South Asia: New Cold War

The objective for the conference was to explore regional dynamics of ‘rising Asian powers’ in the region and ‘influences they exert on Kashmir’. The conference was aimed at understanding the ‘increasing influence of China and the potential for regional conflict over disputed territorial claims.

The conference also endeavoured to examine the ‘potential spill over from the conflict in Afghanistan and the effect of a protracted conflict on Pakistan’s Western front on Kashmir Security’. Besides, some internationally recognized experts on South Asia, the conference was also attended by some defence and strategic expert from India and Pakistan.

Kashmir, after 9/11, had assumed importance for some international organizations and experts because of ostensible paradigm shift in China’s Kashmir policy. Moreover, they had started seeing the resolution of this dispute as key to stability in the region. Since 1980, despite having very cordial relations with Pakistan, China had adopted a neutral stance on Kashmir.

Instead of seeking resolution of Kashmir in accordance with the UN Security resolutions, it urged the two countries to resolve the issue bilaterally. In 2009, Beijing invited a Kashmiri leader, Chairman of All Parties Hurriyat Conference to pay a state visit to China. Some commentators then had seen, it as ‘paying in same coin’ policy for India having invited Tibetan leader Dalia Lama  to historic town of Tawang in Arunachal Pradesh- a territory claimed by China. ‘The move was symbolically significant for internationalizing the Kashmir.’

The invitation was seen as Beijing reinventing its Kashmir policy and returning to its traditional stand during fifties and sixties when it loudly supported right to self-determination for people of Jammu and Kashmir in all international forums. Its policy of staple visa for people of “IAK” and normal visa for visitors from “AJK”,  denial of visa to a military general who had been part of operations in Kashmir were seen departure from its ‘cautious foreign policy’. There were sufficient indications that it wanted to play a ‘pro-active’ role in Kashmir- to bolster Pakistan’s position at the international level.

Nothing much has changed during the past four years, except change of guards in Pakistan and India. In Pakistan, the Pakistan Peoples Party led by Asif Ali Zardari was replaced by the Muslim League, Nawaz Sharif. Fundamentally, the two parties had almost similar policies towards India and wanted to increase trade relations New Delhi.

The two even shared idea of giving most favoured nation (MFN) status to India and simultaneously continuing dialogue for resolution of contentious issues and disputes. Though no substantial progress was made during past four years, yet it seemed that doctrine of ‘cold peace’ pursued by the UPA government headed by Manmohan Singh had prevented brought peace on LoC and borders.

In 2014, there was change of guard in New Delhi and Narendra Modi, led the BJP government came to power.  Initially, it seemed that the new government will follow, Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s policy of reconciliation vis-à-vis its immediate neighbour.

And, reinitiate the process of dialogue started by iconic BJP Prime Minister with Pakistan for amicably settling all issues including core dispute between the two countries. Or at least to follow the doctrine of ‘cold peace’ that would at least keep channels of dialogue open for reinitiating the composite dialogue.

Nonetheless, the bonhomie seen between Narendra Modi and Nawaz Sharif one year back did not live long. True, after initial increase in cross-border firing there was a radical fall in the firing across the LoC and the working boundary.

However, this comparative peace across the LoC failed to graduate to creating conducive atmosphere for resumption of suspended dialogue between New Delhi and Islamabad because of rhetoric by some die-hard BJP minister and politicians and war mongering by some corporate television channels. India-Pakistan relations, which showed no signs of improvement during past one year are now in the recent past all-time low.

The war of attrition between two neighbours after the visit of Chines President Xi Jinping to Islamabad has heightened further. He launched $46 billion projects in Pakistan. Such a huge investment that far exceeds U.S. spending in Pakistan ‘reflected a shift of economic power in the region from the West to China’. Beijing is not now that pro-active on Kashmir as it was four years earlier.

Nevertheless, after the US withdrawal of its troops from Afghanistan and installation of new government in Kabul, profile of China in South and Central Asia has considerably changed and it has emerged as key player in the region.  Decision of Beijing to build an economic corridor through Pakistan to open new links to the Arabian Sea and beyond is not only seen as advantageous to China but to Pakistan as well. New Delhi does see these developments to its detriment in Afghanistan but war of words that could lead to war is no solution.  There are apprehensions, as transpires from newspaper commentaries in Beijing and Islamabad that India may “subvert” the economic corridor passing through Baluchistan. Thus, China, now for economic reasons feels more concerned about Pakistan’s security than it did previously and it will have stakes in any future confrontations between the two.

India and Pakistan has a bad history of war of attrition turning into tension on borders. In the mounting tension between the two countries in the words of a Pakistani commentator, “Speaking rationally, an India-Pakistan war should not be imminent but looking at the past, it cannot be ruled out completely. A near-war situation as in 2002 and 2008 is a probability.”

It is an admitted fact, that during Kargil sub-continent was saved from a nuclear war due to intervention of Washington. In the post Kargil war scenario Washington not only prevented a war between them but also nudged Musharraf and Vajpayee for engaging into dialogue for settling all disputes including that of Kashmir amicably.

True, in the changed geo-strategic situation in the region Beijing has a bigger role to play than Washington but in this changed situation India and Pakistan instead of working for cross purposes need to work together for resolving their outstanding disputes and bringing in lasting peace in the region.