The Pak-China and USA Algorithm

The USA can do more to put pressure on Pakistan to act on terrorists. One way of doing so is by involving China in the equation.

The news about a certain level of breakdown in the Pakistan-China ties has been in the newspapers for the last couple of days. Despite the excited editorials in every daily about the issue, this crisis, excuse the exaggeration, is far from anything anybody should be excited about. The consequences of deteriorating Pak-China relations, when studied keeping in mind the various geo-political and economic factors, are not positive globally.

One of the most important geo-political factors that needs to be kept in mind is the decision of the United States to showcase a close relationship of sorts with Pakistan to the international media. The prime reason for this is, of course, the continued reluctance on the part of the Pakistani administration to take concrete action against the terrorist havens which still continue to exist in the country resulting in an increase in the number of drone attacks carried out by the USA on Pakistani territory.

A major roadblock to the Pakistan government's resolution to eliminate terrorism is the conservative view of world affairs held by many in the top brass of the Pakistan Army, the de-facto decision-maker at times. However due to this insistence on non-acknowledgement of the existence of terrorist havens in the country, the relations between Pakistan and its once upon a time all weather friends are certainly being tested.

New reports indicate that, along with the many anti-India and anti-West terrorist havens that operate in the south-east Asian country, many Uighur sympathizers have also set up havens for the struggle against the Chinese government in the province of Xinjiang.

The Chinese government has repeatedly made its displeasure over the existence of such anti-China institutions in the country known to the Pakistan government. Yet, due to rampant corruption and sympathizers within the administration, not much has been done in this regard resulting in a continued anti-China resistance in Xinjiag with majority of the support received by the protestors being traced back to Pakistan.

Though this is primarily an area of conflict between Pakistan and China, the US authorities must also keep a keen eye on the developments surrounding these incidences. Despite the inability of many western countries to convince Pakistan to cancel terrorism as a state policy, China has to an extent succeeded or at least performed better than the other western countries, considering the drop in the number of terrorist/freedom struggle incidences now reported in China which can be traced back to Pakistan.

Adopting such an approach of being convinced that there has been a drop in the above mentioned activities appears optimistic considering the lack of information coming out of China. However, when we look at the situation in the context of national security, there has been a slight shift in allied positions from the USA to China under President Zardari's regime. Though the shift is not absolute, it is easily noticeable.

Thus, despite the numerous long term concerns that the White House may have regarding Pakistan's closeness to China, it is only sensible in the short run to encourage greater Pakistan-China engagement on terrorism as that might be the only possible way to deter Pakistan from hosting terrorists on its soil. The fear of being isolated internationally, withdrawal of US and western world's support from major contracts and treaties internationally without adopting sanctions as a means of approach and at the same time portraying China as a reluctant ally of Pakistan would be the most surrealistic of all possible methods to get the Pakistani administration started on its fight against terrorism.

However as surrealistic as the above scenario may sound, it is possible for the United States to manipulate its positions a bit to get a more positive response from Pakistan. An example of such a manipulation would be to stress the importance of banishing terrorism from all forms of practice to the new Chinese Premier and President (both Mr Jiabao and Mr Jintao handing over power to their successors during the year) while at the same time steering clear of the human rights aspect of the situation in Xinjiag. Such a manoeuvre by the USA would ensure that enough pressure is put on Pakistan to curb terrorist activities while at the same time, it won't be seen as the US stepping back on its demand for human rights and their implementation all over the world.

Though idealistic, only such manoeuvres have been known through out time to change the course of history as we know it.

Why India must work on its Foreign Policy

Given the status that India currently enjoys in the diplomatic world, it is only natural that India be required to make tough decisions.

The diplomatic power of a country can be analysed by simply taking together factors that act for and against the state at the international level and the state's ability to work out a plan to balance out the negatives that it may face. United States can be considered to be a country that is more or less able to balance out the negatives at the international level (recent 'stand-off' with Russia and China on the Syria and Iran issue can be considered to be a negative that it hasn't balanced out in the UN). 

