Clamping of emergency in Pakistan by President Pervez Musharraf on 3 November 2007 has evoked strong opposition, both domestically and internationally. The judiciary, which was regarded as the most significant threat to Musharraf’s quest to continue in power, has on 23 November 2007 upheld the imposition of emergency by President Musharraf as well as the suspension of fundamental rights. However, the military setbacks in Waziristan and SWAT valley can now be attributed as a prelude or the immediate cause for declaring emergency. On the external front, President Musharraf’s act has earned ‘mild’ condemnation from the United States, European Union, China, India and other countries. However, the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) currently in session in Kampala, Uganda, has suspended Pakistan on 23 November 2007 for the second time in eight years for clamping a state of emergency.
Undoubtedly, President Musharraf rode the crest of power through a farcical re-election process on 6 October this year; the active opposition of the judiciary helped to unite the opposition parties and the filing of lawsuits against him. Amidst protests, lawyers’ clash with policemen, and subsequent media blackout, along with a mass resignation of legislators, the election looked all the more less than credible.
In the wake of these developments, President Musharraf has not shied away from indulging in political gimmickry by inviting former prime ministers – Nawaz Sharief and Benazir Bhutto – for consultations to prove his bona fides as a democrat. Nawaz Sharief was deported soon after his arrival in Pakistan and Benazir Bhutto, with whom Musharraf is reported to have entered into a secret power sharing agreement, is also likely to meet the same fate amidst reports that President Musharraf had recently flown to Saudi Arabia to meet Nawaz Sharief. Buckling under the external pressure, particularly fro the United States, Musharraf has promised to hold elections by early January 2008. How far he can stand by his promise of holding elections and restore democracy in Pakistan is yet to be seen.
On the whole, present scenario prevalent in Pakistan seems conducive for President Musharraf to further consolidate his grip over the reins of power, reshuffle the top brass in Army and the ISI to placate his opponents and handpick his own henchmen who can be instrumental in dancing to his tunes in the near future. At the same time, president Musharraf can also utilize this opportunity to crush a blow to militancy and curb the terrorist activities of pro-Taliban and Al-Qaeda activists along the Pak-Afghan border. If Musharraf succeeds in this strategy, then he can reap rich dividends in terms of pampering the Bush Administration and improving his relations with Kabul as well.
Indian Approach
India has treaded a cautious path on developments in Pakistan. Reaction to recent developments in Pakistan has been generally muted in Western capitals and India has also toed similar line. The South Block’s official statement only expressed “regret” about the imposition of ‘emergency rule’ in Pakistan: “We regret the difficult times that Pakistan is passing through. We trust that conditions of normalcy will soon return permitting Pakistan’s transition to stability and democracy to continue.”
Pakistani civil right activists and media personalities have said that they would have preferred New Delhi to take a tougher stand. But the Indian government seems to prefer a cautious approach and is careful not to be perceived as interfering in Pakistan’s internal affairs. South Block officials claim that New Delhi has traditionally done business with whoever is in power in Islamabad. However, India had vehemently criticized the government in Pakistan after Musharraf seized power in 1999. At that time, New Delhi raised its voice in all major international fora against the crushing of democracy in Islamabad. Now, both New Delhi and Islamabad are allies of the U.S. in the ‘war on terror’. U.S. Deputy Secretary of State for Defence John Negroponte told Congress, before his recent trouble-shooting trip to Islamabad, that there “was not a mission in the world more deserving of our persistence and considered patience” than Pakistan.
On the eve of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s departure for Russia on 11 November 2007, National Security Adviser M K Narayanan told journalists accompanying Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on his two-day visit to Russia: “We are very worried about what is happening in Pakistan. We are concerned. We have tightened our borders tremendously and are on our guard.” Commenting on the prevailing situation in Pakistan, Narayanan said the Prime Minister has consistently maintained that India wants a stable Pakistan: “We want a stable Pakistan but more importantly an unstable Pakistan means increased problems and aggravated militancy within our borders.”
