Congratulations are due to you again, Mr. Singh. After waiting anxiously for nearly three hours outside the conference room in Sharm el Shaikh when we finally received the joint statement, I thought it was a moment for Pakistani Prime Minister to establish himself as a regional leader. And, I was wrong.
By taking a considerable leap of faith, you have positioned yourself to be recorded in South Asian history as Sane Singh. What appeared to both Indian and Pakistani journalists as you ceding too much ground to the Pakistani Prime Minister was actually reflection of your grander goals. We were (both Indians and Pakistani) particularly fixated on a line saying that the peace process should no longer be linked to Pakistan’s progress in cracking down on militancy. A Pakistani colleague called it a ’diplomatic coup’ for Pakistan. Thumping his chest he told his TV channel that Pakistan had come out a victor. Must admit, I made the same mistake. When my anchor asked why India was playing on the ’back foot’, I implied that India was under tremendous international pressure to forge peace and reduce tension with Pakistan.
You can’t blame us. De-coupling of terrorism from bilateral talks was a reversal of India’s position since the Mumbai attack.
My Indian counterparts were angered by the inclusion of a reference to Pakistan’s southwestern province of Baluchistan, where Pakistan says India’s intelligence service is supporting a separatist insurgency. In the past India had always denied that, and resisted making the issue part of the two countries’ dialogue.
I watched your speech to the Indian parliament during a heated two-day debate on recent foreign policy issues. I know you watered down some parts of the joint statement, but you stood by the basic position that India needs to talk to Pakistan directly: admitting that the only alternative is another war.
I am glad that you were firm on your Baluchistan position: if you have nothing to hide why not put this out on the table as well. If India is not interfering in Baluchistan we will soon put this behind us.
I know you will not win the favor of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) but you have won my support. And, as long as you stick to the peace process you will continue to win hearts and minds of many Pakistanis like myself.
Mr. Singh- I know I speak for many like minded Pakistanis when I say: Justice and fairness should be the first and foremost priority of any future dialogue. I can assure you that majority of Pakistani people are willing to reciprocate.
I know Mr. Singh that your domestic critics will remain unconvinced: I saw that BJP walked out of Parliament in protest over the Baluchistan issue. But you have been blessed with an opportunity of historic proportion. Your opponents are still in disarray after their dismal performance in this year’s election, whereas Congress now has an even stronger mandate and greater control over its coalition.
Mr. Singh, successful leaders are not afraid of taking unpopular positions. So even if it seems unpopular at present you should press ahead and resume composite dialogue with Pakistan.
In my past pleadings to you, I have proposed a “sous rature” for Kashmir – because the conflict is inadequately represented thus far as a territorial issue. Since this is an important issue, I propose we keep it legible yet cross it out. And, going forward use a more accurate term; water conflict.
Water is linked to the crises of climate change, energy and food supplies, and in our case, a territorial dispute. Unless Kashmir’s link with water is addressed and resolved, these other crises may intensify leading to further political insecurity and conflict at various levels.
It is abundantly clear to most educated Pakistanis that the Kashmir dispute cannot be resolved until every Pakistani citizen is assured access to water – today, tomorrow and for times to come.
You have demonstrated the courage and wisdom I expected from our sagacious neighbor and I hoping you will drop the idea of building dams that deprive Pakistani farmers of vital water supplies. Please resume the composite dialogue and address the critical issue of the Tulbul Navigation project on Wular Lake in the Indian-controlled portion of Kashmir.
I know Mr. Singh you have taken a considerable risk to repair the relationship and for that you deserve credit. Hats off to, Sir!
Now let’s address the water crises right away.
Ibrahim Sajid Malick is a Pakistani-American writer, technologist, and social entrepreneur. He has been writing on Pakistani society and politics since 1986. He has held several media, communications, and technology positions for organizations large and small. Mr. Malick graduated from New School for Social Research with a master’s degree in anthropology. He holds several technology and management certifications. He works for a leading technology firm and blogs at www.ibrahimsajidmalick.com
Hello Ibrahim, good to see this article. I am glad that a Pakistani is praising Indian Prime Minister for the right reason. Dialogue between India and Pakistan can solve many issues. Maybe not every issue but many issues. I am not an expert on water crisis but I will tell you that these dams are creating problems for India as well.
Thanks for sharing.
Now the war btween india and pakistan would happen just coz of water
yaa i heard about some mess in sharm al sheikh…
hey i heard tht paki foreign minister was not a part of delegation to sharm al sheikh..
Mr. Malick,
Let me begin by quoting a line from your above given article.
“Justice and fairness should be the first and foremost priority of any future dialogue. I can assure you that majority of Pakistani people are willing to reciprocate.”
Do you really believe in this?
I’m an Indian who wishes to see peace between Indian and Pakistan. Everytime a dialogue takes place between our leaders i look forwad to seeing something positive come out of the meeting. But over time i realised dialogues will do nothing to change the enemity between our two peoples.
I read your other article on the water shortage in Pakistan caused by the dam on the Indian side. It was a well writen article, but what caught my attention more was the commments from the readers. As you can see, those are not comments to the srticle. Those are just a war of words between angry Indians and Pakistanies. What are they angry about, the water or the terrorist attacks? I would say they are angry just for the sake of being angry. Just because Indians are ‘supposed to hate’ Pakistanies and vice versa.
From a very young age, i have looked at pakistan as my enemy. Why, because my eldres looked at Pakistan as an enemy.At that age, I probably didnt even know what wrong Pakistan had done. And i am sure a similar picture exists on your side of the border.
What i mean to say is our enemity is nothing more than the result of generations of distrust. And this distrust wont go away overnight by just removing the dam or by stopping terrorist attacks. Suppose Indian was to remove the dam and Pakistan were to destroy all its terror camps. Would we become friends?? The answer is NO. The Pakistanies would be thinking ‘Ok they removed the dam, but surely they would have found some other way to hurt us.’ and the Indians would be thinking ‘they would not have destroyed all their terror camps, they probably moved them to more secret locations.’
Its got more to do with the heart than the mind. We just dont trust each other. Our leaders dont trust each other, our peoples dont trust each other.
How do we remove this Disturst. It can only be removed if Indians and Pakistanies get to interact with each other. And how can we interact? Well, establish trade between the two countries. Another good possibility would be to arrange for student exchange between the countries.