If we look at India under the same lens, then a couple of inconsistencies do crop up which are common in countries which are still developing their diplomatic power (i.e focus more on the soft power). One of the major  problems that the current foreign policy of India has is the inability to move out of the neutrality sphere. 

After the end of the Cold War, the diplomatic world underwent a period of 'secondary power vacuum' wherein, the west was able to take major decisions without being challenged in a manner that would threaten its dominance in the diplomatic world. Yet soon countries like Russia, China and India caught up and three together are no able to form a major opposition to the west at the international level.

Thus while the three are able to form a formidable opposition, India's foreign policy still hasn't evolved enough to take a stand with one side and through out the course of the event remain on the same side. One of the major example of this would be the recent decision by the Indian government to send a diplomat to attend the Friends of Syria meet which is considered to be an anti-Assad and a pro-change forum. This decision has certainly raised a few eyebrows towards the effectiveness of the Indian bureaucracy and government in formulating a foreign policy meant for the long term.

While at the same time, this can be considered to a successful practice by India of its principle-based foreign policy. However such a practice cannot be considered to be an exactly ideal path to follow at the international level and thus a certain reworking of the foreign policy is in order as India tries to analyse the pro-cons of its relationship with various countries in this every changing world.

Democratizing the Nuclear Neighbour

Despite the fears of a coup, India must ensure that conditions are maintained to retain some state of democracy in its nuclear neighbour.

Historically, relations between the Pakistan Army and the Indian government haven't exactly been friendly. Since Independence, they have bordered at extreme paranoia and complete distrust. Attempts to start/maintain peace between the two neighbours has seen the civilian government in Pakistan asking for the "go-ahead" from the Army. In case the above hasn't been done, the efforts to achieve peace have been scuttled at the very basic stage.

Thus, it is not in India's interest to allow the Pakistani Army into power. But any attempt to do so by using "unacceptable" methods would only ensure that the public opinion tilts in favour of the Army (something that has for the last couple of years prevented the army from coming to power). A more intelligent approach would involve encouraging the civilian institutions in Pakistan to maintain their grip on power mainly by covering them in the mainstream Indian and international news media. 

Also covert funding to moderate pressure groups in Pakistan would be an ideal path that the RAW (India's spy agency) can take in order to ensure that the public opinion remains in favour of the civilian institutions while at the same time ensuring that a balance is attained with the extremists. A situation resembling the current Indian state of affairs (extremely active civil society) would provide democracy the much needed boost that it requires in the country which has a history of democracies being overthrown by military coups.

For India, a military government is not acceptable considering the fact that all the wars that India has fought against Pakistan happened during the military rule. Thus any attempt to install an army government in Pakistan can only succeed if the 'terror of India' is created in the minds of the Pakistani people. The paranoia regarding India has always been the stepping stone that the Pakistan Army has needed to hoist itself to a position of direct power (indirect power involves tremendous amount of influence on the civilian government while refraining to portray itself as a major political power in the public eyes).

A face off with the US (though highly unlikely) would certainly create the buzz that the Pakistani Army needs while at the same time uncomfortable relations with India would certainly put the civilian government in an uncomfortable position. Thus attempts to improve ties between India and Pakistan should be on the top of the priority list for Pakistan.

Closer trade ties involve direct interaction between the people and thus the mistrust on either side is reduced every day little by little. It is only through such attempts of improving ties while at the same time not 'bowing down' with/to other countries in the public eye can the current government in power hold on to its present position and last till the next elections where the verdict might or might not go against them.

On the other side of the globe, it would be ideal if USA took steps so as to improve the ties with the current government in Pakistan at least till the elections are over. A civilian government in power is the only way the USA can attempt to get rid of the Taliban and terrorism which has time and again proved to be a strategic asset for Pakistan against its rivals in the Indian subcontinent.

Walking the Pakistani Tightrope

Even though relations between the two rivals are normalizing. It is in vast contrast to what lays underneath the surface.

