What's new

Pakistan’s military has quietly reached out to India for talks

Abdullah719

T20I Captain
Joined
Apr 16, 2013
Runs
44,825
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Concerned about Pakistan’s international isolation and faltering economy, the country’s powerful military has quietly reached out to its archrival India about resuming peace talks, but the response was tepid, according to Western diplomats and a senior Pakistani official.

The outreach, initiated by the army’s top commander, Gen. Qamar Javed Bajwa, began months before Pakistan’s national elections. Pakistan offered to resume on-and-off talks with India over their border dispute in the Kashmir region, which stalled in 2015 as violence flared up there.

A key objective for Pakistan in reaching out to India is to open barriers to trade between the countries, which would give Pakistan more access to regional markets. Any eventual peace talks over Kashmir are likely to involve an increase in bilateral trade as a confidence-building measure.

Increasingly, Pakistan’s military sees the country’s battered economy as a security threat, because it aggravates the insurgencies that plague the country. Pakistan is expected to ask the International Monetary Fund for $9 billion in the coming weeks, after receiving several billions of dollars in loans from China earlier this year to pay its bills.

“We want to move forward and we are trying our best to have good ties with all our neighbors, including India,” Information Minister Fawad Chaudhry said. “As General Bajwa says, regions prosper, countries don’t. India cannot prosper by weakening Pakistan.”

General Bajwa linked Pakistan’s economy to the region’s security in a hallmark speech last October, and the idea that the two are inseparable has since become known as the Bajwa doctrine. The army chief is also seen as more moderate than his predecessors were on India, which has been Pakistan’s bitter rival since the bloody partition that came with independence in 1947.

The Pakistani general and his Indian counterpart, Gen. Bipin Rawat, served together in a United Nations peacekeeping mission in Congo about a decade ago and get along well, diplomats say. Earlier this year, General Bajwa said the only way to solve the two countries’ conflict was through dialogue, a rare statement from the military.

Diplomats say General Bajwa has tried to reach out to General Rawat to initiate talks. But the effort has been stymied by what one diplomat called a “system mismatch.”

The army is Pakistan’s most powerful institution, but India’s military is much weaker and could not agree to a peace deal without the civilian government’s approval. Diplomats in New Delhi say Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government is preoccupied with elections expected early next year and does not want talks before then, fearing that if talks collapse — as they have many times before — it could cost them at the polls.

“Till the Indian elections, there cannot be an immediate betterment in bilateral relations,” Mr. Chaudhry said. India’s military and its foreign ministry did not respond to requests for comment.

The new Pakistani government led by Prime Minister Imran Khan has been sending strong signals in favor of talks, though it is the military that ultimately controls foreign and defense policy. “If you take one step forward, we will take two steps forward,” Mr. Khan said in his victory speech, addressing India. “We need to move ahead.”

With Mr. Khan in office, talks may have a better chance because he is seen as the army’s man, diplomats in both Islamabad and New Delhi say. India sees Mr. Khan’s outreach as sanctioned by the military and believes he will clearly present General Bajwa’s demands and red lines.

That the military would initiate such a major foreign policy decision unilaterally, and before the elections, suggests it was confident that its preferred candidate, Mr. Khan, would win. Mr. Khan was sworn in as prime minister last month, in the wake of accusations that the army had intervened to back his candidacy.

Diplomats in Islamabad say Pakistan’s outreach may also be driven in part by the country’s Chinese allies. Beijing has prodded Pakistan to stabilize its border with India, hoping for greater stability as it pursues its regional economic ambitions. China is investing some $62 billion in Pakistan, mostly in large infrastructure projects through what is being called the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, part of China’s global Belt and Road initiative.

The plan would give Beijing more direct access to important Western markets by building a series of highways through Pakistan, connecting China’s western border to Pakistan’s Gwadar Port on the Arabian Sea. If Pakistani troops are freed up along the border with India, the thinking goes, they could be diverted to secure the country’s western flank, where China’s trade routes would be.

Chinese Muslim insurgents who oppose Beijing’s rule have been active in Afghanistan and western Pakistan, and other Pakistani insurgents, including Baloch separatists, have opposed the Chinese infrastructure projects. Last month, a Baloch separatist group attacked a bus carrying Chinese workers, wounding five.

Pakistan may also be realizing that it can no longer withstand its growing international isolation and its worsening ties with the United States, which was once its closest Western ally. The United States cut more than $1 billion of aid to Pakistan in January for not doing enough to curb terror groups, which it accuses the army of supporting.

Tensions with Washington were further aggravated this week when the American military said it would withhold $300 million in aid to Pakistan, just days before the Trump administration’s first meeting with Mr. Khan’s new government. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is scheduled to meet Mr. Khan on Wednesday in Islamabad, and Pakistani lawmakers enraged over the aid cut have been calling for Mr. Khan to scrap the meeting.

