FINAL REPORT Pak India Relationship

JANUARY 9, 2016

MUHAMMAD ZUBAIR SHAUKAT

1

To: Ma’m Maryam Khan, Department of English, University of Sargodha Canal

campus Lahore.

From: M Zubair Shoukat, Department of Computer science and IT, University of

Sargodha Canal campus Lahore.

Roll #: Bscs-F14-LC-571

Date: January 7, 2016

Report distinguishing the relation of Pakistan- India

relations

Summary:

This report is in listed to show the relationship of two countries and their

conflicts that are ongoing since their independence and are the major

cause of any agreement and development idea failure. In this report we try

to show what is the main cause and the issues which are making this

problem intensely difficult to sought out what are the conditional problems

that are presenting as the barriers for both of them to make a piece full

relation.

This report also shows the adverse effects on the public and the political

portions of the country. Both countries are trying to take over each other in

many field regarding industry, trade, intelligence, information technology,

motor vehicles and agriculture. How the governments are interacting to

soughing out this? What are the demands of the leaders and also the poor

and innocent civilians of the Kashmir?

Purpose of the report:

You ordered me to make a report for the final term class activity regarding

the occasional topics of current affairs and the major problems of Pakistan.

So I prefer the major conflict of Pakistan and neighboring country India.

Procedure:

1. I read out the regarding articles and the newspapers.

2. Gathered the information from the books which are reminding us

that Pak-India life and their independence.

2

3. Consulted with the news reporters of various news channels in India

and Pakistan.

4. Get the ideas of my elders, simple civilians, some politicians, and the

youth.

Findings:

1. india and Pakistan relation have been complex due to a number of

historical and political events. Relations between the two states have

been defined by the violent partition of British India in 1947,

the Kashmir conflicts and the numerous military conflicts fought between

the two nations. Consequently, even though the two South Asian nations

share linguistic, cultural, geographic, and economic links, their

relationship has been plagued by hostility and suspicion.

2. After the dissolution of the British Raj in 1947, two new sovereign

nations were formed—the Dominion of India and the Dominion of

Pakistan. The subsequent partition of the former British India displaced

up to 12.5 million people, with estimates of loss of life varying from

several hundred thousand to 1 million. India emerged as a secular

nation with a Hindu majority population and a large Muslim

minority while Pakistan was established as an Islamic republic with an

overwhelming Muslim majority population although its constitution

guarantees freedom of religion to people of all faiths .

3. Soon after their independence, India and Pakistan established diplomatic

relations but the violent partition and numerous territorial claims would

overshadow their relationship. Since their independence, the two

countries have fought three major wars, one undeclared war and have

been involved in numerous armed skirmishes and military standoffs.

The Kashmir conflict is the main center-point of all of these conflicts

with the exception of the Indo-Pakistan War of 1971 and Bangladesh

Liberation War, which resulted in the secession of East

Pakistan (now Bangladesh

4. There have been numerous attempts to improve the relationship—

notably, the Shimla summit, the Agra summit and the Lahore summit.

Since the early 1980s, relations between the two nations soured

particularly after the Sachem conflict, the intensification of Kashmir

insurgency in 1989, Indian and Pakistani nuclear tests in 1998 and the

3

1999 Kargil war. Certain confidence-building measures — such as the

2003 ceasefire agreement and the Delhi–Lahore Bus service – were

successful in deescalating tensions. However, these efforts have been

impeded by periodic terrorist attacks. The 2001 Indian Parliament

attack almost brought the two nations to the brink of a nuclear war.

The 2007 Samjhauta Express bombings, which killed 68 civilians (most

of whom were Pakistani), was also a crucial point in relations.

Additionally, the 2008 Mumbai attacks carried out by Pakistani

militants resulted in a severe blow to the ongoing India-Pakistan peace

talks

5. Relations between the countries remained frigid into the early 2010s,

following repeated acts of cross-border terrorism. According to a

2014 BBC World Service Poll, 17% of Indians view Pakistan's influence

positively, with 49% expressing a negative view, while 21% of Pakistanis

view India's influence positively, with 58% expressing a negative view.

