10 |

EDITORIAL

HYDERABAD

THE HINDU

MONDAY, DECEMBER 28, 2015

The map of neighbourly outreach

JOSY JOSEPH

monday, december 28, 2015

Opposition for
oppositions sake
t must have caused the Congress party great political discomfort to watch Prime Minister Narendra
Modi make a surprise stopover in Lahore, exude
bonhomie with his Pakistani counterpart, Nawaz
Sharif, and behave as if he could will India towards better
ties with Pakistan without help from anyone else. What
the Congress-led government failed to do for ten years
between 2004 and 2014, despite the good intentions of its
Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, the Bharatiya Janata
Party and its Prime Minister, Mr. Modi, seem able to do
with ease: take the initiative in visiting Pakistan and set
the agenda for talks with Pakistan. The Congress is free
to rue its missed opportunities, and, maybe, even blame a
combative BJP-headed opposition for the unimaginative
and constricted foreign policy vis--vis Pakistan in that
decade. But what it should not do is undermine the efforts of Mr. Modi as he sets about doing what it would
have liked to have done by itself. Of course, Mr. Modi can
be faulted for the U-turns in Indias South Asia foreign
policy. But the time for such criticism is not now, when he
and his government are moving ahead in the right direction. The sudden boost to ties with Pakistan might have
been unpredictable, as Congress leader Anand Sharma
saw it, but predictability is no virtue either. Also, it is of
no great consequence if the visit was prearranged days in
advance or was the result of an impulsive decision. What
matters is what ensues from Mr. Modis sudden overtures
to Pakistan. If the relations move up a level or two, and
the surprise visit helps build greater trust between the
two countries, then it would have served its purpose. The
visit can be termed frivolous only if the end results do
not go beyond wishing Mr. Sharif on his birthday or
greeting his granddaughter on her wedding. To be dismissive of the Modi-Sharif meeting even without giving
it a chance to bear fruit betrays the political nervousness
of the Congress more than anything else.
That, during its years in power, the Congress took its
cautionary instincts on Pakistan to an absolute extreme
was obvious. Indeed Prime Minister Singh did not get the
necessary support from his party or his Cabinet colleagues when he tried to take the initiative in resolving
outstanding issues with Pakistan most spectacularly,
on the Sharm el-Sheikh joint statement. This might have
had to do with the fear of the BJP, then in opposition, taking political advantage of any normalisation of relations
with Pakistan by projecting it as a sell-out. But without
doubt, Prime Minister Singh was seen as apolitical by the
Congress leadership, and was not given a free hand in
taking initiatives of the kind that Mr. Modi has. The Congress should seriously introspect about the need to place
national interest above petty political calculations. For
his part, Prime Minister Narendra Modi too must reach
out to take opposition leaders into confidence on his vision for India-Pakistan talks else, bipartisan consensus
on such a crucial issue will remain elusive, with populist
grandstanding continuing to threaten the countrys strategic and foreign policy challenge.

The dramatic diplomacy that unfolded across

Afghanistan-Pakistan-India on Christmas
day may be the first clear admission from
Prime Minister Narendra Modi that dealing
with Pakistan is not a simple task. And that
his governments ill-thought-out jingoism of
its early months in power needs to be tempered with a mature and realistic approach if
he has to focus on and achieve the grand slogans ranging from Swachh Bharat to Make
in India.
Ever since Mr. Modi swept to power in the
summer of 2014, his foreign policy has been
packed mostly with spectacle and some boldness. He kicked off by inviting the South
Asian Association for Regional Cooperation
(SAARC) leaders to his swearing-in, but soon
let strident rhetoric lead the bilateral engagement with Pakistan. That early spark of hope
was dashed by aggressive statements from
the highest levels, and almost a wanton abandonment of restraint along the International
Border (IB) and the Line of Control (LoC).
The initial freeze
Diplomatic engagements with Pakistan
nosedived to embarrassing childishness. In
August 2014, Foreign Secretary-level talks
were called off after the Pakistani High Commissioner, Abdul Basit, met Kashmiri separatists; the same excuse was given a year later to
call off National Security Adviser (NSA)-level talks in New Delhi. The Modi governments
strategy gave a new lease of life to Hurriyat
factions, while adversely affecting the situation in the Kashmir Valley and along the IB
and the LoC.
Militant infiltration and the occasional
provocation from across the border have long
been the routine, but the tough posture
adopted in the wake of the April-May general
election in India coincided with, if not resulted in, a dramatic rise in cross-border firings.
Dozens of civilians and many paramilitary
personnel were killed or injured, and normal
life along the border was disrupted.
The pattern of terrorists sneaking into India from across the border and, within hours,
launching attacks on a target close to the border, be it a security installation or a civilian
target such as Gurdaspur in Punjab in July

