History of Indo-Pak Relation

History of Indo-Pak Relation

The year 1947 came with the partition of subcontinent in two separate independent states called India and Pakistan which is being considered pre-module by one school of thought however the other school of thought consider it instrumental. Both countries do share much of their common geographic location, and religious demographics yet the unsatisfactory relationship with each other is defined by psychological, ideological and territorial difference which resulted in numerous military conflicts and territorial disputes between them. The hostile relation started between India and Pakistan on the unequal distribution of assets, canal water dispute, and inadequate territorial division which caused serious threat to Pakistani state.

The relationship between India and Pakistan since independence has been troubled and hostile marked by wholesale communal massacres at the time of the partition of British India and three wars and innumerable minor conflicts and disputes subsequently. One critical factor in this history has been the pre-partition heritage of the two political movements that dominated the political environment in the subcontinent both before and after independence – the Indian National Congress and the Muslim League. Most of the political and social concepts that dominated the ideology and psychology of the narrow elites that controlled these two movements survived into the independence period and have not disappeared. This has been particularly true of their intensely negative perceptions of each other, which, moreover, were retained in most respects by a younger generation that otherwise rejected much of the ideology of the older elite.


The importance of this pre-partition heritage is evident in the rhetoric Indians and Pakistanis used in reference to each other a quarter-century after independence. Political literature from both sides, for instance, continues to be filled with discussions of the relevance of the “two-nation” theory, moreover the military regimes have nurtured such sentiments between India and Pakistan. Sumit Ganguly writes in his book “Conflict unending: India-Pakistan tensions since 1947”that the “images of Indian perfidy and duplicity pervaded Pakistani official publications and educational material. The popular press which failed to develop norms of dispassionate reportage and analysis, contributed to chauvinist accounts of Indian malfeasance s and Pakistan grievances.” The sentiments of hatred were further being endorsed by the people who faced brutal attitude by Indians while migrating from India to Pakistan after independence.

The ideological differences between both states before their emergence widened even after their independent stature. For centuries Hindus, have dominated the population of South Asia with a smaller but also prominent Muslim minority, concentrated in the northwest and east, areas that eventually formed the modern countries of Pakistan and Bangladesh. Many political and religious leaders of both groups have seen this religious and cultural split as a key to the dispute, especially in Kashmir, where there is a significant Muslim population living under the rule of New Delhi. Currently, Kashmir remains in a state of military occupation, and both sides continue to incite rebellions on either side of the dividing line, hoping to break off parts of the other's territory.

India and Pakistan since the very moment of their birth have grown ever further apart; and their policies both domestic and international have evolved in increasingly divergent ways. Pakistan is locked in other territorial disputes with India such as the Siachen Glacier, Kori creek and especially over the possession of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, over which India and Pakistan fought two major wars in 1948. 1965. and 1971. The third war between India and Pakistan was fought in 1971 which started from East Pakistan but after that spread to the western border. As a result, the Kashmir state again became the theater of same battles, and the old ceasefire line was upset at many points, moreover, in result of 1971 war, Pakistan lost East Pakistan which became Bangladesh. However, in Simla agreement in 1972, both states agreed to resolve their differences through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon between them and in accordance with the United Nations Charter. But the tense relations between Indo-Pak continued and in 1998, India and Pakistan did their nuclear tests to display their nuclear technology. In 1999, Kargil war started in Kashmir. India with its propaganda mechanism projected Pakistan as aggressor and alleged Pakistan with promoting cross-border terrorism in Kashmir. Pakistan emphasized that Kashmir is the core issue between Indo-Pak hostile attitude and stresses that Indo-Pak relations cannot become friendly until Kashmir imbroglio is resolved. Pakistan has declared time and again that it is ready to negotiate with India any time, anywhere and at any on the issue of Kashmir. But India wanted cross border terrorism to be discussed. This was the reason for the failure of Lahore declaration and Agra summit in past.

There was an east been observed in Indo-Pak relation in the result of a ceasefire between the two countries in 2003 and fencing of the Line of Control being carried out by the Indian Army. Both India and Pakistan have launched several mutual confidence-building measures (CBMs) to ease tensions between the two. These include more high-level talks, easing visa restrictions, restarting of cricket matches between the two.

Unfortunately the peaceful environment could not work for a long time and in 2008 ten terrorist attacked on Mumbai and killed over 160 people. India blamed the Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based Welfare group, for planning and executing the attacks. Islamabad resisted the claims and demanded evidence which they had not been provided as such. India provided evidence in the form of interrogations, weapons, candy wrappers, Pakistani Brand Milk Packets, and telephone, sets which were not enough to accept the involvement of Pakistan in Bombay attack.

