Why backdoor talks with India?

Apprehensions about the backdoor diplomacy with India are growing because it is being seen as an ‘absence of strategic clarity’ on Pakistani side. Concerns are growing due to scanty details about the talks being made public in Pakistan. 

There is growing perception that Pakistan is being made to negotiate on the insistence of certain external forces and Kashmir issue is once again likely to be placed on the back bumper.

These concerns were voiced in Islamabad at a Think-Tank meeting. The talk of the three speakers at the webinar — former Defence Secretary retired Lt Gen Asif Yasin Malik, former Permanent Representative at the United Nations and Ambassador to the UK and the US Dr Maleeha Lodhi, and former envoy to India and Ambassador to Germany Abdul Basit — revolved around India’s possible motive behind opening the back door diplomacy, nature of discussions on Kashmir, and the utility of a front channel resulting from these behind-the-scenes talks between intelligence chiefs of the two countries that have reportedly been continuing since last December.

Since details have been made public, I will avoid repeating those. I will talk about some questions coming to minds of people of average wit.

A question arises, if this back door diplomacy, courtesy some friendly countries, has been going on for a long time why the details were not made public? Another question is why the need has been felt to discuss the details of the undisclosed agenda and modalities now?

I have all the reasons to believe that no details were made public for a long time to let the negotiators prepare the ground. As some ‘terms of reference’ have been finalized, an effort is being made to seek public opinion.

I am sure hawks in Pakistan will be too keen to put Kashmir issue on the top, but hawks from India would not like to make even a cursory mention of the issue. In such a scenario the ‘mediator’ will have to play a crucial role, to bring some balance for the satisfaction of respective domestic constituencies.

Let me also say that lately so much dust has been created by the hawks on both the sides that it may take long time to settle.

Please also allow me to refer to the Cabinet’s decision disallowing import of cotton from India. It had exposed lack of coordination among various government functionaries.

Having said all this, the fate of negotiations will depend on how much influence the mediator has on both the countries.

In normalization of Israel’s relations with Morocco and Jordan this reward policy has played a key role.

Will the mediator be able to reward both the countries in monetary terms or accepting control over certain territories?

GSP plus status for Pakistan: An incentive or exploitative tool

The European Parliament has adopted a resolution calling for a review of the GSP plus status granted to Pakistan. The resolution calls on the Government of Pakistan to unequivocally condemn incitement to violence and discrimination against religious minorities in the country. It also expresses deep concern at the prevailing anti-French sentiments in Pakistan.

The EU Parliament calls on the Commission and the European External Action Service (EEAS) to immediately review Pakistan’s eligibility for GSP plus status and whether there is sufficient reason to initiate a procedure for the temporary withdrawal of this status and the benefits that come with it, and to report to the European Parliament on this matter as soon as possible

The EU resolution expresses particular concern about Ms. Shagufta Kausar and Shafqat Emmanuel, who were sentenced death penalty on blasphemy charges in 2014.

The couple remains in jail pending a court ruling on their appeal against their death sentence. The appeal was due to be heard in April 2020, six years after they were sentenced, but has been postponed multiple times, most recently on 15^th February 2021, according to the resolution.

The resolution says Pakistan has benefited from trade preferences under the GSP plus since 2014, while the economic benefits from this unilateral trade agreement for the country are considerable. However, the GSP plus status comes with the obligation to ratify and implement 27 international conventions including commitments to guarantee human rights and religious freedom.

"In its latest GSP plus assessment of Pakistan on 10 February 2020, the Commission expressed a variety of serious concerns on the human rights situation in the country, notably the lack of progress in limiting the scope and implementation of the death penalty," the text says.

It says the EU Parliament considers the violent demonstrations against France as unacceptable and is deeply concerned by the anti-French sentiment in Pakistan, which has led French nationals and companies to have to leave the country temporarily.

It may be said that be it textile quota regime of the past or current GSP plus status for the developing countries, it is sole aimed at getting the supplies at huge discount as well as twisting the arms as and when desired by attaching certain frills, the most common being human rights and religious extremism.

One is amazed that the member countries of the EU allow printing of blasphemous content on the pretext of ‘Right of expression’, despite knowing that these have been instigating violent reactions.  However, this time, the sole objective of this resolution seems to be pressurizing the Government of Pakistan to release the couple facing death sentence. The west has achieved its desired objectives in the past by following ‘arm twisting’ policy.

It may not be inappropriate to remind the developed countries that for ages they have been exploiting the developing countries, rich in natural resources. Ongoing proxy wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Yemen and economic sanctions on Iran are the most naked examples of their aggressions. People living in these countries as well as many other countries are losing patience and at times even the smallest incident leads to heavy loss of human lives and properties. 

 

Oxygen for strengthening Indo Pakistan diplomatic relations

Today, I received a message, “Two nuclear powers, one without Oxygen and other without vaccine”, the two countries referred to were India and Pakistan. For a second I was traumatized, but soon gathered the courage to write this blog.

