Pakistan violence and poor hold of the government in N-W Fron­tier province creates a cause of concern for India. Kashmir is the core of Indo-Pak tension, where Pakistan has been waging a proxy for the last nine years, sending intruders, militants and terrorists to kill the innocent people in Kashmir and to do ethnic cleansing.

HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF THE RELATIONS

India and Pakistan, since their inception in 1947, have had sharp rivalries with each other.

The  between the two has vacillated from a clash of national identities to territorial disputes.

The relations have always been locked in a vicious cycle. They begin with much optimism and fanfare but soon get engulfed by uncertainties, generating complications that lead to the suspension of dialogue, only for the cycle to continue again with a fresh round of optimism the next time. Though the acquisition of nuclear capabilities by both countries have prevented a major conflict, small-scale conflicts like Kargil crisis of 1999 did take place.

Shimla Agreement 1972

• The Shimla Agreement (also called the Shimla Accord or Shimla Treaty), signed between the premiers of India and Pakistan was a treaty that laid out the principles which would govern the future bilateral relations between the two countries.
• It was signed 8 months after the Indo-Pakistani war of 1971 that led to the splitting of Pakistan and the consequent creation of Bangladesh had ended.
• The accord had contained the steps which were to be taken in order to ensure the normalisation of relations between India and Pakistan.
• The agreement was signed in Barnes Court (Raj Bhavan) at Shimla, Himachal Pradesh.
• The terms of the treaty were as follows:
• The Charter of the UN shall govern relations between India and Pakistan.
• Any differences shall be settled by peaceful means and through bilateral negotiations.
• Both countries shall respect the territorial integrity of each other and not interfere in the internal matters of each other.
• Forces shall be withdrawn to each other’s side of the international border.
• The ceasefire line of December 17^th 1971 (after the Bangladesh War) shall be respected (and reiterated as the Line of Control).
• The treaty also had some other terms like renewing communications, telegraph, postal, airline relations, etc. It also talked about having exchanges in the field of culture and science.
• India released 93000 Pakistani prisoners of war (POWs) who were captured after the Bangladesh war.
• It is said that India had a vantage position after Pakistan’s crushing defeat but failed to capitalise on it. India could have pushed for a definitive solution to the border problem with Pakistan but did not do so and failed to leverage the POW situation. Despite the entire military leadership of erstwhile East Pakistan surrendering to Indian and Bangladeshi forces, and despite having captured strategic positions in Kashmir and about 5000 square miles of Sindh and Pakistani Punjab, India failed to settle relations with Pakistan once and for all.
• A few observers opine that India was keen to get Bangladeshi leader Sheikh Mujibur Rehman released from Pakistan.
• Pakistan did not keep its word and continue to unsettle India on the Kashmir issue. There was a severe war-like situation between both countries around Kargil in 1999.
• The Shimla Agreement did nothing much to improve relations between India and Pakistan

Present issues in India Pakistan Relations

Territorial Disputes

Siachen Glacier: There has been demands for withdrawal of Indian troops from Siachen. However, Siachen holds a strategic importance for India and India has refused to agree to the demand. It was suggested to make it a demilitarized zone. India and Pakistan almost managed this in Nov. 1992. The agreement on Siachen was in mutual withdrawal of troops from new positions, the creation of a “zone of complete disengagement,’ and the delineation of a “zone of peace and tranquility”. The process broke down before a formal treaty could be agreed to.

Sir Creek Problem: Sir Creek is a 60 km estuary in the Rann of kutch. The Rann of kutch lies between Gujarat on the India side and Sindh on Pakistan side. The main problem arises between India and Pakistan because of the boundary live which divides Sir Creek.

Tulbul / Wullur Project: The issue was between India and Pakistan. It relates to a barrage to be constructed by the J&K on the Jhelum just below the Wullur lake. The object of the barrage is to allow navigation over a distance of some 20 kms, between Wullur lake and the Kashmir town of Baramulla.

Kashmir – The Root Cause of Clash: Before the merger, the state was attached by Pak-sponsored armed infiltrators. They were repulsed but a portion of Kashmir came under infiltrators. Today, the part of Kashmir is known as Pak occupied Kashmir (POK). During the conflict, the matter was raised in UNO by India. The UN appointed commission called United Nations commission for India and Pakistan to restore peace and arrange for plebiscite in Kashmir. However it failed to bring desired result.