No doubt, India is recognized as a biggest democracy of the world but its hegemonic aims to get dominance in the region has troubled the relation between India and Pakistan. As India is focusing on its agreement and pacts with Israel, United States and China instead of paying head on relation with its next door neighbor Pakistan. Both countries need flexibility in their attitude by putting behind their differences, so that they could develop healthy relation which would not only consolidate their socio-economic ties but would strengthen the whole region in the long run.
Lecturer
Zamurrad Awan
Kinnaird College for Women

A Report on the Lecture of Defense Analyst Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa at Kinnaird College for Women Lahore

Lecture of Defense Analyst Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa at Kinnaird College for Women Lahore


Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa Agha is an independent security analyst and strategic affairs columnist of Pakistan. She is also a regular op-ed contributor to Dawn, and before that to Daily Times. Dr Siddiqa visited Kinnaird College for women for her lecture on Friday ,20th November 2009 and refreshed her old sweet memories as an old kcite. She delivered her lecture on “US Presence in South Asian Region” and handled the question answer session at the end. The lecture was of 40 minutes and Dr Siddiqa smartly handled this short time however the topic of her lecture was broad.
According to Dr Siddiqa, the countries built relation on the basis of their interests and US has erratic relation with South Asian region which was build during the cold war when Afghanistan played its role as a buffer state between US and USSR. Indian’s had a socialist policy during that movement. In 1958 Pakistan opted to join two arrangements CEATO and CENTO which was not liked by Muslim countries especially Egypt however Pakistan received military and financial assistance by US and made it clear to satisfy India that “weapons provided to fight would not be used against India to combat communism”. The relation between US and USSR had been affected the South Asian region. In 1962 when tension started between China and India, US was eager to help India instead of Pakistan’s unhappiness. US realized that its presence in this region means if they would help India, Pakistan will remain be unhappy and vise versa. In 1965 war Pakistan faced embargo. During 1970s India signed friendship treaty with USSR and received equipment on concessional rates. For Pakistan, US and China both are important, Pakistan is the only non-communist state to receive economic aid from US. So US contained USSR with the help of China by thinking its better to use a minor enemy against the big enemy.
After defining the history of relation between US and South Asia, Dr Siddiqa said that Amercia’s relations with this region developed gradually as there is a long geographical distance between both and the end of 1970s changed the situation when US had zero sum game with South Asian countries. In 1979, Soviet invasion in Afghanistan and Iranian revolution further reshaped the relations between US and South Asian countries. Pakistan started the training of Jihandi’s during 1970s, the last days of Bhutto’s government. The Soviet invasion in Afghanistan was to reach warm water in Pakistan but resulted in disintegration of USSR in 1990s.In 1990s, there was a new world as US happened to be the only supper power and were thinking to be the only supper power and were thinking to have a new relation with South Asian region and has started building economic and military relations and India became significant in this regard. The significant role of academia can not be neglected; who worked on India-US relation after Indra Gandhi who supported socialism in past but the new leadership propagated the capitalist state. The tension emerged between US and Pakistan. 9/11 incident was a miles tone between US/South Asia and resulted in first war in Afghanistan, second the emergence of non-state actors as a force, third the expansion of South Asia (when US joined SAARC), fourth the Bill Clinton started this strategy that we will engage in both India –Pakistan at the same time and China followed the same policy. China builds up the relation with India as they don’t want to be hostile to anyone out of both. Dr Ayesha remarked that American engagement in South Asia was build on the principles that what the other states will offer to them, but this relationship strategy can not be understand without the conspiracy theory. The important thing is that some important personals of government institutions had been caught in connection with Al-Qaeda, which shows the actual presence of Americans in this region. While concluding her lecture, Dr Siddiqa said that US can leave this region on two conditions, first if Pakistan agrees to leave and say good bye to democracy, second if Pakistan and India have bad relations.

Lecturer: Zamurrad Awan
Political Science Dept
Kinnaird College for Women Lhr

Problems of South Asian Countries by Zamurrad Awan & Yawar Hayat Shah

Problems of South Asian Countries

Pakistan
• Progressive Deterioration of Internal Security
• Terrorism/Extremism/Sectarianism
• Energy Crisis/Limited Energy Resources/High Dependency on imported Furnace Oil/Country wide Power Shortage
• Scarcity of Irrigation Water/ Water Crisis/Mega Water Reservoirs
• Food Shortage (e.g. severe flour shortage)
• Currant Account/ Trade Deficit
• Fiscal Deficit
• High indigenous and foreign debt
• Staggering Unemployment & Poverty
• Inadequate Health Facilities (e.g. High infant/maternal mortality rate)
• Exploitation of Women
• Violation of Human Rights
• No Agricultural taxation
• Droughts and famine
• Adulteration of Fertilizers
• Low growth rates in industry manufacturing and service sector
• Low per-capita income and HDI
• High Population growth rate
• High Defence Budget
• Lack of Foreign Direct Investment
• Frequent disruption of democratic governance due to military coups
• Dynastic Politics
• Absence of internal democracy in Political Parties

Bangladesh
• Frequent Military Take over
• Sharply polarized political environment
• Population Explosion
• Fail to reduce poverty
• Fail in delivery of basic services
• High illiteracy rate
• Low pace of development
India
• Human Rights Abuses
• Insufficient economic growth
• Political challenges slowing down the pace of economic development reforms
• Low per-capita income
• HIV/AIDS pandemic
• Environmental degradation
• High population rate
• Female infanticide
• Communal Violence
• Terrorist incidents
• Separationists and cessationists insurgencies (e.g. Kashmir, Mewos, Nagas, Maos)

Sri-Lanka
• Terrorist insurgency by LTTE
• 18 years old civil war
• Tension with India over Tamil issue
• Ecological Problems
Nepal
• Low per capita income
• High rate of poverty
• Bad governance
• Social injustice
• Distorted distribution f income, wealth and human capital
• Lack of social harmony


Zamurrad Awan & Yawar Hayat Shah