In the past, military and government officials in Pakistan have said they could withstand American aid cuts, pointing to their growing ties with China. But Pakistan was stunned this year when China went along with putting Islamabad on a terror-financing watch list, which will make it harder and more expensive for Pakistan to raise badly needed funding on international debt markets.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/04/world/asia/pakistan-india-talks.html
 
Good stuff.

Need better relations with all our neighbours.War won't achieve anything.Dialogue could.
 
So says the New York times. That is all I need to know! Such papers are only good for wrapping up food.
 
Nothing will happen until after Indian elections.

Sheeples are needed to be re-elected.
 
Good stuff.

Need better relations with all our neighbours.War won't achieve anything.Dialogue could.

Dialogue will be meaningless unless there is going to be some end solution in mind. That would mean concession on some major positions held previously, and as Pakistan is the party which is (allegedly) reaching out to India, you can probably draw your own conclusions which party will be conceding on those sticking points.
 
Hmm story appears after Hussain Haqqani does an op-ed in the same paper... which the writer of this article retweeted on twitter.
 
Not the best time to have any sort of talks with India. Its election season, and they are trying to open peace talks with a party that bases his whole campaign on an anti-Pakistan rhetoric.
 
Sounds like they have learned their lesson from Kargil after 19 years. However, I don’t believe this news and even if it’s true, nothing will come out of this, and we have only ourselves to blame.

We are responsible for this conflict, not them. We have poked our nose where it does not belong for far too long.
 
Modi does not have the political capital so close to elections to resume bilateral talks with Pakistan at any meaningful level.

So any efforts from Pakistani side before then will be a waste.
 
No talk with Military that will undermine elected Govt of Pakistan.It's Pakistan's internal matter who decides their foreign policies,but as far as Indians are concerned talks are between Govt to Govt.
 
Dialogue will be meaningless unless there is going to be some end solution in mind. That would mean concession on some major positions held previously, and as Pakistan is the party which is (allegedly) reaching out to India, you can probably draw your own conclusions which party will be conceding on those sticking points.

What is the major position Pakistan holding?
 
Predictable that it's the 'Pakistan military' and not the 'Imran Khan government'.
 
In Naya Pakistan the PM is still castrated by the military. Who knew?
 
I guess some can't read that the overtures allegedly began a year before the elections.

Amazing that a country with so much going for it, so many people in such high positions in massive multi-conglomerates, fear the electing of one man in a 3rd world country

Also there's literally no quotes in the article, everyone on twitter is riling their eyes at it, and lastly it's still a day or so after Hussain Haqqani had a op-Ed lol.
 
Last edited:
No. The official position is Kashmirisvwant independence and should be give Independence.

That seems a very reasonable position so as I said, seems that the only way there is going to be any meaningful talks is with major concessions re Kashmir which is the major sticking point I believe.
 
That seems a very reasonable position so as I said, seems that the only way there is going to be any meaningful talks is with major concessions re Kashmir which is the major sticking point I believe.

Pakistan has to only implement what it already agreed to and signed on. Maintain the sanctity of the LoC and not support a armed terrorist movement in Kashmir.

If Pakistan wsnts to talk about Kashmiri freedom at the UN or any such platform i dont think its going to be a issue.
 
Pakistan supports the UN resolutions which mandate a plebiscite, the plebiscite only gives 2 options - India or Pakistan.

UN resolution talks of no pakistan option. Infact it asks Pakistan to vacate PoK.


In the first step, Pakistan was asked to use its "best endeavours" to secure the withdrawal of all tribesmen and Pakistani nationals, putting an end to the fighting in the state.
In the second step, India was asked to "progressively reduce" its forces to the minimum level required for keeping law and order. It laid down principles that India should follow in administering law and order in consultation with the Commission, using local personnel as far as possible.
In the third step, India was asked to ensure that all the major political parties were invited to participate in the state government at the ministerial level, essentially forming a coalition cabinet. India should then appoint a Plebiscite Administrator nominated by the United Nations, who would have a range of powers including powers to deal with the two countries and ensure a free and impartial plebiscite. Measures were to be taken to ensure the return of refugees, the release of all political prisoners, and for political freedom.
The resolution also called for measures be taken for return of refugees, for the release of political prisoners and for political freedom


This is the gist of the resolution.
 
Did someone say 'peace talks'?


Though he didn’t name any country, Bajwa apparently referred to clashes with Indian forces along the LoC in Kashmir when he said he wanted to assure the people that the “blood of martyrs wouldn’t be spilled in vain”.

“The blood that has been spilled on the frontier, the blood being spilled on the frontier, we will take revenge for this blood,” he said, speaking in Urdu.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/indi...f-gen-bajwa/story-Tb2N0MrrNbZysbd4BtMERM.html
 
Back
Top