Balancing Act: The Complexities of Indo-Pak Trade Relations

At the start of any discussion around Indo-Pak relations, it is essential to note that the internal power dynamics within Pakistan are a result of its consistent hate campaign against India. In simple words, the Army is the most powerful institution in Pakistan, and it chooses the civilian leadership by directly and indirectly managing the elections. Their tactics include using judges to jail politicians, denying registration to popular political parties, assassination attempts on journalists and key political figures, and so on. Though media is comparatively free in Pakistan, journalists are not allowed to name army generals and discuss the army's role in directly managing the country. It is increasingly coming into the public domain that Army generals examine every proposal introduced by the civilian government, and the civilian government cannot implement any policy or plan without clearance from Pakistan Army Headquarters. 

The Islamists in India refused to accept India as their country and demanded the partition of the country in 1947. The Congress was reluctant to accept the demand, and the British government was planning to leave the country and had no real interest in the fate of India as one unit. Britain was observing carefully but was not keen to follow Jinnah's and his followers' dictates. The Jinnah gave an open call to Muslims to start riots and attack the Hindus to make the point that both communities cannot live together in one nation. After his call, popularly known as Direct Action Day, the riots erupted in Calcutta on 16 August 1947. Jinnah made it clear through his call that if India was not partitioned based on religion, then these communal riots would continue, and the country would remain in a permanent state of turmoil due to communal riots. Pakistan was created to the chagrin of secular Indian nationalists in 1947. One-third of Indian territory was given to one-fourth of its Muslim population. Pakistan laid claim on Jammu and Kashmir as well and rejected India as a secular nation. Around nine percent of the population of India was Muslim even after the partition. It increased to around 15 percent in 2021. 

Pakistan remained obsessed with Kashmir. It decided to make seizing Kashmir from India its core objective. The Pakistani civilian leadership failed to make a constitution after the independence and built on the bureaucracy left behind by the British government. Army generals filled the political vacuum. The army decided to entrench its control over society and injected high doses of religion and militant nationalism into the broader population. Even today, whether it is civil society groups, journalists, public intellectuals, film stars, or cricketers consider Jinnah as their ideal who openly preached the hateful ideology of the two-nation theory, which claims that Hindus and Muslims cannot remain together as two faiths are different from each other and so on. In the 21st century, it appears madness that any person who openly argues that people of different faiths cannot remain in one nation due to the differences in their culture and faith can be an ideal for anyone. It is interesting to note that Pakistan remained almost like India for the first two decades after the partition. However, the Pakistani government started the process of Islamization and eliminated any influence of the faith that existed before their conversion to Islam. No doubt their efforts have paid off. The mindset of the average Pakistani and Indian is vastly different today. India has wholeheartedly accepted Western modernity, while Pakistan has chosen to become a radical Islamic society, where any idea has to pass the test of Islam and its principles. Cinema is one such example. Due to religious reasons, Pakistan, despite having a population of 240 million, has only 150 cinema screens. However, it has a vibrant drama industry mostly known for regurgitating similar content. The reason for the constraints on the imagination of filmmakers is the radicalism prevalent in society. People are not tolerant and are not ready to accept content that even slightly flicks from the tenets of Islam, 

After the ouster of Prime Minister Imran Khan, the Pakistan army conducted the elections and reinstalled the Nawaz Sharif and Bhutto family to power. The army did not allow Imran Khan’s party to contest elections; each party candidate had to contest the election as an independent candidate on a different symbol. It was a mockery of free and fair elections, but the international community remained silent as Imran Khan was pushing Pakistan toward Muammar Gaddafi and Ayatullah Khoumenei style Anti-Westernism. He even openly called Osama Bin Laden a martyr in the legislature. At the same time, he was questioning Saudi Arabia’s leadership of the Muslim world. His political rhetoric and speeches were inciting Muslims, not only Pakistanis but others as well, to question and challenge the US leadership. Political realists run most Muslim countries, and they don’t unquestioningly support other Muslims at the cost of their interests, but Pakistan expects all Muslim nations to confront the West and anyone who is in confrontation with any Muslim nation on any issue. The purpose of the Pakistani approach is to galvanize the support of Muslim nations to support its rhetoric on the Kashmir issue. So far, success eluded Pakistan. Generally, the Organization of Islamic Countries never paid more than lip service to the issue at Pakistan’s behest, but most of the Muslim nations have very friendly relations with India. In fact, during the tenure of PM Narendra Modi, India’s relations with Arab nations have been deepened considerably.