Since the election of new governments in both India and Pakistan,

however, significant steps are being taken to improve relations, in

particular developing a consensus on the agreement of Non-

Discriminatory Market Access on Reciprocal Basis (NDMARB) status

for each other, which will liberalize trade. From late 2015, a gradual thaw

in relations has resumed, following meetings between the foreign

secretaries and the national security advisers of both nations, at which

both sides agreed to thoroughly discuss hurdles remaining in the

relationship. In November 2015, the new Indian Prime

Minister, Narendra Modi and Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif

agreed to the resumption of bilateral talks; the following month, Prime

Minister Modi made a brief, unscheduled visit to Pakistan while en route

to India, becoming the first Indian Prime Minister to visit Pakistan since

2004.

Kashmir conflict

kashmir was a Muslim-majority princely state, ruled by a Hindu king,

Maharaja hari singh. At the time of the partition of india maharaja Hari Singh, the

ruler of the state, preferred to remain independent and did not want to join either

4

the union of India or the dominion of Pakistan. He wanted both India and Pakistan

to recognize his princely state as an independent neutral country

Despite the standstill agreement with Pakistan, team of Pakistani forces were

dispatched into Kashmir. Backed by Pakistani paramilitary forces, Pashtun

mehsud tribals invaded Kashmir in October 1947 under the code name "Operation

Gulmarg" to seize Kashmir. They reached and captured baramulla on 25 October.

Instead of moving on to Srinagar just 50 km away and capturing its undefended

airfield, they stayed there for several days. Kashmir's security forces turned out to

be too weak and ill-equipped to fight against Pakistan. Fearing that this invasion

would bring about an accession to Pakistan, the Maharaja now turned to India and

requested India for troops to safeguard Kashmir. Indian Prime Minister Nehru was

ready to send the troops, but the acting Governor General of India, Lord

Mountbatten of Burma, advised the Maharaja to accede to India before India could

send its troops. Hence, considering the emergent situation he signed the instrument

of accession to the Union of India on 26 October 1947 (see the two-page

document's photo below). t the end of British occupation in 1947, two countries

stood where there once was one. Pakistan divided with the intention of being the

nation for the Muslims of India. Kashmir, the roots of the boundary dispute

between the two nations, was an autonomous state under British rule and remained

so post-partition, when initially given a choice between Pakistan and India.

Eventually though, in October of 1947, the ruling prince of Kashmir decided in

India favor. This decision was viewed as fraudulent, unfair, and completely

unrecognized by the Pakistani government.

5

Due to its strategic position and unique and exquisite nature, Kashmir has

been of particular interest to both countries. The main goal of Islamabad is to gain

control of this region, thus completing the vision of an independent Muslim state

outside of India considering that Kashmir is majority Muslim. New Delhi, on the

other hand, has the goal of retaining Kashmir in order to support the portrayal of

India as a secular nation.

contents

1. In 1948, the first Kashmir war was fought between the Indian

troops and Pakistani pathans invading from the northwest of the

Kashmir region. This primary war ended with UN intervention

and a mutual agreement to a formation of a Line of Control, the

ceasefire line that the troops of both nations were withdrawn

behind.

2. The second war was fought in 1965 and the third in 1971. Each of

these wars resulted in 11 UN resolutions and two significant

agreements, namely the Tashkent Declaration of 1966 and the

Simla agreement of 1972.

3. By 1974, India began nuclear testing in its northern desert. In

1998, Pakistan also showed signs of significant nuclear capability.

More armed conflict ensued in 1999 until finally ceasefire and

peace talks began between President Musharraf and Prime

Minister Vajpayee. Unfortunately, these are all retarded by

6

increasing conflict in the disputed region, specifically with the

August 2001 railway massacre in Jammu, the Kashmiri assembly

attacks in October 2001, and the Indian parliament attack in

December of the very same year. This triggered military build-up

by both nations on the line of control, increased diplomatic

sanctions, the end of transport links between the two countries and

an announcement by Indian military of a keen preparation for

imminent war.

4. Initially, 2003 saw both nations using forceful rhetoric in relation

to their readiness and capability to endure nuclear warfare.

Throughout the 90 and continuing into the 21st century, the low-

intensity war that has continued within this region between Indian

military and Pakistan militant groups has cost both nations a large

loss of life and resources.

5. Despite continuous militant attacks, both nations eventually

attempted to reach peaceful negotiations over the border dispute,

including the establishment of sporting ties, transportation links,

official cease-fire arrangements, and recognition of Kashmiri

separatist groups by India.

