The incident involving the physical assault of Pakistani diplomat in New Delhi has plunged Pakistan-India elations to a new low. The incident followed by an exchange of charges and counter charges has some as yet another setback to the process of normalizing relations between Islamabad and Delhi which had gathered pace after the December 17 summit meeting between President Zia-ul-Haq and Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi.
Diplomat-bashing on both sides since the beating up of the Pakistani diplomat is regarded by some as retaliatory action against the assault on Indian diplomats by Canadian Sikhs in Lahore last month is likely to escalate the war of words that has long marked Indo Pakistan relations.
Apart from the statement in the recently resumed talks on the disputed Siachen Glacier and renewed Indian charges of Pakistan’s complicity in the Sikh crisis there seem to be several difficulties that are impeding efforts at normalization. The expectations generated by the euphoric December Summit that somehow old suspicions would fade away have not mate realized.
Translating peaceful intentions into policy and concrete agreements has proved more difficult than anticipated. There has been little substantive progress in implementing the six point understanding on confidence building measures agreed at the Summit Meeting.
Even the mutual undertaking Not to attack each other’s nuclear installations given verbally by President Zia and Prime Minister Gandhi after their summit meeting has yet to be formalized in writing. Reliable sources say that during the Indian Foreign Minister Romesh Bhandari’s January visit to Pakistan when Islamabad handed over the text embodying this undertaking there appeared to be minor differences on certain aspects of the preamble. However these sources say Delhi has still not formally responded to Pakistan’s proposal text.
Differences between the two sides have also stalled talks on merging into a single peace treaty Pakistan’s proposal for a no-war pact and India’s counter treaty of friendship. The sticking points continue to focus on two clauses in the proposed joint draft India has insisted ever since these talks began that an accord on bilateral settlement of disputes should exclude any reference to international forums over issues like Kashmir. Pakistan on the other hand has long argued that the Simla.
Accord of 1972 does not preclude recourse to the U.N. by either party if bilateral talks become deadlocked. According to informed sources a tentative agreement has emerged on the question of bilateral resolution of disputes in so far as the two sides are ready to accept the formulation provided by the Simla Accord.
The relevant clauses of the Simla Agreement are as follows:
(i). That the principles and purposes of the United Nations Charter shall govern the relations between the two countries.
(ii). That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them. Pending the final settlement of any of the problems between the two countries neither side shall unilaterally alter the situation and both shall prevent the organization assistant or encouragement of any acts detrimental to the maintenance of peaceful and harmonious relations.
Despite the mutual acceptance of tis formulation differences persist on its interpretation Islamabad reads this as permitting recourse to the U.N should bilateral talks on a dispute fail Delhi disagrees. Thus in the substantive sense this takes the two sides back to square one.
The second clause in the proposed joint draft for a peace treaty concerns the question of foreign bases. India insists on incorporating a mutual guarantee precluding each side from granting bases on its soil to any foreign power.
The Pakistan Foreign office view is that Islamabad cannot give such a guarantee because this is not a universal principle enshrined in the UN. Charter Islamabad maintains that its membership of the Non-Aligned Movement should itself be sufficient guarantee Islamabad however is apparently prepared to give a guarantee 10 Delhi that bases (should they ever by granted to a foreign power) would never be used to attack or undermine India in any way.
On the question of widening trade ties with India two conflicting views had earlier emerged within the Government One view the items allowed to be imported from India which could open prospects of greatly increased bilateral trade.
The other view opposed this sweeping trade proposal and urged caution and gradualism to ensure that the local industry was not undermined by such trade ties. Reliable sources say that these differences have been reconciled and now the consensus within the establishment is not to go beyond the items that were initially agreed. So there are no plans to extend this list.
All these factors have combined to make rapprochement with India a distant possibility.
Article extracted from this publication >> July 25, 1986