The move by Pakistan to grant India the MFN (Most Favoured Nation) status was welcomed by a big majority in the diplomatic circles and was hailed as move towards a shift in the relationship between the two nuclear states. Manmohan Singh and Yousuf Raza Gilani who met in Maldives recently decided to break the deadlock that the two countries were in since after 26/11. Yet there continue to be rumors that there is a lot more than meets the eyes.

The UPA government which is at the moment at its lowest ever in public popularity is doings its desperate best in an attempt save face. With allegations against members of India Against Corruption rising, the government at the moment remains fairly convinced that it might have a chance in the state elections that are coming up in the next two years leading up to the general election in 2014. But even as the elections at the state level happen, there is a lot of reason for the UPA to take care in the way it deals with issues like terrorism, nowadays a major vote-puller in India.

Though the number of attacks in the country have decreased a lot, there still continues to exist a state of uncertainty among the populace as they deal with a neighbour (Pakistan) which every day heads close to either a military coup or take over by Islamic fundamentalists. The anger in India continues to be at the same level as after 26/11 with many a facebook pages coming up with negative results regarding celebrating the return to normal relations between India and Pakistan. Youth in India is eyeing every development with a keen eye, ready to get out on the street and corner the government for any mistake that they make. Hence, the ability of the UPA government to deal effectively with Pakistan will determine their odd of winning the upcoming elections. 

Carefully keeping the 'Kashmir' issue off the table, the government has succeeded in brushing of concerns of an 'unfavorable' round of table talks. With an on-going dispute between Omar Abdullah, the Jammu Kashmir Chief Minister, and the army already heating up the atmosphere in the country, including the Kashmir issue would have been a certain death warrant for the present Government. But the step to not include talks on punishment of the terrorist is also a bold step for this government which faces continuous flak from BJP, the primary opposition party,  for any and every mistake that it is committing in recent times.

Hence any progress between the two countries at best is balanced on a thin line at the moment. With internal pressure mounting on the UPA government to prove it's worth, the Pakistan card might just be the trump card that the government desperately needs at the moment. If India is successful in getting Pakistan to hand or even punish the culprits of the 26/11 attack, then it will be a guarantee that the odds against the Congress for the 2014 general election would have been countered and all parties would be on the same starting point.

Thus even as India tries to do its best to reach out to Pakistan, India's friendliness would directly depend on what Pakistan is able to do against terrorism. Any further attack on Indian soil would not only damage but paralyze the relationship for a long time if not permanently. Thus the onus is now on Pakistan to show results as the UPA government puts everything on line for their Pakistan card.

Asian Union- A Dream

Countries coming together and forming unions is not a new thing. It has happened in Europe. European countries came together to form the European Union. The same happened with Asia in 2002 when the Asian Cooperation Dialogue was formed. It is seen as a precursor to an Asian Union. However the possibility of a full fledged Asian Union similar to the European Union look grim.

Membership and Expansion of the Asian Cooperation Dialogue

Countries might join hands and come together to form an Asian UN of sorts but forming a European Union is a little far fledged thought. In Europe many countries have the same common currency and that is the Euro. In Asia this might happen only after 2-3 years but it will happen sooner rather than later. The reason behind this might be the growing Indo-Chinese influence. These two countries will be in a fierce competition with the United States for international say within the next 2-3 years. It has already started.

The common currency may come into existence but it won't be taken to a higher level the way it was taken to in Europe. This common currency might just be a commonality between a couple or more countries. But even the Euro started out as a common currency between some countries and then later went on to be the common currency of more that 27 nations. This might happen many years later but it will surely happen.

The Asian Union will help increase the trade between world's largest markets and that will do the Asian countries a lot of good. Such common things are needed by all the countries in Asia to grow. These commonalities are often the one's that bring people closer. Globalisation brought people closer because people in country wanted a good that was produced in another country.

Unity is what is needed to establish a common base for all the countries. This unity is a little hard to achieve a result of the numerous wars that were fought within this region. But people will surely get united one day. They will realise that the people living on the other side of the border are just like them and also live like them. This realisation will herald a new era in world politics.