In favour of Kashmir, Pakistan argues that Kashmir is pre-dominantly a Muslim populated state and according to ‘Two Nation Theory’, its natural place is in Pakistan. It further says that all three major rivers of Pakistan – Indus, Jhelum and Chenab – originate in Kashmir. So health of Pakistan’s agriculture depends on Kashmir “being a part of Pakistan’. India counters Pakistan argument by saving that it never accepted Jinnah’s two nation theory. Moreover, there are more Muslims living in independent India than in Pakistan. India decided to refer the Kashmir question to the security council of the UN in the year 1948. It requested security council to ask Pakistan government to sort out the difficulties. Pakistan demanded that Kashmir accession to India was illegal. The resolution affirmed the right of Indian army to defend the state. The security council resolution could not be implemented because both India and Pakistan failed to comply with its conditions.

Terrorism and Drug Trafficking: 

• Cross border terrorism has always been an issue.
• Some analysts go to the extent of saying that both nations are always in a perpetual state of war.
• Despite the fact the after the Kargil conflict, there was a Ceasefire Agreement signed in 2003, there have been regular cross border ceasefire violations from the Pakistan side of the border with the trend being as such that since 2009 onwards, there has been a rise in the violations (with the exception of 2014). It has killed and injured security forces as well as civilians on both the sides.
• With the regime change in India, there has been a different approach to the violations. With the hardline policy of the new government, there has been massive retaliation to the unprovoked firing.
• Thus, out of desperation, there has been a rise in the number of infiltrations of terrorists from across the Line of Control (LOC), which has been routine for quite a while now.
• With the void in between the Kashmiri people and the establishment increasing after the devastating floods of 2014, there was rising discontent again in the valley. The trigger to the events was the killing of the militant commander of the terrorist organization Hizb-ul-MujahideenBurhan Wani, which led to widespread protests in the valley and the situation has been highly volatile ever since with almost daily scenes of protests and stone pelting in the valley.
• Pakistan has taken advantage of the situation and has fuelled the protests by providing the elements fighting against the Indian establishment and Forces in the state with all sorts of possible support. The PM of Pakistan, in fact, went a step ahead and during the United Nations General Assembly meeting of 2016, declared Wani as a martyr and the struggle of the people of Kashmir as an Intifada.
• This is in sync with the stand Pakistan holds on Kashmir i.e., to internationalize the issue of Kashmir and asking for holding a plebiscite in Kashmir under Indian administration to decide the fate of Kashmiri people. The stand has been rejected by India as it says it is in direct violation of the Shimla Agreement of 1972, which clearly mentions that peaceful resolution to all issues will be through bilateral approach.
• After the attack at the Pathankot base in 2016 January, there was again a thaw in the relationship, especially when seen in the context that the Indian PM paid an unscheduled visit to Pakistan to meet his Pakistani counterpart. With Kashmir already on the boil and Pakistan adding fuel to fire to the situation, the attack on Uri Army camp in September 2016 in which 19 Indian soldiers were killed made the Indian PM declare the statement that ‘talks and terrorism’ cannot go hand in hand.
• This was followed by surgical strikes carried out by the Indian Army across the LOC targeting the terror infrastructure in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK). They were carried out at the end of September.
• In a first, India tinkered with the Indus Water Treaty, a Treaty which has stood the test of time and the bitter sour relationship for more than 55 years and was pondering with the fact to fully exploit the water potential of the West flowing rivers over which Pakistan has control.
• Thus, the fact trickles down to the point that India has its stand that until Pakistan doesn’t do enough to tackle the terrorism menace, there can be no talks held in between the nations.
• On the other hand, Pakistan is ready for a dialogue with India but it wants the inclusion and discussion of the Kashmir issue which it keeps raking up every time.

Case of Kulbushan Jadhav

• The case of Kulbushan Jadhav, a retired Naval officer arrested nears the Iran-Pakistan border in Baluchistan region by the Pakistani establishment.
• He has been accused by Pakistan of espionage and spying and has been sentenced to death by a military court in Pakistan.
• India, on many previous occasions, demanded consular access of Jadhav, a demand consistently rejected by Pakistan citing national security issues.
• India says that Jadhav was a retired Naval officer who was a businessman working in Iran and has been falsely framed by the Pakistani establishment.
• As there were repeated denials of the Consular Access, India approached the International Court of Justice (ICJ) at Hague where it put forward the argument that Vienna Convention was being violated as the Consular Access was denied.
• The ICJ has asked Pakistan to stay the execution of Jadhav and the matter is sub judice.

