Pakistan is getting closer to a superpower but it's not China
The first part of the two-part budget session 2022 was concluded on February 11. Unlike the loving environment created by valentine’s week, parliament was high on a different heat of fiery speeches, claims and allegations. In this environment of hostility, most headlines were grabbed by Rahul Gandhi’s response to the president’s address.
His speech was lauded by many. The courageous words were not only applauded by the experts but by many outside the Congress as well. Raga’s speech turned out to be a report card of the Modi government. How much impact it might have electorally is a different debate whole together, but among many issues he raised, the most talked about was the allegation that this government has bought China and Pakistan closer pushing India into a two-front situation.
This statement by Gandhi seemed to have hurt the BJP quite a bit as several prominent names in the ruling party went straight on attacking him. Among all, some fact checks were given by Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar. But how much weight does any of the claims hold?
Was Xi not always against us?
In the long charge sheet filed by Rahul Gandhi in parliament, the most important allegation was that this government has brought China and Pakistan together forcing India into a two-front situation. The counter-attack by BJP was led by S. Jaishankar, who is also a redoubtable mind himself.
Rahul Gandhi alleged in Lok Sabha that it is this Government which brought Pakistan and China together.Perhaps, some history lessons are in order:
— Dr. S. Jaishankar (@DrSJaishankar) February 2, 2022
-In 1963,Pakistan illegally handed over the Shaksgam valley to China.
-China built the Karakoram highway through PoK in the 1970s.
Jaishankar, here, resorted to history. In his string of tweets, the foreign minister underlined major events in the timeline of Pak-Sino relations, including the handing over of Shaksgam valley to China. In the last seven years, one thing has become evident whenever a BJP minister talks history, there is always, direct or indirect, reference to Jawaharlal Nehru. However, there is a bit of truth in the words of both the leaders. Pakistan’s relations with China have prospered over the years, but it all started with the wars. Major landmarks in this friendship came with troubles on the Indian frontier. Every war that India fought bought our two enemies closer.
It was after the 1962 war with China, which India lost, that Pakistan handed over the Shaksgam valley to China. That agreement ended up making Beijing a party to the Kashmir issue which, otherwise, was between Islamabad and New Delhi. The understanding was that whenever the territorial dispute between India and Pakistan is settled, fresh negotiations will reopen with China vis-a-vis the country that will have Kashmir at that point.
As Pakistan was backed by China and USA, New Delhi found some support in Moscow. After a spell of friendless years until 1966, this support by USSR was crucial for India to survive as Islamabad played broker for the Dragon in improving relations with the White House.
These flowers bloomed in the 1972 war when the Soviet T-55 tanks faced the T-59s, Chinese version of the T-55s, bought by Rawalpindi. With support from Leonid Brezhnev as Bangladesh was liberated, the wounded Rawalpindi again found support in communist China. What Zulfikar Ali Bhutto lamented as the Islamic Bomb was an ambition fulfilled with the backing of the PRC.
Zulfikar Ali Bhutto with Henry Kissinger before the US turned against Pakistan’s nuclear programme
(Courtesy: Dawn)
Thereby, Jaishankar is right when he asks if China and Pakistan were ever distant. But discarding Raga’s statements will be mere idiocy. Rahul is not wrong when he suggests that every government has attempted to avoid a two-front situation. He, indeed, is right to claim that Pakistan has been coming closer to a superpower, just that it is not the one that New Delhi has any trouble with, but contrary to it.
Rahul is right, but it is not China
Since the end of the US war in Afghanistan, whatever help Pakistan was getting from the US has stopped. As Washington decided to leave the landlocked country to its fate, the global strategic landscape changed much more drastically than what the American bureaucracy might have anticipated.
As Washington blocked its aid for Islamabad the country, struggling with issues of booming inflation and turmoil, had no option but to lean on its neighbour. This gave Dragon even greater control over the Islamic Republic for using it as a proxy to keep Delhi in check. With the world heading towards more polarised times, Beijing s leaving no chance of leveraging its friends’ insecurities to rub into its adversaries’ eyes.
However, there have been developments on the other side as well. The major one among all being the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, also known as the Quad. Four major powers of the Indo-Pacific or Asia-Pacific, depending upon which side of the debate you are on, coming together under the leadership of the White House reminds everyone of the Cold War era. The difference is, this time it is two superpowers against one. This is one reason why not all of it is not working in India’s favour.
One does not need an international relations expert to judge Russia’s insecurities with the warming Indo-US relations. After all, nations act in their self-interest and not out of philanthropy. Here, for all pragmatic reasons, it is fair for Russia to lean on the other side. But this is working to New Delhi’s detriment as the Indian security forces are still overwhelmingly Russian equipped.
Many might argue that such crests and troughs are normal in the strategic policy sphere, but with Imran Khan becoming the first Prime Minister to be invited by Moscow in over 20 years, we can expect the formation of an ‘anti-Quad’.
In April 2021 Sergey Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, became the first in over 9 years to visit Pakistan. He further cleared Kremlin’s stance while terming the Quad as ‘Asian NATO’ during his visit to Delhi. Such remarks take the possibility of an anti-Quad a step closer to reality. How much Pakistan will matter to such a setup is a topic of deliberation, but on the diplomatic front, this is leading India to a predicament.
These unabashed comments in the public domain are not something the Indian diplomats were expecting from a friend at a time when the enemy is trying to subdue its sovereignty.
Where does that leave us?
It will not be wrong to say that New Delhi is stuck in a paradox created due to its nostalgia of Non-alignment and subsequent hypocrisy. Building relations and cementing alliances require time, and above all the spine to take a stand.
It is evident that India has either failed to overcome Jawaharlal Nehru's Non-Alignment fantasy or has failed to differentiate between a policy and strategic goal. During the cold war, the then Prime Minister took NAM as an end goal which resulted in the most friendless years for India, especially after the Indo-Sino war. Finally, it found its way out with Soviet help as it not only helped India set up its heavy industry but also began indigenous production of Mig-21, which remained the frontline combat aircraft of that epoch.
New Delhi has not been able to leave the ghost of non-alignment behind, but this time under the banner of ‘protecting its autonomy.’ A major example of it is the dissembling of Quad 1.0 due to the fear of upsetting the Chinese. Even today India has been inconsistent with its position on Quad, vary of calling it a military alliance even when the group has ‘security’ in its name.
The current setup is nothing less than an enigma for India. But with the overweening Chinese knocking in Ladhak, South Block seems to be short on timing for calling shots. Delhi has to be mindful of the vulnerabilities that it faces in this situation. As the chasm between India and Russia deepens, ignoring the apparent will be nothing but being dead from the neck up.
Kremlin’s interests are just opposite to ours as its persistent troubles with Washington will keep both the parties sceptical of each other. With Europe in tatters and Xi jin ping adamant about colonising countries in the name of the Belt and Road Initiative(BRI), it is doubtful how long India will be able to hold against two adversaries.
Given our proximity to Beijing, the disparity in threat perception to China vis-a-vis other Quad members, risk tolerance, strategic culture, military capability and economic power, Indian strategists should be most desperate for deepening military cooperation and improving interoperability. Strategic autonomy is an objective, not the doctrine of foreign policy, and should be treated that way.
Comments
Post a Comment