|
Obama unveils ‘AFPAK’ policy: India’s reservations |
 |
There must be sense of relief among South Block mandarins over the new US policy on Pakistan-Afghanistan which was unveiled by President Obama after weeks of deliberations . The policy which wields a stick and a carrot, promises to deal with terrorism with a heavy hand and at the same time release funds for the development of Pakistan’s border region because poverty is seen as one of the reasons for breeding terrorism. Pakistan has been promised more than one billion worth of aid annually for the next five years to set up hospitals and schools and build roads, but warned at the same time that it would not be a blank cheque and it will have to be serious in rooting out jihadism from its soil.
As far as India is concerned, there should be some relief that it has not been dragged into what it considers a US-Pak-Afghan quagmire. Pakistan was seeking to link the Kashmir dispute with its US-sponsored war on terrorism on the plea that unless it was free from its security concerns on the Kashmir border with India, it would not be able to singularly focus its attention on dealing with Taliban terrorism on its borders and the forces tied up on its border in Kashmir limited its ability to commit more military in areas bordering Afghanistan. A similar plea was made when the mandate of Richard Holbrooke as special envoy of President Obama was being considered. New Delhi’s diplomacy prevented his mandate to be extended to India as well.
Even during the policy review on Pakistan-Afghanistan, India threw its weight to once again tell the Americans that no attempt should be made to link India once again. As revealed by the US Assistant Secretary of State, Richard Boucher, the issue was raised both during the visit of Mr. Holbrooke to New Delhi and India’s Foreign Secretary Shiv Shanker Menon to Washington last week. Menon’s visit to Washington took place even as the State Department and Pentagon were giving final touches to the policy review. Some reports emerged that during the visit of Menon, the US raised the Pakistani security concerns over the Kashmir border and suggested that India pull back or at least reduce the number of troops along the LoC so that Pakistan could be made to focus more on fighting terrorism on its western border. India politely but firmly rejected the suggestion. For the record’s sake, the report has been denied by Washington and New Delhi, but suspicions remain that the issue was raised by Washington. In fact, the Pakistan Prime Minister made the demand again when CIA chief Leon Pannet visited Islamabad last week.
But that the US would not like to involve itself in Pakistan’s Kashmir dispute with India was once again emphasized by no other than the US National Security Adviser, Gen. James Jones while talking to foreign correspondents on March 28. Manmohan Singh and Obama are due to meet in London on April 2 on the sidelines of the G-20 summit and the regional situation in Pakistan and Afghanistan is sure to come up for discussion. Dr. Singh is once again likely to express India’s reservations on the US pampering Pakistan with more arms assistance and financial aid much of which is being used to buy weapons capable of fighting a war with India rather than small arms for fight against terrorism.
He is likely to emphasise that such a policy would encourage Pakistan to allow the jihadis embedded on its territory to continue to operate because the longer they are there, the greater will be the US aid and its dependence on Pakistan. This indispensability could be exploited by Pakistan to extract promises from the US to use its leverage and good offices with India to resolve the Kashmir dispute on its terms.
The US which kept India in the loop while drawing up the policy review, stood by its promise to keep it away from the issue. It is notable that a White Paper issued by the White House on the occasion of the review did not mention Kashmir. In fact, there was only one reference to India in the White Paper and that as a victim of terrorism exported by Al-Qaeda and affiliated Jihadist groups in Pakistan.
Two more developments which must cause concern to New Delhi are President Obama speaking of the possibility of having some dialogue with the “moderate” Taliban in Afghanistan which means that in the second stage the Taliban in Pakistan could not be ruled out for a similar treatment. President Zardari is already treating the jihadis in the Swat Valley with kid gloves, reaching an agreement with Mullah Beitullah to introduce Sharia rule in the whole of the Malkand area which will encourage the Islamic fundamentlists in other areas in Pakistan’s frontier provinces for similar deals. India does not subscribe to the US views, earlier propounded by the then Pakistan President Gen. Musharraf, that there are both bad Taliban and good Taliban and the latter could be won over to isolate the bad Taliban. A terrorist is a terrorist whether bad or good, so goes the Indian argument. The Indian policy makers are worried that Zardari’s deal with Swat Valley jihadis and now the President’s willingness to have a deal with the moderate Taliban will encourage fundamentalism which is not good for peace and stability in Pakistan and Afghanistan and will have great security implications in Kashmir. It has been the experience of India that whichever party is in power in Pakistan, the Pakistan military and the ISI invariably stand by the jihadis. Now, this covert connection will be getting legitimized both by Islamabad and Washington with serious consequences for India which may see the Jihadis now exporting terrorism into India with impunity and without the fear of inviting the ire of the countries from where they operate.
|