The wrong priorities and political turmoil in Pakistan affected its economy negatively. Due to Western support, Pakistan was economically well-off than India till the 1990s. Almost all nations that aligned themselves with the United States against the Soviet Union made remarkable economic progress in the second half of the 20th century. Pakistan is one of the few countries that failed to capitalize on the support provided by the Western powers led by the United States due to misplaced priorities and confrontationist rhetoric against India. Presently, the country is avoiding economic default due to the regular support from the IMF. It is desperately looking to increase its exports, reduce the cost of its imports, and find opportunities to generate revenues. Over the last few decades, India has gone out of its way to request normal trading ties with Pakistan, which included giving the MFN (most favored nation) status despite continuous terror attacks on India by Pakistani-backed Islamic terror groups operating in Jammu and Kashmir. Pakistani establishment, media, and politicians repeated ad nauseam that relations between both countries cannot be normal until the resolution of the Kashmir issue. India insisted that while negotiations are ongoing about the territorial dispute, at least both countries should improvise the relations in other areas, but Pakistan rejected it. India long believed that normal trade relations and cultural ties would build a peace constituency in both countries that can leveraged to reduce hate-mongering. Pakistanis argued that India was trying to put the Kashmir issue on the back burner, and attempts by India to have trade, people-to-people contact, cultural ties, and sports collaborations are attempts to sideline the Kashmir issue. 

Pakistan continued to provide military training, supply weapons, and weaponize Islam in Kashmir Valley. India struggled to crush the militancy in Kashmir despite using a large number of security forces. At the same time, Pakistan openly supported Jaish-e-Mohmmah, Lashhkar-e-Taiba, Hijbul Mujhahiddin, and many other Islamic terror organizations. Even after the United Nations proscribed some of these terror groups and high-profile terrorists, the Pakistani military continued to support them to launch attacks on India openly. The helplessness of India was exposed during the 2008 Mumbai attacks. Ten Pakistani terrorists invaded Mumbai through the sea and launched a killing spree on many high-profile targets. Mumbai became a warzone while India struggled to kill the terrorists. India, under the Congress rule, led by the Gandhi family, though Manmohan Singh was Prime Minister, could not do anything except repeat the phrase that we would isolate Pakistan. 1.3 Billion people watched with helplessness but could not do anything. Pakistan has friendly relations with all key global nations and enjoys a deep friendship with China, which used its veto power to protect the terrorist groups from UN bans over the decades. Five permanent members of the United Nations can veto any proposal in the international body, and almost every nation is helpless. In short, Congress gave confidence to Pakistan that it could use proxy war to destabilize Kashmir and derail India’s economic growth and economic potential. After the Mumbai attacks, international tourism collapsed, and investor confidence was deeply shaken. If India’s most prosperous city and financial capital is not safe, what is the hope for the rest of the country? 

