A three day Karachi Literature Festival (KhiLF) was held at the Beach Luxury Hotel from Feb 17 to 19. The topic ‘People, Planet and Possibilities’ focused on Pakistan’s current economic and geo-political challenges. Over 200 speakers including many foreigners participated. A conversation was held on February 19, ‘Untangling South Asia’ between Mr. Ikram Sehgal and
Mr. Michael Kugelman, Deputy Director of the Asia Program and Senior Associate for South Asia at the Wilson Center, Washington. Over the last many decades, long standing disputes between the two nuclear armed states of South Asia have veered into deeper hostility and violence. These have reflected and reinforced new and significant geopolitical shifts because of which the region faces deepening and more multifaceted polarization. When one looks at the formidable interaction of the political, security, economic, social and human problems of
South Asia, one cannot fully grasp the awesome nature of these problems and their grave
implications for the future of mankind. It must also be remembered that in South Asia lie many global faultlines and effective solutions to many cannot be found by domestic actions within South Asia alone. Land and maritime border issues exist between various regional states, and internal disputes and conflicts often have trans-border ramifications that affect regional security as a whole. For the benefit of readers, a summary of my conversation is reproduced below:
“South Asia is difficult to understand because so many other civilizations have influenced it. You have people from Central Asia and East Asia, and then you have a blend of many from the Middle East. Shashi Tharoor has written a very good book on that, one can know a lot of facts and figures about what South Asia was. If you’re wondering how to untangle South Asia, you cannot do it militarily or politically, but you can do it economically. Bengal was the granary of South Asia pre-1957, and Punjab, of course, has always been the granary, used to feed the entire South Asia.
Unfortunately, due to religious, ethnic, and political diversity, and individual ambition, we are now in a situation where Pakistan today is physically attached to South Asia, but we are not part of South Asia because you know Bangladesh has friendly relations with us, Sri Lanka and Nepal but not good economic relations because of the dominance of the present government in India, they have been denying to us space in South Asia, and we are now turning more towards the Middle East or Central Asia. To the extent that even the World Economic Forum has realized this and made us part of Eurasia. They said, “Middle East and North Africa.” I said, “Hey, we don’t have that much oil. What are we going to do in the Middle East and North Africa?” So, they said, “Okay, fine. We will not include you in that region. We’ll make you part of Eurasia.” I think, first of all, we must understand the diversity and then when you understand the diversity, go towards a place where there can be no controversy, and that is the economy. So, I think that is something that, if you work on assiduously, we can start untangling South Asia.
The Chinese intention to have a land-based communication route to Europe and Asia. One of the problems has been that people have lost track of a particular connectivity that existed post the Baghdad Pact, the Regional Cooperation for Development (RCD) highway. Today, those two routes have become the primary links, and the third one is the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. Upgrading these routes would connect Karachi to Gwadar to Chabahar, upgrading the Chaman route, and the Kandahar route would provide two links to Eurasia. India is losing out on this because if India would connect to us, and we have a railway connection to ‘Khokhropar’ and through Lahore, the entire South Asia, Southeast Asia, and four South Asian countries could get their goods into Central Asia or even Europe. We lose complementary services, but our textiles still go to Bangladesh, and cotton still goes to Bangladesh. The roots exist, and they just need upgrading. The Old RCD Highway, the
North-South Route, and the transnational railway even the railway to Iran – which is broad railway. The railway going through Quetta to Kandahar just needs that connection because it is narrow gauge from Quetta to the border and it just needs the connection to Kandahar broad gauge. Then it goes up to Mazar-i-Sharif, then to Torghundi, and from there into Central Asia and all the countries of Central Asia. I see one ray of hope in New Delhi itself where the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) came out victorious in New Delhi, cutting across religious barriers and achieve a victory despite the dominance of the BJP in other areas. This could potentially balance out the negative effects of religious nationalism in the region, leading
to a more open South Asia.
