Click to play videoIndia and Pakistan have been involved in a war of words ever since Pakistani terrorists attacked Mumbai on November 26 killed nearly 200 people including many foreign nationals. India has presented a dossier to Pakistan and many other countries including the United States of America, United Kingdom, Israel and China of the involvement of Pakistani terror group Lashkar-e-Toiba in planning and executing the attacks.
However, Pakistan has rejected the dossier as having nothing new and not being credible enough. Even as External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee reacted angrily on Thursday to Pakistan's rejection of India's 26/11 evidence dossier, US Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher said Pakistan has made a promising start in the fight against terrorists.
But the battle is far from over. Home Minister P Chidambaram may not go to Washington as planned with the 26/11 evidence. And that brings us to our Question of the Day on CNN-IBN show Face the Nation: Can America rein in Pakistan?
On the panel of experts to debate the issue were Director of South Asia Studies at the Johns Hopkins University Walter Anderson, former diplomat KC Singh and senior editor, Hindustan Times, Pramit Pal Chaudhary. The debate was moderated by Senior Editor Sagarika Ghose.
Battle within a battle
Boucher said that Pakistan made a promising start, yet on the other hand Pakistan National Security Adviser was sacked on Wednesday for accepting that Kasab is a Pakistani. So it is a promising start for the US, but may not be for Pakistan.
Singh began the debate by saying, “The NSA case was a quick political amputation because they (Pakistan) realised that if the first accusation is accepted that Kasab is a Pakistani then the rest of the things will also follow suit. Hence, Pakistan will be forced to take action. So they will be very alert and reluctant in accepting everything.”
But which way is America likely to lean? Pakistan is an ally of America in the war against terror while India too is an ally especially after the Indo-US nuclear deal and the people-to-people contact. So will the US take an even-handed, hyphenated approach?
“It is the last few days of the Bush administration so whatever Boucher says is almost irrelevant. Now we don’t fully know what Obama’s position is going to be in this regard, though it should be in continuation with the present stand. My guess is that Pakistan has delayed the probe in hope that the Obama government, with the present financial crisis in the US, may not focus so much on South Asia,” Chaudhary said.
“Secondly, Lashkar will now definitely be a target of the US because six Americans were killed in the Mumbai terror attack. However, for India it is a symptom of a much larger problem in Pakistan. So in that front we should not expect America to do much,” Chaudhary added.
America relies on the Pakistani army to keep the supply lines to maintain its war against the Taliban in Afghanistan. So how will the US handle both India and Pakistan?
“The argument is that you cannot keep your relationship with the US in its current level. To move forward India has to engage with the Obama administration on the highest level. We need to have a strategic reengagement with the Americans at a higher level. If you remain at the same level then you will slip,” Singh reasoned.
But the Obama administration could have certain ideological differences with India on several issues including Kashmir.
“Nothing is really cast in stone,” Chaudhary said and then added, “But as Singh said we need to bring more on to the table than we have right now. We can’t just say that we have done the nuclear deal and now we all can go back to sleep.”
The criticism is that we have become very reliant on America. Many say that India has outsourced its national security to the US.
To which Singh explained, “The US by making us vote against Iran knocked down one of the pillars of approach in western south Asia. After that vote, Iran is now very suspicious of India’s relationship with the US.
Now unlike Vietnam, US cannot cut its losses and go back because now the al-Qaeda will go after them. So this is a problem which has to be settled. So India has to bring more value to the table. We have to go back and reengage Iran, talk to Russia.”
Who makes the smartest move?
The panelists agreed that the way for India is to up its strategic relationship with the US while Chaudhary went a step further and added that India has to up its strategic relationship in a host of areas.
As the debate gathered steam, Anderson joined in on the point that in the aftermath of 26/11, there is a clash of nationalism or a political one-upmanship in the terror probe between India and Pakistan.
“The bigger issue is coherence in the Pakistani government in responding to all this because the government officials have been all over the map over Kasab’s nationality and on the whole issue of information provided by India,” Anderson said.
“Now the US government is putting pressure on Pakistan to do something. Meanwhile, the Indian government has been admirably restraint in its restraint. But the problem is the lack of cohesion in the Pakistani government as a response to an issue which is a bigger problem in Pakistan,” Anderson added.
But how will America pursue its war against terror in Pakistan with such lack of cohesion?
“America has said that they will pursue it to the end. After all Americans were also killed in the Mumbai attacks,” Anderson reasoned.
In the attempt to pressure Pakistan, does the US also have to show Pakistan that it has a hyphenated relationship with India? Pakistan will cooperate only if it is made to understand that America has an evenhanded relationship with both the countries.
To which Anderson said that the issue of hyphenation is a loaded one.
“Terrorism is a regional issue and that is how we can approach it. The fact is that this is a dangerous issue and Pakistanis need to understand it. Fighting terrorism is something that is in Pakistan’s interest,” he explained.
However, Singh said, “We have to first figure out what is happening in Pakistan. Zardari’s credibility is at stake. The one who got the mandate was his wife. The one who probably has a mandate is Nawaz Sharif and his brother. But they have been cut out of governance. Therefore, Zardari has to demonstrate that the onus of democracy is on the Pakistani leadership.”
Is an Indo-US partnership the way forward to create a democratic demonstration in Pakistan?
Anderson closed the debate by saying, “It should have an American print and not Indian one because then Pakistani nationalism will again get in the way. We have to be patient and persistent at the same time. Senior American figures look at this as a way of nation-building and encouraging the democratic process in Pakistan.”
Final SMS/Web poll: Can America rein in Pakistan?
Yes: 44 per cent
No: 56 per cent
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and Pinterest)
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
More on IBNLive Right Now
MOST SHARED
PHOTOGALLERY