Fortunately, Modi won the elections in 2014. He tried to improve relations with Pakistan, but Pakistani continued supporting Islamic separatists in the Kashmir valley and launched attacks now and then on security forces and critical installments. The confidence of Pakistan's military was extremely high, and Kashmir valley was in turmoil. The stone pelting was at its peak; the locals were expressing their unrest with frequent protest marches, particularly on Fridays after Namaz outside the mosques and on streets; Pakistani flags and slogans were raised in a very high pitch, high profile separatists enjoyed state largesse, security forces killed the killing of militants who became famous led the widespread protests. The purpose of Pakistanis internationalizing Kashmir was quite successful. The world has started noticing the turmoil and attempts made by India to suppress the rebellion. Pakistan openly ran trains by printing the posters of slain militants and made all attempts to declare them heroes. The Pakistani diaspora also became hyperactive in galvanizing the support in Western countries for the separation of Kashmir from India and its merger with Pakistan. It has been the stated objective of Islamists since 1947. 

Prime Minister Modi started with surgical strikes, but Pakistan dismissed as mere propaganda and continued to use terror attacks. Then came the 2019 Pulwama attack, and PM Modi reversed the offensive. He ordered the military retaliation and bombing of terror training camps in Balakot. Undoubtedly, he was constrained by the inability of the Indian Air Force to launch air offenses properly. It is important to note that Pakistan has less but has better pieces of equipment including missiles and fighter jets supplied by the United States. Pakistan displayed its capabilities and bombed certain areas in India while also downing a Mig-21 plane by Abhinandan. Mig-21 was included in the Air Force during the 1960s, and India is still using the planes. However, the message was loud and clear to Pakistanis. BJP is not Congress, and days of releasing routine press notes after terror attacks vowing that India will isolate Pakistan is over. India under Modi will retaliate. India will take revenge, and Pakistan’s policy of launching terror attacks under the nuclear umbrella will no longer provide any safety to it. There is no doubt weak pro-India Kashmir outfits like the National Conference and PDP failed in dealing with local aspirations and providing them with positive leadership. Modi won the 2019 general elections. He decided to abrogate Article 370, jailed all separatists, and used the governor’s rule and NIA to prosecute overground supporters of separatist militant groups. He adopted the policy of zero tolerance towards separatists and their supporters and fired govt employees who were inciting youth and promoting separatism. And within five years, Kashmir is reaping the fruits of peace. Millions of tourists are visiting Kashmir, and the activities of terrorists and support for them have declined considerably. There is hope in the overall atmosphere, and troublemakers have been boxed into the corner. Pakistanis also fear retaliation and have so far refrained from launching significant terror attacks. Kashmiris are participating in huge numbers in the general elections. The situation was not so good in decades from India’s point of view. Kashmiris are increasingly looking like any other Indian state. 

Pakistani military and civilian leadership are trying hard to convince India to resume its bilateral trade ties. Though Pakistanis released their frustration by claiming that the Hindu nationalist BJP government didn’t want any regular ties with them and ignored the reality that Modi traveled to Pakistan twice, Modi negotiated a ceasefire agreement for Kashmir valley. India not only negotiated but tried to normalize relations while making it clear that Pakistan must not launch terror attacks on India by using their proxy Islamic terror groups Jaish-e-Mohammad, Lashkar-e-Taiba, and so on. India must ask, can we allow Pakistanis to choose areas of cooperation and confrontation as they wish? Currently, Pakistan is facing a downturn and needs trade to support its dwindling economy. The situation will change in a few years, and Pakistan will resort to the same policies. What is the solution? What is India’s expectation? 

India’s expectation is straightforward. We don’t want Pakistan to supply money, weapons, and training to Islamic terror groups operating in Kashmir. Pakistan must cease all support to terror groups operating on its soil, which means visible actions against perpetrators of the 2008 Mumbai attacks and jailing of UN-designated terrorists, including Hafiz Sayeed and Masood Azhar. Suppose there is any agreement on the terror issue. In that case, India must have normal trade relations, cricketing ties, and cultural ties, including Pakistani singers and actors working in the Indian film industry. Till then, we should heed the advice of Pakistan experts like Sushant Sareen, who have devoted their lives to studying the collective mindset of Pakistan, its institutions, and its ruling elite. 

[Mukesh Devrari]