A Veritable
Babel of Tongues
By Dr Shireen M. Mazari
It is a strange Pakistani phenomenon
that many of our practitioners of foreign policy,
on retirement, immediately decry these policies.
That is why it was not surprising to find one such
senior practitioner claim, in a panel discussion
the other day that the Kashmir issue was effectively
a territorial issue for Pakistan -- as it is for
India -- and had nothing to do with the issue of
self-determination. Now, having maintained since
1947 that the issue of Kashmir was basically one
of self-determination for the Kashmiri people, this
claim coming from the gentleman was astounding to
say the least. Worse still, he then confessed that
all these years he had blinkers on but now he has
shed these! Of course, conveniently, only after
retirement. Is it any wonder then that our foreign
policy is not projected effectively -- given that
the practitioners do not believe in what they are
supposed to be projecting?
Again, in a uniquely Pakistani fashion, many in
power also choose to issue statements that clearly
contradict our prevalent policies and postures,
as well as our authoritative official declarations.
It is no wonder then that on very sensitive issues
our signals are thoroughly confused when they should
be unambiguous. Non-official discussions with varying
viewpoints being represented are one thing; official
contradictions are another. Take the case of the
restructuring of the UN and attempts by a group
of states, including Japan and India, to gain veto-possessing
permanent membership of the UN Security Council.
Pakistan's official position has always been to
oppose an increase in the permanent members of the
UNSC and instead we have sought to support an overall
expansion of the membership of the Security Council
so that it can become more representative of the
global comity of nations. We oppose the extension
of the club of veto-wielding elite states on a matter
of principle -- regardless of which state may be
seeking this status. However, when some of our policy
makers seem confused on the issue it undermines
our principled position. That is why the controversy
over the Foreign Minister's utterances on this issue
in Japan did undermine our policy to some extent
-- despite the fact that the Foreign Office clarified
the situation. But, on such a sensitive issue and
at such a critical time, the signaling cannot afford
to be mixed at all. The confusion sent negative
signals to South Korea and our crucial ally China,
and it also led to questioning of our own position
by those whom we are presently seeking to convince
for support against expansion of the permanent membership
of the UNSC. Clarifications may do some damage control
but the initial confusion is very costly especially
when there must have been something amiss to have
created the confusion in the first place.
And what happens to Pakistani officialdom once they
get a berthing space in the US -- especially in
US think tanks and in the UN with US sponsorship
-- has already been alluded to in earlier columns.
Suffice it to state here that an obsessiveness with
following US agendas leads to a dangerously narrow
vision of the world where dealing with major European
powers like France and Germany can be absurdly misconstrued
as 'strategic defiance'!
Nor is this all. We have had retired officials involved
in sensitive backdoor diplomacy between Pakistan
and India claiming all sorts of achievements in
front of international audiences, especially Indian,
with no substantiation for these claims. One such
glaring and extremely damaging assertion, that is
being reiterated on many fora, is the claim, by
a backdoor channel during the second Sharif government,
that the Kashmir issue had been resolved and only
needed to be officially inked had the military not
intervened and sabotaged it! The tall claim is sometimes
specific in that it refers to the Indians having
accepted the Chenab formula, which would have given
the Valley to Pakistan! At other times the claim
is more general, merely targeting the Pakistan military
for having intervened negatively. Having examined
this issue over the last few years, there is no
ground on which the claim has any veracity at all.
Meanwhile, the damage done by this person to Pakistan
is tremendous.
And let us not forget our absurdities even in the
field of cricket. Before the Indian cricket tour
of Pakistan in March 2004, when the Indians insisted
we shift the venues of their matches from certain
cities because of security reasons, we obliged without
making it a political issue. However, when it came
to our tour, which is to commence this week, and
we pointed out the security problems in relation
to Ahmedabad, the Indians turned the whole thing
into a political game of brinkmanship and of course
we blinked. This is despite the fact that the state
of Gujarat is the last place we should be playing
any cricket given the Modi government's abetting
in the massacre of Muslims there. But the PCB Chairman,
with his own affiliations to a royal Indian past,
saw nothing wrong in giving in to Indian coaxing
on Ahmedabad. Equally disturbing were the threats
being issued by the Hindu fundamentalists against
our team's tour of India. We certainly had no such
political vitiation of the atmosphere when the Indians
visited us. Under the circumstances, we should have
stood firm, voiced our increasing security concerns
and simply refused to play in Ahmedabad. Surely
some reciprocity in actions is necessary.
But then the PCB is becoming a fiefdom and a law
unto itself, despite many public revelations of
wrongdoing. And how come the PCB chose to keep quiet
on the Dalai Lama issue until it came to the attention
of the Foreign Office and others through a press
story. Surely the PCB Chairman, with his Foreign
Office background knew exactly what the Indians
were planning with the introduction of the Dalai
Lama factor. An embarrassment for Pakistan in relation
to its ally China and an undermining of its policy
on Tibet. Given the fact that the PCB had details
of the tour, the whole issue should not have come
up at all in the public domain. But the Indians
were trying to bring political issues into the cricket
and it seems the PCB would have gone along but for
the Foreign Office finally intervening firmly.
It is this lack of clarity and a dangerous ignorance
on issues and national positions that are lending
an air of confusion to our policies. It is also
creating a dangerous space for those seeking to
undermine these policies covertly. This can be seen
most starkly in the Pakistan-India dialogue process
where Pakistan is in danger of willy-nilly being
propelled into accepting the Indian dialogue agenda
without getting anything positive on the real conflictual
issues. Surely there is a need to assert the institutional
framework of this process and ensure that the center
retains not only policy control but also the pace
over the rapprochement at the official level. At
the moment absurdities abound, including claims
by supposedly experienced media representatives
in front of the Indian leadership, that there are
no problems or suspicions -- kadoorat -- in the
hearts of the Pakistani nation vis-a-vis India.
We know this is incorrect but some of us are so
desperate to say what the Indian leadership wants
to hear that the truth is in danger of becoming
the first casualty of the present peace process.
At the end of the day, we need to retain some sense
of balance and commitment to the nation and the
state despite the headiness of being applauded by
external actors, both in our own neighborhood and
across the Atlantic. The damage being done to Pakistan
by the wild assertions and antics of those having
held sensitive positions in the country is incalculable.
(The writer is Director General of the Institute
of Strategic Studies, Islamabad. Courtesy The News)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