If the Lahore drop-in was the first key step in

Prime Minister Narendra Modis new balanced
Pakistan policy, then it must immediately be
followed by a broadbasing of intellectual inputs
that inform his decisions
2015, became more pronounced. In the Kashmir Valley, the fog of war intensified. While
more local youth took to militancy, the mysterious rise of flamboyant militant commanders, their unusual escape from several encounter scenes, and final elimination after a
few months of their stardom was a recurrent
phenomenon.
The new aggressive phase wasnt all that
surprising, given the verbal volleys lobbed by
Mr. Modi against Pakistan in the run-up to the
2014 general election.
Reality from South Block
The grand settings of Lutyens Delhi have
an uncanny capacity to temper a ruler, even if
he pretends to be a macho outsider. Mr. Modi
is finally showing signs of realism that his

named government bungalow close by,

where the widow and children of former Afghan President Mohammad Najibullah have
been staying for over a quarter century. It was
from the remnants of the Afghan mujahideen
who fought Najibullahs forces that the Kashmir insurgency of the past three decades acquired sophistication, weapons and manpower, after New Delhi messed up its
Kashmir policy.
Young warriors from madrassas of Pakistan who rode into Kabul to drag Najibullah by
a pickup truck, in 1996, and hang him in the
streets were soon to shelter the al-Qaeda.
From this sponsorship by Pakistan, of nonstate violence and regressive political Islam,
the world got its new generation of terrorists
and their broader ideology. From New York

If states have only permanent interests, then India is yet

to define them. Until then, New Delhi will swing between
chaotic state responses to terrorist attacks and that
of dramatic bilateral summits.
neighbourhood policy cannot be complete
without engagement with Pakistan. His efforts over the past few weeks, to rekindle India-Russia bilateral ties and to reach out to
Pakistan, are signs that the former Gujarat
Chief Minister is now finally becoming the
Indian Prime Minister. Dramatic summits
and humongous announcements do not often
account for great diplomacy; it requires patience and perseverance.
Against the new mature phase of Mr. Modis diplomacy, it was, in hindsight, not a great
surprise that he flew into Lahore from Kabul,
on December 25, where the vagaries of violence are interspersed with buried egos of
empires and signposts of Indias strategic interests. If Afghanistan wasnt the real reason
that prompted Mr. Modi about the need to
calibrate his Pakistan policy, then he has to
only walk a few yards from his office to an un-

Citys World Trade Center complex to Pariss

Bataclan theatre, from Mumbais streets to
the many bombed markets across India, the
signatures of violence nurtured by sections of
the Pakistani establishment and flourishing
under its guidance cannot be ignored. Precisely for this and other factors, India needs
to remain engaged with the Pakistani
establishment.
Vajpayee, Manmohan Singh eras
Rhetoric about large-scale annihilations
and macho responses to a dysfunctional democracy sound impressive in the heat of an
election campaign but for a government, the
challenge is to find ways to deal with the delinquent next door. Mr. Modi seems to have
now picked up the gauntlet.
It is the realisation of the complexity of
dealing with Pakistan that forced successive