Viewing with ‘concern’ the situation in Pakistan, Narayanan said India had tightened security at its borders with the strife-torn country as it feared infiltration by militants. New Delhi favoured stability in Pakistan and hoped the “transition” there would be peaceful. Answering questions on Pakistan developments, Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon said India hoped the transition in Pakistan will be peaceful. Menon said India would like to carry forward the Indo-Pak peace process: “There have been improvements in Indo-Pak relations in the last two-three years. This process we will like to carry forward to its logical conclusion.”
Terror trepidation
India’s National Security Adviser, M.K. Narayanan, told the media recently that there was a danger of increased infiltration of terrorist groups from Pakistan if the political crisis continued. He also talked about the possibility of terrorist “sleeper cells” being activated in India. New Delhi has been accusing Islamabad of complicity in the terrorist attacks that have rocked India in 2007. No clinching evidence has, however, been provided by the Indian authorities. The Pakistan Army is now engaged in counter-insurgency activities of its own as it tries to stop the spread of the Taliban in the tribal areas bordering Afghanistan.
Indian Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon said that India was concerned about the instability on its periphery but emphasized that it was for Pakistanis to decide about their rulers. New Delhi has left it to Washington to speak about the fears pertaining to Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. Musharraf has rejected the Bush administration’s demands that it be made privy to the location of the country’s nuclear weapons. The Pakistan President insists that under no circumstances will he compromise with Pakistan’s sovereignty on this issue.
President Musharraf, even though he finds his back against the wall, has in recent times taken decisions that cannot have pleased Washington. Pakistan went ahead and signed the gas pipeline agreement with Iran in early November. In 2006, Islamabad, unlike New Delhi, refused to vote against Iran in the International Atomic Energy Agency. Musharraf has strengthened ties with countries such as Russia.
Islamabad has taken more interest in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) than New Delhi in recent years. The Saudi Royal House has been deeply committed to the Pakistan Army for a variety of reasons. It is unlikely to ditch Musharraf in a hurry. China remains an “all-weather friend” of Pakistan but has remained circumspect on the internal politics of the country. New Delhi is no doubt aware that Musharraf has still many cards left to play.
Trade ties
The current political turmoil in Pakistan notwithstanding, trade ties between India and its neighbouring country are unlikely to be affected in the near future. However, industry representatives say in the long run, trade between both the countries could take a hit if the instability continues. According to one commerce ministry official, “We have not seen any impact on cross-border trade with Pakistan. Things seem normal at the ports.” However, some early reports emanating from New Delhi appeared to suggest that the perceived thawing process in the area of trade across the line of actual control was likely to be affected.
As the situation obtains currently, Islamabad has rejected five of the 14 items selected by New Delhi for trade across the LoC, the five being leather and leather products, juices, jam and honey, readymade tin-packed foods, copper and silver items, and fabricated items such as gold ornaments. On its part, New Delhi has agreed to trade in six of the 16 items proposed by Islamabad, among the rejected items being spices, apples, walnuts, rice, paper and carpets.
Though the specific points along the LoC through which trade will be conducted have not yet been decided upon, there has been some progress in the larger sphere of border trade with trucks transporting identified trade-items being allowed to cross over into the territory of the destination-country.
There is general agreement on the fact that direct trade between the two countries will be far more beneficial to the two economies than the sort of trade taking place today, where Indian goods are having to find their way into Pakistan through third countries like, say, Dubai, adding to costs. Broadly speaking, direct free trade between the two economies is prone to disrupt the Pakistani domestic market to some extent in view of the stronger economic muscle-power Indian products wield compared to Pakistani export items. But, in the first place, there is no reason why free trade should be “uncontrolled”, especially when one of the two trading economies is likely to face domestic hiccups in the course of the implementation of such a policy.
