10-09-2007, 08:30 AM
âRepairing Indo-Pak ties â Musharrafâs major accomplishmentâ
* Cohen says Indo-Pak composite dialogue initiated due to compulsions on both sides
By Khalid Hasan
WASHINGTON: In dealing with India, President Pervez Musharraf has travelled farther than any of his predecessors. When he leaves power, this will be considered one of his major accomplishments, according to South Asia expert Stephen Cohen.
In an analysis of the general situation in Pakistan, Cohen, who is head of South Asia studies at the Brookings Institution, considers the development unfortunate since Pakistanâs military effectiveness on the Afghan border depends on a truce between India and Pakistan. The ultimate strategic balance in South Asia will likely be determined by Pakistanâs relations with India, not its strained ties with Afghanistan, he believes. He calls President Musharrafâs cooperation in curbing the radicalism ânotoriously unevenâ.
Composite dialogue follows compulsions: The Brookings expert maintains that the âcomposite dialogueâ between the two neighbours was initiated not out of a change of heart, but because of compulsions on both sides. Indian officials want to resolve the Kashmir problem and move on to a grander stage as a leading Asian power. Pakistan, is looking for âface savingâ arrangements that will allow the country to devote more of its energies to domestic reform and the growing internal threat from militant Islamists. Yet, both Pakistani and Indian leaders retain âfallback positionsâ that would permit a relatively easy exit should the process falter or become politically embarrassing, he points out. This does not suggest a lack of sincerity on their part, but rather an absence of confidence in the intentions of the other side. The end result is that the process still remains fragile, and a few adverse developments, such as an assassination or a series of terrorist attacks, could easily lead to another armed confrontation.
Cohen believes that the present situation can turn into a âslippery slope,â where despite the presence of strong complementarities, political compulsions could end up forcing both sides to end the dialogue. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leadership has passed to those whose views towards Pakistan are not known. In Pakistan the religious political parties will oppose normalisation with India. A wave of terrorist attacks within India carries the potential of escalation to crisis levels. Pakistan could grow increasingly impatient with the lack of Indian flexibility in response to its proposals on Kashmir and political pressure may force Islamabad to reinitiate âdiplomatic brinkmanshipâ. New Delhiâs efforts to increase its already substantial presence in Afghanistan could lead Islamabad to once again look the other way with regard to infiltration into Kashmir. Already, India alleges that infiltration from the Pakistani side of Kashmir is on the rise. The current situation, therefore, presents a limited window of opportunity, he cautions.
* Cohen says Indo-Pak composite dialogue initiated due to compulsions on both sides
By Khalid Hasan
WASHINGTON: In dealing with India, President Pervez Musharraf has travelled farther than any of his predecessors. When he leaves power, this will be considered one of his major accomplishments, according to South Asia expert Stephen Cohen.
In an analysis of the general situation in Pakistan, Cohen, who is head of South Asia studies at the Brookings Institution, considers the development unfortunate since Pakistanâs military effectiveness on the Afghan border depends on a truce between India and Pakistan. The ultimate strategic balance in South Asia will likely be determined by Pakistanâs relations with India, not its strained ties with Afghanistan, he believes. He calls President Musharrafâs cooperation in curbing the radicalism ânotoriously unevenâ.
Composite dialogue follows compulsions: The Brookings expert maintains that the âcomposite dialogueâ between the two neighbours was initiated not out of a change of heart, but because of compulsions on both sides. Indian officials want to resolve the Kashmir problem and move on to a grander stage as a leading Asian power. Pakistan, is looking for âface savingâ arrangements that will allow the country to devote more of its energies to domestic reform and the growing internal threat from militant Islamists. Yet, both Pakistani and Indian leaders retain âfallback positionsâ that would permit a relatively easy exit should the process falter or become politically embarrassing, he points out. This does not suggest a lack of sincerity on their part, but rather an absence of confidence in the intentions of the other side. The end result is that the process still remains fragile, and a few adverse developments, such as an assassination or a series of terrorist attacks, could easily lead to another armed confrontation.
Cohen believes that the present situation can turn into a âslippery slope,â where despite the presence of strong complementarities, political compulsions could end up forcing both sides to end the dialogue. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leadership has passed to those whose views towards Pakistan are not known. In Pakistan the religious political parties will oppose normalisation with India. A wave of terrorist attacks within India carries the potential of escalation to crisis levels. Pakistan could grow increasingly impatient with the lack of Indian flexibility in response to its proposals on Kashmir and political pressure may force Islamabad to reinitiate âdiplomatic brinkmanshipâ. New Delhiâs efforts to increase its already substantial presence in Afghanistan could lead Islamabad to once again look the other way with regard to infiltration into Kashmir. Already, India alleges that infiltration from the Pakistani side of Kashmir is on the rise. The current situation, therefore, presents a limited window of opportunity, he cautions.