issue of Kashmir, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage expressed optimism that the environment had become ripe for a new India-Pakistan dialogue. Speaking at a press conference, Armitage pointed out, “The infiltration across, cross-border violence and the lethality are down from this time last year. (3)” India, however, downplayed Pakistan’s assertion that it had ended incursions by Islamic militants in Kashmir, claiming that heavy snowfall in the region was responsible for the decrease in attacks.
In a meeting between Presidents Bush and Musharraf at Camp David in late June, Bush lauded Musharraf and Indian Prime Minister Bihari Vajpayee for their recent efforts to promote peace and stability in South Asia (4). He also proposed a five-year, $3 billion aid package to Pakistan, pending Congressional approval. However, Bush noted that the controversial sale of F-16s would not be included.
On June 15 Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov likewise declared that Russia would not sell weapons of any kind to Pakistan because of concerns over escalating an arms race on the Indian subcontinent (5). It seems clear that while the United States and Russia are pursuing stronger diplomatic and trade relations with Pakistan, they do not wish to promote an arms race that would jeopardize stability in South Asia.
The same cautious approach applies to relations with India. More than a year after an Israeli appeal to sell the U.S.-Israeli Arrow theatre missile defense system to India, American officials are still conflicted on whether to approve the sale (6). While some officials in the White House and Pentagon want the Arrow sale to proceed, there is opposition to the potential export in the State Department. Ayesha Siddiqa-Agha, a former director of naval research in Pakistan, said that Pakistan’s response could be to increase the number of missiles in its arsenal, but only “to a certain degree and no more (7).”
Several events in the past few months serve as reminders that a stable relationship between the two countries remains elusive. Several Indian officials have contended that the United States has not done enough to pressure Pakistan to end support for Muslim militants, asserting that India should have the same right to launch a preemptive strike against Pakistan that the United States and Britain exercised in Iraq (8). In an address to Parliament, Indian Foreign Minister Yashwant Sinha claimed that the situation in Pakistan makes for a “fitter case” to intervene than did the one in Iraq (9). One Indian official said that these recent comments were merely rhetorical and do not indicate that India has plans to launch military action against its neighbor (10).
In late March, India and Pakistan both tested short-range, nuclear-capable missiles (11). While an Indian spokesman reported having notified “all relevant entities” before the missile test took place, Pakistan claimed that India’s test came as a surprise and that it was compelled to respond in kind.
Furthermore, a single, unforeseen incident such as the terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament in 2001, can lead to a rapid deterioration of relations, as can renewed violence in Kashmir. On June 23, 16 people were killed and 40 injured in separate attacks in Kashmir, making it one of the most violent days since the thaw in relations began (12). No militant group has claimed responsibility for the attacks.
In order to maintain the positive diplomatic momentum in South Asia, President Musharraf should continue to take a firm stance, both in rhetoric and in actions, against terrorism and militant infiltrations in Kashmir. He must refuse to cave in to pressure from extremists in his country who believe that he is a puppet of the Bush Administration.
It is crucial that India and Pakistan take steps to reduce nuclear tensions. Both countries should refrain from operational deployment of nuclear weapons, avoid further nuclear tests, and commit to peaceful resolution of issues that divide them. The United States and Russia should continue to avoid potentially destabilizing arms deals, such as the Arrow sale.
Finally, it is imperative that the leaders of both India and Pakistan refrain from overreacting when relations become tense, lest conflict escalate to the nuclear level. As President Musharraf stated in an interview with The London Times, “When a war starts [you don’t know] what direction it will take because there are a lot of intangibles which then come in the way. No sane person in normal conditions can ever even contemplate going into a non-conventional war, but basically the best guarantee is to avoid conflict (13).”
RSS Feed