CARTOONSCAPE

New energy
in old friendship
hould old acquaintance be forgot, asks the
famous song Auld Lang Syne, traditionally
sung at the years end. Prime Minister Narendra Modis visit to Russia last week,
much in the manner of the song, was as much about reassuring a strong and reliable friend of India, as he referred to Russia, as it was about chalking out new avenues for future cooperation in defence, energy and
space. These avenues are well- charted, with the annual
summit between both countries giving a consistent direction on all bilateral agreements, but relations have
flagged in the past few years. This year the summit itself
had to be put off several times for one reason or another,
and it was finally held on Christmas-eve, which was the
last possible window before Russia shuts down for holidays. In contrast, Indias relationship with the other
world power, the United States, has seen a dramatic year,
particularly in military engagement. From U.S. President Barack Obamas visit to New Delhi as chief guest at
the Republic Day parade, when India and the U.S. signed
their first military agreement outside South Asia as a
maritime cooperation agreement, firming up of more
military exercises and joint development of defence
equipment, visits by top U.S. generals, and the first-ever
visit by the Indian Defence Minister to an American military base all have given the impression that India is
abandoning its traditionally neutral strategic space.
While Prime Minister Modis visit may not have resulted in overturning that impression entirely, it has
served as a major boost to the outlook on India-Russia
ties in the future. First, a series of defence acquisitions
announced in the works will put Russia back on top of
military suppliers to India, a spot taken by the U.S. and
Israel for more than five years. Second, the deal for 200
Ka-226T Kamov helicopters will become the first big
Make in India project, which has tended to be only a slogan thus far. Third, by investing time in the CEO summit
that included several Indian players in the energy and
defence sector, Mr. Modi and Russian President Vladimir Putin have shown a desire to involve the private sector in areas that only saw government-to-government
deals. This move is the most significant: despite the
close friendship the two have fostered, the immense
goodwill the people of the two countries share and the
major dependence the Indian military has on Russian
hardware, bilateral trade ties have always been poor, and
even today languish below $10 billion. Russian and Indian industrys interest and investment will give what the
leaders referred to as the old friendships new energy.
An energy that will also bolster Indias plans for new ties
with Central Asia, and more recently, in the trips Mr.
Modi made straight after his Moscow visit, with Afghanistan and Pakistan.

CM
YK

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Detour to Lahore
With his sudden visit to Lahore, on
Christmas day, Prime Minister
Narendra Modi has displayed
wisdom and statesmanship in
trying to take the India-Pakistan
dialogue forward (PM goes to
Lahore, makes a Christmas date
with history, Dec.26). It is
intriguing, however, why the
Congress should be irked because
he is only following its policy of
continued
engagement
with
Pakistan
(Cong.
slams
unpredictable policy, hints at
private deal, Dec.26). It is
significant that the visit comes just
after a friendly meeting between the
two Prime Ministers, of India and
Pakistan, in Paris, a breakthrough
meeting between the NSAs of India
and Pakistan in Bangkok, and
Foreign Minister Sushma Swarajs
parleys with Sartaj Aziz in
Islamabad (3 minutes that changed
India-Pak. ties, Dec.26). The
Pakistan military too could come on
board this time around because it
faces tough internal challenges and
cant be seen to be indefinitely
fighting a low-level war with India.
While Mr. Modis out-of-the-box
diplomacy may not yield immediate
dividends, it will certainly pave the
way for a new comprehensive
dialogue
between
the
two
countries.
Kangayam R. Narasimhan,
Chennai

The success of the gesture can be

measured only by the ability of New
Delhi and Islamabad to insulate the
dialogue from interference by nonstate actors. India cannot ignore the
fact that the real policymaker in
Pakistan, as far as Pakistans India
policy is concerned, is still the
military leadership. For any
meaningful dialogue and longlasting peace in the subcontinent,