During 2006-07, exports from India to Pakistan increased by 95.63 per cent to $1.3 billion against $690 million in the previous fiscal. Imports from Pakistan in the same year were worth $320 million, an 80 per cent increase over the year-ago figure of $180 million. Within the SAARC block, India has been the biggest trading partner of Pakistan in the last six years. According to analysts, India’s share in Pakistan’s total trade over the last six years stands at almost 50 per cent within the region. Following the relaxation of cement imports earlier this year, Pakistani companies were planning to export 6 million tonne of the commodity to India annually making it its largest market for cement. Moreover, after a series of talks between the commerce secretaries of the two countries, India and Pakistan had recently allowed trucks to cross the Wagah border post for unloading goods.
However, negotiations to open up border trade along the line of control (LoC) in Jammu and Kashmir may slow down because of the heating political scene in Pakistan. According to Tariq Sayeed, former chairman, Pakistan Chamber of Commerce and Industry, and secretary general, SAARC Chamber of Commerce and Industry “The emergency in Pakistan will not impact trade between India and Pakistan in any way as the trade policy has not been disturbed. Trading is being done as usual and there are no reports of a slowdown.” The Federation of Indian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Ficci) has stated: “The trade as of now remains undisturbed, given that regular infrastructure like railway continues to operate as usual. But in the future, Indian business houses might get apprehensive about trade with Pakistan. Also, traders who were contemplating to initiate trade relations with Pakistan may put their plans on hold”. Recently speaking to Business Standard, Krishan Kalra, secretary general, PHD Chamber of Commerce said: “According to the World Bank, trade between the two countries can even go up to $9-10 billion by 2010. But such incidents can deal a huge blow to the trade.”
According to Manpreet Vohra, the Indian Deputy High Commissioner in Karachi, the trade between India and Pakistan should not relate with other unresolved issues between the two countries and the governments should not put obstacles in the traders’ relationships at both sides of the border. While addressing a meeting with the members of Karachi Chamber of Commerce and Industry (KCCI) during his visit to the KCCI office in Karachi recently, Manpreet Vohra said that the needs of people and market should not be put off due to the unresolved issues like Kashmir between the two nations and trade should continue without any barriers.
He further added that both New Delhi and Islamabad have realized that the early resolutions of bilateral disputes were necessary to accelerate the bilateral trade but no time frame could be proposed for their solutions as such difficult issues take a longer time to resolve.
Suggesting that India could export low cost but high quality engineering and other goods to Pakistan, the Indian envoy said that Pakistan should not fear to import such items from India, which it was importing from other markets costing much more. He asked that if Pakistan could sign Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with China then it should not hesitate to maintain normal trading relations with India.
He said India was not deliberately blocking Pakistani exports adding there was nothing specific for Pakistan in Indian Trade or Export Policy, as it is equal for all countries. He assured the traders that no barriers were there on Indian side in enhancing bilateral trade but admitted that there were some reservations at their side regarding opening consulate at Karachi.
Stating that the trade between two countries has grown tremendously in the last few years as the Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) played a vital role in it, Manpreet Vohra informed that such increase in trade was broad based on agricultural and other commodity shortage at either side. He also called for augmentation in the bilateral trade on concrete and continued basis. He said that only 5-6 goods were allowed for trade by truck between the two countries and urged on both the sides to increase the numbers of items in positive list.
Earlier, President KCCI Shamim Ahmed Shamsi, while welcoming the Indian envoy, said that economic line could build stronger ties between two countries but it was not being focused so far. He urged to initiate joint ventures by the traders of both the sides of the border, adding that the new ventures should be explored for bilateral trade. KCCI president said it would be difficult to proceed towards stronger trade ties between two countries until the bilateral political issues including Kashmir could not be resolved peacefully.
Nevertheless, Pakistan has been especially curmudgeonly about trade, making the simple issue of according ‘most favoured nation’ status to India a matter of strategic importance; MFN is a trade jargon misnomer, all it means is that two countries give each other basic trade rights. But India, as the bigger country and the bigger economy and with a private sector that is in parts world class and which is, in general, thriving now, should be the more adventurous negotiator. However, it is in India’s interest to promote normalcy in Kashmir, to take the focus away from whatever it is that militancy wants.
