The Foreign Hand

In a press conference in front of the world media, Pakistan’s PM’s advisor on interior affairs Mr. Rehman Malik admits that a “part of” Mumbai “conspiracy” was planned in Pakistani territory. This came as an unexpected turn in Pakistan’s stand on the issue. Starting from the denial mode of not recognizing Kasab as a Pakistani to this position, it is certainly a major achievement the Indian diplomacy has achieved. But is it truly a change of heart or just another ploy???

So is this change out of compulsion or conviction?? It is beyond doubt that it has happened under pressure from western powers specially President Obama’s administration. Pakistan has a history of giving some concessions initially and then it reverts back to same old band music. It gives away little to get huge economic and other aids, and then the Pakistani military gets back to what it knows best. Even in being a close ally to USA in war against terrorism so far Pakistan hasn’t yielded much. It hands over few non critical terrorists while the consequential ones are still elusive.

India should be further skeptical about its neighbor as elements in the Pakistan’s military and ISI still hold terrorism as a foreign policy tool against India. These sections are certainly silent for the moment but more certainly they still exist and with a substantial say in the power matrix of Pakistan. The terror architecture in Pakistan is still intact. There is further suspicion on the diplomatic game plan of Pakistan when Mr. Rehman asks India for further “tenable” and “credible” evidence for its investigation. Now India can provide more evidence to a certain extent but it cannot share its complete intelligence data with a hostile neighbor as Pakistan. Thus now, if investigation fails to bring “justice” to the perpetrators, Pakistan can conveniently point towards India saying that India did not co-operate and bring India in a bad faith.

The content and mention in list of 30 questions also raises some doubts on Pakistan’s true motives. The mention of “local hand”, arrests in Spain and calling it as a only “part” of conspiracy being related into Pakistan could well be its attempt to get a clean chit to its military and ISI involvement in the massacre and give it a “global terrorism” shade with non-state actors being responsible.

Nevertheless, as Pakistan’s media is putting it, it is a “seismic” shift in Pakistan’s position. New Delhi’s response calling it as a “positive development” was apt. It is a big success for Indian diplomacy for Pakistan’s establishment has accepted something which it hadn’t since the “tribal intruders” came to Kashmir in 1947. But the diplomatic game has just begun. In dealing with Pakistan India should be ready for any eventuality. India must keep up the international pressure but also at the same time dilute its dependency on western powers in dealing with Pakistan. For example, when India wants the terror infrastructure inside Pakistan to be dismantled, it is certainly not in the interest of western war on terror there because it will be as bad as opening a third front for the already burdened Pakistan’s military on its northern border.

Where do bi-lateral relations between these neighbors go from here? It is very early to even speculate. But certainly a new dimension has been added. A fragile nuclear neighborhood cannot be in interest of India. Thus, India needs to be very cautious and measured in its approach. We must strengthen the democratic forces in Pakistan and pressurize it to eliminate the complete terror framework operating from its soil, quit terrorism as a state policy, and withdraw financial, political and ideological support that it provides to terrorism against the Republic of India.