Prime Ministers to risk so much to engage

with the neighbour, often without much success. Atal Bihari Vajpayee took the gamble of
riding a bus across the contentious border,
only to be faced with the Kargil incursion a
few weeks later. It may be a mere coincidence
that Nawaz Sharif was the one who hosted
Mr. Vajpayee in Lahore then, and now Mr.
Modi, despite his perilous survival in a military-dominated state.
Both Mr. Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh
worked with a significant number of Pakistan
experts, within the Prime Ministers Office
and Ministry of External Affairs and on the
track II circuit, to steer their policies. Pakistan is a state like none other. As you sit back
taking in the success of diplomatic outreach,
militants can sneak across the border to occupy strategic heights; as you prepare for a major push to improving bilateral trade, you may
find a few men rowing across the sea to
launch a deadly terrorist attack on your commercial capital. Pakistan is a state in deep crisis, fighting its many demons, and with statecraft deeply embedded in misguided military
chauvinism. However, those, and other factors, cannot be the only issues to dictate Indias engagement with Pakistan.
The engagement should be primarily informed by the fact that Indias economic
growth, including its ability to keep government expenses under check, enjoy global
market trust and attract investment, is all critically hinged on a peaceful South Asia. No
other reason is needed to appreciate why India will have to keep talking to Pakistan.
Dealing with Pakistan is like playing football on a rainy day and on a muddy ground.
The team needs to have the skill, the ability to
anticipate the unexpected, the response
without losing ones nerve, and the stamina to
keep playing despite the downpour. No one
who has watched the Modi government
closely will grant all that to his narrow, centralised, decision-making structure where
very few seem to have any influence on foreign policy. If the Lahore drop-in was the first
key step in Mr. Modis new balanced Pakistan
policy, then it must immediately be followed
by a broadbasing of intellectual inputs that inform his decisions.
Defining permanent interests
The excuses offered by the Modi government to muddy India-Pakistan relations over
the last year-and-a-half were no new discoveries. For long, even under both Mr. Vajpayee
and Dr. Singh, India has introduced new goalposts, or moved existing ones. On the sidelines of the SAARC summit in Kathmandu in
2001, Mr. Vajpayees Foreign Minister, Jaswant Singh, was clear with the demand: he
produced a list of 20 wanted people allegedly
living under state protection in Pakistan, and
asked that Islamabad dismantle the infrastructure of terror. By the end of 2008, after the
Mumbai attacks, the Manmohan Singh governments demands were focussed on action
against those responsible for the attack on
Mumbai.
The fact is that India still does not have a
consistent diplomatic posture against Pakistan, which has been perilously close to being
a full-blown, dysfunctional nation state over
the past several years.
Mr. Modis diplomatic moves since he took
office in 2014 capture the bigger trouble with
Indias international positioning. It still does
not have a grand strategy regarding its diplomatic and military ambitions on the global
stage, including how to deal with Pakistan,
that carries political approval across the
spectrum.
If states have only permanent interests,
then India is yet to define them. Until then,
New Delhi will swing between chaotic state
responses to terrorist attacks and that of dramatic bilateral summits.
josy.joseph@thehindu.co.in

Letters emailed to letters@thehindu.co.in must carry the full postal address and the full name or the name with initials.

the democratic set-up has to have

the upper hand over the military
and the ISI.
Srinivas Bodla,
Hyderabad

It was amusing to read former

Foreign
Minister
Salman
Khurshids explanation that Prime
Minister Manmohan Singh could
not visit Pakistan, apprehending
mayhem and criticism from the
BJP (Why Manmohan Singh could
not make trip to Pak.? Dec.27).
While this is no excuse for not
taking bold initiatives on the foreign
front, the Congress is now doing the
same thing by deprecating the
diplomatic initiative of Mr. Modi.
Its senior leader Anand Sharmas
description of the initiative being
unpredictable and personally
motivated shows that the Congress
does not have the magnanimity and
large-heartedness to appreciate Mr.
Modis laudable move.
S.V. Venkatakrishnan,
Bengaluru

It is heartening that the rest of the

world has welcomed the initiative
(China, UN welcome talks,
Dec.27; Editorial and Will benefit
entire region: U.S., both Dec.26).
One welcomes the comments of
Chinas
Foreign
Ministry
spokesperson Lu Kang that China is
ready to support the friendship
between the two countries, through
combined dialogue. One hopes that
the efforts that were started by Atal
Bihari Vajpayee and Manmohan
Singh will continue to move
forward. Good ties between the two
neighbours are a must.
Maninataraajan,
Chennai

