Vajpayee’s Bus Journey Starts a Thaw in Glacial India-Pakistan Relations

By M.M. Ali

Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s February bus trip from India into Pakistan may be a positive development in relations between the two countries. However, it would be a mistake to read too much into it.

It certainly marked a thawing of the tension that had mounted in the subcontinent following the May 1998 nuclear tests carried out by both sides. But unrestricted land travel between India and Pakistan may not come about for a while. Certainly it will be some time before a crossing between the two countries becomes as routine as passage between the United States and Canada.

Real normalization of Indian-Pakistani relations still depends upon resolution of the Kashmir dispute, the cause of two of the three wars between the two countries in 1947, 1965 and 1971. Nevertheless, Vajpayee’s initiative and the warm reception he received in Lahore from Pakistani Prime Minister Mian Nawaz Sharif has opened up a dialogue between them.

It is obvious, too, that intensive shuttle diplomacy by U.S. Under Secretary of State Strobe Talbott over the past eight months had a role in the warming trend. Talbott chose to make public a summary of his talks with Indian and Pakistani leaders during several visits to Delhi and Islamabad in an article he wrote for the Foreign Affairs March/April1999 issue.

In dealing with his talks on nuclear nonproliferation, he has treated India and Pakistan evenhandedly and ignored India’s contention that its nuclear program is not geared toward Pakistan but is designed to give itself an effective capability to defend against China’s nuclear threat.

Talbott went on to tell India publicly that where the U.S. may endorse Japan and Germany for permanent seats on the U.N. Security Council when the question arises, it does not support India’s ambition to become a permanent Security Council member.

He also said Washington is willing to scale down the economic sanctions imposed against both India and Pakistan following their nuclear tests if Delhi and Islamabad desist from producing any more fissionable material and agree to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).

From his article it appears that Washington has finally accepted the reality of the nuclear weapons programs of both countries and is prepared to work with them. As Talbott put it: “Having India and Pakistan stabilize their nuclear competition at the lowest possible level is both the starting point and the near-term objective of the U.S. diplomatic effort…The Clinton administration does not expect either country to alter or constrain its defense program simply because we have asked it to.”

Vajpayee’s Visit to Pakistan

It is ironic that it is Prime Minister Vajpayee’s Bharatiya Janata Party government, which is wedded to the establishment of Hindutva (land for the Hindus alone) and is opposed to the existence of Pakistan, that has initiated the process of improving relations between the two neighboring states. The agreement signed at the end of the Vajpayee visit to Pakistan read: “The two sides shall engage in bilateral consultations on security concepts and nuclear doctrines, with a view to developing measures for confidence-building in the nuclear and conventional fields.”

While there were vague references to ways to avoid the accidental use of nuclear weapons, there was no mention of signing a treaty banning nuclear first-strikes or of any concrete steps that would be taken to resolve the underlying Kashmir dispute. The agreement stated only that the two governments “shall intensify their efforts to resolve all issues, including the issue of Jammu Kashmir.” Nevertheless, Vajpayee’s visit marked an improvement in the otherwise glacial relations between the subcontinent’s two largest countries.

Sharif’s Management Style

Pakistani Prime Minister Mian Nawaz Sharif won big in the last elections and his Muslim League party enjoys a clear majority in the National Assembly, ensuring him political stability. However, he has been at pains to reduce, if not eliminate, challenges to his authority from all other real and even perceived sources such as the military, the courts, and the media.

He has humored the army by appointing many of its senior officers to important civilian positions, sacked the judges who disagreed with him on political decisions, and seems now to have turned toward a section of the media that has not lined up with him. The largest chain of English and Urdu (Pakistan’s national language) newspapers and magazines, the Jang Group, is presently feeling the government’s ire.

The Group has been accused of violating the income tax laws, its offices have been raided by the police, permits for import of newsprint have been withheld, and government advertisements upon which the publications depend for a major share of their revenues have been withdrawn. In addition, several recent court orders against such high-handed government actions have been circumvented.

Information Minister Mushahid Hussain, a prominent professional journalist himself, has ended up justifying government political actions against his former colleagues. The government also has attempted to maintain law and order by empowering military courts to deal with the deteriorating political and security situation. However, the judiciary has asserted itself and nullified such appointments.

Now another set of civilian courts with power for rendering summary judgments within the constitutional confines has been appointed to deal with the menace of violence and terrorism that are out of control in the country. A breakdown of the machinery of law and order remains an issue, with killings, destruction of property and burglaries continuing unabated.

Wisely with the economic health of Pakistan still far from satisfactory, the U.S. has scaled down its economic sanctions imposed following last year’s nuclear tests. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank also have begun to release part of their monetary and project assistance. Further, the Paris Club of lender nations has promised to reschedule its debt recovery plan and the London Club, comprising private sector lenders, also has relented on Pakistan’s debt payment deadlines.

All this has allowed Pakistan some breathing space but has done little to alleviate its problems. Had these concessions not come through, Pakistan would have had to declare bankruptcy, with the resulting damage to its already shaky financial standing in international markets.

Yet another internal issue also has become a serious headache for Nawaz Sharif. His decision to seize private foreign exchange accounts in the Pakistani banks has been declared void by the High Court of Punjab. The government plans to appeal the High Court decision to the Supreme Court. However, should the Supreme Court uphold the lower court decision, the government, already severely financially strapped, will have to come up with close to $2 billion.

This decision to freeze foreign exchange deposits already has resulted in a flight of capital outside Pakistan and put an end to the frail trickle of investments that was coming in from abroad. Therefore, in view of the increase in the debt burden without prospects of any appreciable revenue generation, Pakistan’s economic prospects do not appear bright as the country prepares to enter a new millennium.

Nawaz Sharif may postpone the day of reckoning through earning concessions from donor agencies and assisting countries. But for a long-term cure he will have to find better ways of pulling the country out of the doldrums. Merely gaining time while the debts grow will only prolong Pakistan’s economic woes and increase the nervousness of market forces.

M.M. Ali is a consultant and fellow with the Center for Planning and Policy Studies in the Washington, DC area.