I believe that in Pakistan, we should not link our relationship with the United States to India. India is a vast country, both economically and politically, and given the United States-China situation, it is bound to have a strong relationship with India. Instead, we should focus on our own relationship with the United States. The situation in Afghanistan has worked in our favor, as the United States is re-engaging with us, recognizing that the Pakistan Armed Forces are the only true deterrent to the spread of terrorism not only in South Asia, but all over the world. If we can communicate to India that it is in our best interest to work together, without
subscribing to the “enemy of an enemy is a friend” philosophy, we could make progress. Some of my closest friends are Indian industrialists and businessmen I met through the World Economic Forum, and many attended my son’s wedding in Islamabad in On the water issue, “I want to mention a silver lining in the Indus Water Treaty. Despite three wars between India and Pakistan, the Treaty has not been touched. However, if another war were to happen, it would likely be fought over water. Water is the lifeline of any nation, and people depend on it for their livelihoods”.
I believe the status quo should remain, and we should not enter into a Ukrainian-type situation. This would not be good for either India or Pakistan because Pakistan would be under pressure from all sides, especially public pressure, as happened in 1962. In 1962, when Pakistan was ready to go into Kashmir, the United States stepped in, and India agreed to talks on Kashmir after the conflict. President Ayub decided not to engage in hostility. However, our current leaders may not be as strong as Ayub, and they may be tempted to engage in hostility, which could lead to a wider conflict. We should not expect India to sit back and do nothing. “The solution is economic because we have complementary economies and hold promise throughout South Asia. If we open up the pharmaceutical side, the prices of medicine would drop in Pakistan considerably. Similarly, there has been an occasion where Pakistan has balanced its vegetable prices by importing from across the border from India. So, if we were to at least trade like China and India, trade would be at an all-time high. I see a role for the United States in untangling South Asia. The United States is a superpower and has an interest in this region, leaving aside its interest in containing China. The United States has an interest in ensuring that one of the largest nuclear powers in this region is Pakistan. We have the nuclear assets and the means to deliver them. Nobody is scared of them except India, because they are India-specific. But the fact remains that destabilizing Pakistan would not be in the interest of the United States. Therefore, the United States must have a greater role in untangling the South system.
Regarding the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) he said, “I think there are two things to it. First of all, it’s necessary for Pakistan, but in a way, it’s far more necessary for China. They need an outlet. I think if the United States really engages with Pakistan on Gwadar, think that is something, that must happen because United States engaging in Gwadar would take our over-reliance on a superpower. We are relying out of sheer necessity. There’s nobody else, and we do need Gwadar. We have beaches from ‘Sonmiani’ down right up to ‘Gwadar’ sun swept 330 days of the year. There are vast open areas where industries can come up, cultivation can come up. So, I think we do need United States’ engagement in this area, India is threatened because they say that it is passing through disputed territory, etc., call it whatever. I think one of the things that we in Pakistan need to do is to engage the United States into CPEC and see that it is a place from where we can have stability because the north-south access or the RCD access also comes out of CPEC.
On the Kashmir issue, first of all, there should be a Hindu or a minority person who should head the Minority Commission. In Pakistan my best friend Moti Lakhwani is a Hindu, and one of my best friends in India was Pawan, who fought against me and is a Sikh. 20 to 22 years ago I had floated a suggestion to freeze the Kashmir situation for some time and allow easy trade between East and West, which is the natural trade within Kashmir, and make the borders soft so that Kashmiris on both sides of the border could visit each other. That did start, and bus services also started. During General Musharraf’s era, we almost had an
agreement on that basis. I think we cannot put this thing under the carpet. Kashmir is a question that is very important to us; it is a central core question. But we must also realize that no Indian will be ready to give up an inch of Kashmir. So, we have to come to a solution that is palatable to both India and Pakistan, and that is meant for the Kashmiris to solve their own destinies, as we have been saying all along.”