The visit has only sent out a

confusing signal about how the
government wants to direct the
trajectory of our bilateral relations

with a country that has till now

refused to address our deep
concerns over ISI-aided acts of
terror in India. A lack of consistency
seems to have become the hallmark
of Mr. Modis highly personalised
style of functioning while giving the
cold-shoulder to institutionalised,
foreign policy-making processes
(Were dealing with Pak. on our
own terms, says BJP, Dec.27). This
is not likely to yield the desired
results.
Theatrics
and
showmanship do make good
headlines, but are not substitutes
for initiating structured diplomatic
moves. Whether it is about Mumbai
serial blast prime accused Dawood
Ibrahim being sheltered and
protected in Pakistan or dealing
with 26/11 mastermind Lakhvi,
Pakistans response has been least
encouraging. These are just two
examples from a long list of
festering issues.
S.K. Choudhury,
Bengaluru

At least for now these are

hypothetical questions, but what if
there had been a terror attack in
Delhi or massive unprovoked firing
by the Pakistan Army at the border
just as Mr. Modi was leaving Kabul
for Lahore on his surprise visit?
These are highly likely events in
Pakistans India diary. Would he
have still continued with his trip?
Our media should stop making a
song and dance about the whole
event. It was just a normal planned
visit. The drama was an
afterthought.
M. Balakrishnan,
Bengaluru

I do not see anything historic or

phenomenal in this surprise visit.
Had there been a real obstacle in the
way of the two Prime Ministers
meeting one another that had been
cleared by some brilliant and

extraordinary manoeuvre? This

time they decided to introduce a
surprise element into it with an
obvious view to create a sensation
about it. This drama might have
been meticulously planned in
advance.
S.P. Asokan,
Chennai

Mirage in West Asia

Every one knows what kind of a
country Saudi Arabia is (Indians
harassed in Saudi return, Dec. 27).
There are either no or some human
or womens rights, and extreme
laws and forms of punishment,
particularly onerous for nonnatives. Barring a segment of
Indians who work for Indian and
international
projects
and
corporates, the rest most of them
blue collar are at the mercy of
their local employers. Many have
their travel documents taken away
and are literally imprisoned. The
Indian consulate can do very little,
even if it wants to.

Beep song
The next hot topic in Tamil Nadu
after the devastating floods seems
to be the Beep song (Some
editions, Beep song: Nadigar
Sangam says issue in court, Dec.
27). The song is nauseating and
undignified and speaks volumes
about the deteriorating taste of
viewers and listeners in recent
times. I would say all this started
with the Kolaveri song, and that
went viral, which set the trend of
venting ones ire against women. It
is said that the Beep song is
evoking mixed reaction and
comments which makes one
wonder
where
society
is
proceeding as far as our culture and
the subject of decency are
concerned.
Anna Mary Yvonne,
Chennai

This is not the first instance of

brutality against Indian employees
on Saudi soil (Assault on Indian
workers strains ties with Saudi
Arabia, Dec.25). There are
countless other examples where
blue-collar workers have been
subject to inhumane treatment. I
know of electricians being asked to
work in stone crusher factories and
carry headloads of stones for the
whole day in the open. Refusal to do
so
only
meant
instant
imprisonment. The role of dubious
overseas manpower employment
agencies needs to be probed and
some form of regulation introduced
before people leave for jobs in West
Asia.

The main reason for anger across

the State against the Beep song is
over the use of expletives. There
are, however, a number of scenes
and dialogue tracks in our films in
general that are either outright
vulgar or which border on vulgarity;
markedly so in the so-called
comedy scenes. Word punning,
especially where intimate body
parts are concerned, is quite
common and has become quite
acceptable. In the Beep song, the
lyrics convey the anguish and pain
felt by someone who is jilted, who
then proceeds to advise such people
from falling prey to drink and
cigarette smoking. Considering all
this, one would advocate taking an
empathetic view of the whole
matter and letting bygones be
bygones. Maybe an expression of
regret by the actor concerned
should be sufficient in putting an
end to the controversy.

Sohrab Alam Ansari,

Gaya, Bihar

B. Subramanian,
Madurai

A.N. Lakshmanan,
Bengaluru

HY-TG