Why backdoor talks with India?

Apprehensions about the backdoor diplomacy with India are growing because it is being seen as an ‘absence of strategic clarity on the Pakistani side. Concerns are growing due to scanty details about the talks being made public in Pakistan.

There is a growing perception that Pakistan is being made to negotiate on the insistence of certain external forces and the Kashmir issue is once again likely to be placed on the back bumper. These concerns were voiced in Islamabad at a Think-Tank meeting. The talk of the three speakers at the webinar — former Defence Secretary retired Lt Gen Asif Yasin Malik, former Permanent Representative at the United Nations and Ambassador to the UK and the US Dr. Maleeha Lodhi, and former envoy to India and Ambassador to Germany Abdul Basit — revolved around India’s possible motive behind opening the back door diplomacy, nature of discussions on Kashmir, and the utility of a front channel resulting from these behind-the-scenes talks between intelligence chiefs of the two countries that have reportedly been continuing since last December.

Since details have been made public, I will avoid repeating those. I will backdoor talk about some questions coming to the minds of people of average wit.

A question arises, if this back door diplomacy, courtesy of some friendly countries, has been going on for a long time why the details were not made public? Another question is why the need has been felt to discuss the details of the undisclosed agenda and modalities now?

I have all the reasons to believe that no details were made public for a long time to let the negotiators prepare the ground. As some ‘terms of reference’ have been finalized, an effort is being made to seek public opinion.

I am sure hawks in Pakistan will be too keen to put the Kashmir issue on the top, but hawks from India would not like to make even a cursory mention of the issue. In such a scenario the ‘mediator’ will have to play a crucial role, to bring some balance for the satisfaction of respective domestic constituencies.

Let me also say that lately so much dust has been created by the hawks on both sides that it may take a long time to settle.

Please also allow me to refer to the Cabinet’s decision disallowing the import of cotton from India. It had exposed a lack of coordination among various government functionaries.

Having said all this, the fate of negotiations will depend on how much influence the mediator has on both countries.

In the normalization of Israel’s relations with Morocco and Jordan this reward policy has played a key role. Will the mediator be able to reward both the countries in monetary terms or accepting control over certain territories?