I am of the opinion that Pakistan can play a role in saving the lives of Indians who are dying due to acute shortage of Oxygen. My suggestion is well supported by the efforts of employees of Pakistan Steel Mills, working to bring its Oxygen plant back into operations.

Luckily, Pakistan enjoys road as well as rail links and gas cylinders can be swiftly transported to India, within a very short span of time. India can complement the supply chain by sending empty cylinders to Pakistan.

In this endeavor the border forces/customs can also play their role by ‘clearing’ cylinders expeditiously, may be round the clock for a while. To reciprocate Pakistan’s good will gesture, India may also consider supplying COVID-19 vaccine to Pakistan.

Both the countries have lost hundreds and thousands of people due to COVID-19 and the near and dear will face the trauma for a long time to come. This must also brighten a fact that in case the two countries indulge in another war, with high probability of using atomic warheads, the death toll may run into millions.

Therefore, both the countries have to make concerted efforts to resolve all the long outstanding issues, including Kashmir. A huge percentage of population on both the sides on the border lives below the poverty line.

It goes without saying that both the countries enjoy potential to complement each other’s economy. Trading between the two countries is still going on through third country, which added to cost and extends transit time. India has already granted Pakistan ‘Most Favored Nation’ status and Pakistan has yet to reciprocate.

Though, the Government of Pakistan decided not to import cotton from India, but no word is the last word in politics, it can be reviewed. To ease the tension India can also reduce number of troops deployed in Indian Administered Kashmir.

Friendship between two countries flourishes, when their social and economic goals become common. In the prevailing circumstances, both India and Pakistan face a mammoth task of saving precious human lives. They can take the first step by exchanging Oxygen and vaccine.

Does change in MBS tone mean change of heart also?

Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler, Mohammad bin Salman (MBS) has expressed desire to mend ties with Iran for the first time in years, but refrained from offering any goodwill gesture to build confidence between two rivals, Saudi Arabia and Iran. In a dramatic change in his views on Iran, MBS called for a ‘distinguished relationship’. 

“At the end of the day, Iran is a neighboring country. All we ask for is to have a good and distinguished relationship with Iran. We do not want the situation with Iran to be difficult. On the contrary, we want it to prosper and grow as we have Saudi interests in Iran, and they have Iranian interests in Saudi Arabia, which is to drive prosperity and growth in the region and the entire world,” the Saudi crown prince said in a recent televised interview.

He also expressed hope that his country would be able to overcome some challenges affecting Iranian-Saudi relations. “We really hope we would overcome them and build a good and positive relationship with Iran that would benefit all parties,” MBS pointed out. 

Public diplomacy between Iran and Saudi Arabia came after several Western media outlets reported that the two countries held direct talks in Baghdad in early April for the first time in at least five years. These talks are widely expected to continue in the coming weeks especially after Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif visited a number of regional countries ‑ Iraq, Qatar, Oman, and Kuwait ‑ enjoying good relations with Tehran and some of them with both Tehran and Riyadh. 

During his regional tour, Zarif once again presented the long-standing Iranian peace initiative Hormuz Peace Endeavor (HOPE), which is mainly intended to foster dialogue among regional states on security. 

Zarif’s tour raised speculations over a possible exchange of messages between Tehran and Riyadh. The Arab Weekly, a publication close to the United Arab Emirates, has put Zarif’s visits into a broader context of de-escalation between Iran and Saudi Arabia, implying that the tour is aimed at bridging the divide between long-standing rivals and launch a dialogue between them.

Regardless of the motivation behind Zarif’s visits, relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia seem to be experiencing a period of de-escalation of tension, at least for now. Whether this easing would continue for a long time or advance to a full-fledged restoration of diplomatic ties remains to be seen.

Saudis demonstrated little enthusiasm about mending ties with Iran beyond a change of tone that was more likely necessitated by the changing dynamics of the region’s politics after Joe Biden moved into the White House. The Saudi apparent flexibility came amid renewed US diplomatic efforts to put an end to the world’s worst humanitarian crisis in Yemen. 

Right from the start, Joe Biden made it clear to the Saudis that the days of full US support for their regional adventurism are over. He started his new Saudi policy by focusing more attention on the Yemen crisis, naming a special envoy for the war-torn country. He then announced that his administration would pursue diplomacy with Iran to revive the 2015 nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), from which the Trump administration withdrew in May 2018.

Saudis first called on the United States to include them in the ongoing Vienna nuclear talks and expand the JCPOA in a way that encompasses other thorny issues such as Iran’s missile program and its regional influence. The US rejected the call to include the Saudis in the nuclear talks, while assuring them that these talks will not harm their interests. 

Facing a changing international environment, the Saudis seem to have decided to tone down their rhetoric against Iran and increase diplomatic contacts with the US and other Western powers. The diplomatic maneuver of MBS is not likely to heal the wounds Iranian-Saudi relations suffered in the past few years because this move is not driven by a genuine desire to change, but to realign him with the Biden administration.