Undoubtedly, economic ‘reasons’ can be found for keeping Pakistani paper and carpets away. But real economics is what happens across the Indo-Pak border already. Smuggling flourishes. Across the LoC, it would have been so much better had legal trade in all the usual sensitive commodities been allowed.
According to trade pundits, under the restrictive lists agreed to by both sides, there will inevitably be illegal trade. If there’s a good market for Indian-manufactured gold ornaments — banned by Pakistan — it will reach the consumer in PoK, and beyond. But the consumer will pay a premium and much of LoC trade will be shrouded in illegality. So no one will win and commerce as a real peacemaker will be handicapped. All of this is consistent with general India-Pakistan economic relations.
Conclusion
Viewed in a broad spectrum, bilateral relations between New Delhi and Islamabad have never been better since the 1980s, as they are now. Trade between the two countries has increased significantly. Since 2004, India and Pakistan have been involved in substantive talks. Incidents of cross-border terrorist activities have come down substantially. In the last couple of years, Musharraf has made many proposals to resolve the contentious issue of Kashmir. A favourable deal on Siachen was there for the taking. Pakistan’s support in the impending election of a new Commonwealth Secretary-General could be crucial for India. Islamabad was reportedly veering towards supporting Kamalesh Sharma, India’s candidate for the post. Now, however, India may not have to worry about Pakistan’s vote.
Both countries acknowledge the breakthrough in their ongoing peace negotiations and none of them is interested in derailing this process. On 23 October this year Pakistan’s Foreign Office had said that progress in the ongoing composite dialogue with India was healthy, and relations between the two neighbours had never been so good in the last 6 decades. As Muhammad Sadiq, Pakistan Foreign Office spokesman, told media persons in Islamabad: “The composite dialogue is very positive and Pakistan-India relations have never been this good in the last 60 years, but results should not be expected overnight.”
While asserting that India and Pakistan’s internal political situations would not affect the dialogue, Muhammad Sadiq added that there was no instability in Pakistan and the peace process was moving slowly because of the complex nature of the bilateral ties. He further emphasized on the need for speeding up the peace process, especially the talks on Kashmir.
In his talks with a 13-member delegation of Royal College of Defence Studies, UK at Islamabad on 24 October 2007, Muhammad Sadiq said that the composite dialogue process between India and Pakistan had ushered in a qualitative change in bilateral relations. Mushahid Hussain Sayed, Chairman, Pakistan Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and also the Secretary General of the outgoing ruling Pakistan Muslim League, feels that the process of ongoing negotiations has paved the way for broad national consensus on resolution of issues. He said relations between the two countries were improving and the credit for this went to the leadership of the two countries. He further pointed out that Pakistan, under the leadership of General Pervez Musharraf took major initiatives in this regard and, besides resolution of other issues, laid focus on the resolution of the ‘core issue’ of Kashmir through dialogue.
However, a pall of skepticism seems to envelope the developments occurring in the wake of imposition of emergency in Pakistan in terms of likely impact on the ongoing Indo-Pak peace process, including the composite dialogue, which has already witnessed a slowdown over the last few months. As New Delhi comes to terms with the new developments in Pakistan, the Indian government may be weighing options to deal with the situation.
Undoubtedly, hectic high-level confabulations within the corridors of South Block are expected in the coming days to decide the approach to be adopted in relation to Pakistan in view of the emerging situation. The first test is expected to be provided by the foreign secretary-level talks that are to be held at the end of the fourth round of composite dialogue to assess progress of discussions. It is noteworthy that the fourth round of composite dialogue was completed in October this year month with the talks on Nuclear Confidence Building Measures.
All said and done, neither side should attempt to stonewall each other’s positive initiative and respond with equal constructive and enthusiastic response. A stable and peaceful Pakistan is of immense strategic significance for India for ushering in an era of peace, stability and prosperity in South Asia in particular and the world in general.