CPEC and its Significance to India

• The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is a part of China’s ambitious One Belt One Road (OBOR) Initiative to link China with Europe. Started in 2013, the CPEC is a developmental project between Pakistan and its all-weather friend China.
• China-Pakistan Economic Corridor is a whopping 46 billion dollar project which will connect Kashgar in Xinjiang province of China, with Gwadar port in Baluchistan which is the largest province in Pakistan. It is connected through a vast and complex network of roads as well as other infrastructure projects such as dams, hydropower projects, railways, and pipelines.
• From the time when it was initiated India opposed CPEC route and development of Gwadar port.
• The planned CPEC route passes through POK and Gilgit-Baltistan, which India claims to be its own integral and indispensable territory, illegally held by CPEC also somewhat legitimises Pakistan’s ownership over disputed PoK and it may lead to the internationalisation of Kashmir Issue which India doesn’t want. Apart from this India feels that the high economic stakes in the project will push China to ally with Pakistan on the Kashmir dispute.
• With the complete realisation of CPEC, China will get a free corridor to move its armour and mechanised weapons which are a threat to India in the plains of Punjab and Rajasthan. In the guise of securing CPEC, China can permanently position troops on Pakistan soil not too far from the Indian
• Despite clarifications from China and Pakistan that the port at Gwadar will be used only for economic purposes, India fears that China may establish a naval base at Gwadar to ensure Chinese maritime hegemony in the Indian Ocean. India considers Gwadar Port as part of China’s String of Pearls” bases, that extends from its eastern coast to the Arabian Sea.

Future of India-Pakistan relationship

• India and Pakistan are neighbours. Neighbours can’t be changed. Thus, it is in the better of interest of both the nations that they bring all the issues on the drawing board and resolve them amicably.
• India wants Pakistan to act more strongly on the terrorism being sponsored from its soil.
• Also, India wants Pakistan to conclude the trial of 26/11 sooner so that the victims are brought to justice and the conspirers meted out proper punishment.
• India has genuine concerns, as there are internationally declared terrorists roaming freely in Pakistan and preaching hate sermons as well instigating terror attacks.
• With the international community accusing Pakistan of breeding terrorism on its soil, Pakistan cannot remain in denial state and thus, needs to act tougher on terrorism related issues.

Positive initiatives which were taken in the past

• Composite Dialogue Framework, which was started from 2004 onwards, excluded, some of the contentious issues between the two sides had resulted in good progress on a number of issues.
• Delhi-Lahore Bus service was successful in de-escalating tensions for some time.
• Recently, the ‘Ufa ‘Agreement’ was made during the meeting of the National Security Advisors of both nations at Ufa, Russia.
• A couple of important points agreed upon in Ufa were:
• Early meetings of DG BSF and DG Pakistan Rangers followed by the DGMOs.
• Discussing ways and means to expedite the Mumbai case trial, including additional information needed to supplement the trial.

• Ufa Agreement has now become a new starting point of any future India-Pakistan dialogue, which is a major gain for India.
• However, despite all the initiatives, there is always a breakdown in talks. Thus, more needs to be done for developing peaceful relations. With India and Pakistan both being two Nuclear States, any conflict can lead to a question mark on the existence of the subcontinent as well as the entire planet, especially with the border being ‘live’ almost all the time.

Benefits, which can be accrued from a good India-Pakistan Relationship

• If there is peace at the border and a solution of Kashmir is arrived upon, then the China Pakistan Economic Corridor, which is passing through Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) can certainly benefit Kashmir, its people and the economy. Kashmir can act as a gateway to Central Asia.
• Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) pipeline which originates in Turkmenistan and passes through Afghanistan, Pakistan before reaching and terminating in India can also get huge benefits as it can help secure the National Energy needs of both Pakistan and India, which are potentially growing nations with increasing needs of energy.
• Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline is another project, which is currently stalled. If relations are cordial, then this pipeline can also supply the energy needs of both the nations.
• A stable Afghanistan is in the best interest of both Pakistan as well as India. Terrorism is affecting both India as well as Pakistan and the porous boundary between Afghanistan and Pakistan provides a safe haven for terrorists. Also, a better relationship with Pakistan can give direct road access to Afghanistan. Currently, India has to go via Iran to Afghanistan to send any trade goods and vice versa.
• South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) and the initiatives taken by the association will start to hold more relevance as the same hasn’t lived up to its expected potential as the elephant in the room during any summit is sour in the India-Pakistan relationship.

Way Ahead

• Stephen P Cohen in his book ‘Shooting for Century’ calls Indo-Pak Conflicts as ‘Paired minority conflict’ i.e. both side viewed itself threatened and vulnerable. There is need to enhance cooperation between the two Nation
• India should revisit its policy towards military government in Pakistan. India may consider to negotiate with Military regime
• India should improve back channel diplomacy. Many retired cricketer like Navjot sidhu and kapil dev would be helpful to establish a platform for negotiation
• Both nation should begin their negotiation on areas where they can reach an agreement easily. This would help to build confidence for negotiation on major issues like Terrorism and Kashmir
• Both government should promote civil society initiative like aman ki asha to build positive environment in their respective country