This conflict is evidently an enduring one in the sense throughout the years

of military fighting, there is a single goal of obtaining the prize, i.e. Kashmiri

7

territory. The payoffs are high and at each stage in the enduring conflict, both

nations have the chance to decide whether to continue the conflict in order to gain

exactly what they desire or pull out and therefore lose. If both India and Pakistan

cooperate, they will be better off by avoiding greater numbers of casualties and

avoiding the possibility brinkmanship, considering the nuclear capability on both

sides. In relation to proliferation of their nuclear capabilities, if both India and

Pakistan refrain from communicating (diplomatically through vocal, cooperative or

bargaining tactics) and choose to continue with the buildup of their respective

nuclear arsenals, each nation has a significant incentive to defect from a credible

agreement against such build up in order to maintain their respective interests.

Noteworthy is the fact that both nations have the incentive to remain in

credible commitments for the long-term despite incomplete information because of

both of their desires to maintain a certain reputation and gain US aid as well as

India goal of obtaining a seat on the UN Security Council. That being said, the lack

of constructive communication and the aforementioned rhetoric of the capability

on both sides to endure nuclear attack has initiated a fear of possible tit-for-tat

actions regardless of who moves preemptively and therefore resulting in a rise in

the escalation ladder that may not be able to be stopped or managed later.

Charles Chevenix Trench writes in his 'The Frontier Scouts' (1985):

In October 1947... tribal lashkars hastened in lorries - undoubtedly with official

logistic support - into Kashmir... at least one British Officer, Harvey-Kelly took

part in the campaign. It seemed that nothing could stop these hordes of tribesmen

8

taking Srinagar with its vital airfield. Indeed nothing did, but their own greed. The

mahsuds in particular stopped to loot, rape and murder; Indian troops were flown

in and the lashkars pushed out of the Vale of Kashmir into the mountains. The

Mahsuds returned home in a savage mood, having muffed an easy chance, lost the

loot of Srinagar and made fools of themselves.

In the words of Gen Mohammad Akbar Khan (Brigadier-in-Charge, Pakistan, in

his book "War for Kashmir in 1947"): "The uncouth raiders delayed in Baramulla

for two (whole) days for some unknown reason.

While the invading Pakistanis spread across the State and looted baramulla town

just 50 km from the state capital, Srinagar, for several days starting 25 October

1947, the Maharaja signed instrument of accession to the Dominion of India on 26

October 1947. Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah had already reached Delhi a day

earlier on 25 October to persuade Nehru to send troops. He made no secret of the

State faced and asked Nehru to lose no time in accepting the accession and

ensuring the speedy dispatch of Indian troops to the State. (Sheikh Abdullah

corroborates this account in his Aatish e Chinaar (at pages 416 and 417) and

records (at page 417) that V.P. Menon returned to Delhi on 26 October with signed

Instrument of accession. These are photos of the two-page Instrument of

Accession. The Instrument was accepted by the Governor general of India the next

day, 27 October 1947. With this signing by the Maharaja and acceptance by the

Governor-General, the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir became a part of

Dominion of India as per the Indian Independence Act 1947 passed by the British

parliament.

By this time the raiders were close to the capital, srinager. Indian troops were

airlifted from Delhi, landed at Srinagar airport in Kashmir on 27 October 1947 and

secured the airport before proceeding to evict the invaders from Kashmir valley.

The Indian troops managed to evict the aggressors from parts of Kashmir but the

onset of winter made much of the state impassable. After weeks of intense fighting

between Pakistan and India, Pakistani leaders and the Indian Prime Minister Nehru

declared a ceasefire and sought arbitration with the promise of a plebisaite. In

1957, north-western Kashmir was fully integrated into Pakistan, becoming azad

kashmir (Pakistan-administered Kashmir). In 1962, China occupied aksai chin, the

northeastern region bordering ladakh. In 1984, India launched opartion

maghdoot and captured more than 80% of the siachen glacier.

Pakistan now maintains Kashmiris' right to self-determination through

a plebiscite and the promised plebiscite should be allowed to decide the fate of the

9

Kashmiri people. India on the other hand asserts that with the Maharaja's signing

the instrument of accession, Kashmir has become an integral part of India.

Due to all such political differences, this territorial claim has been the subject of

wars between the two countries in 1947 and1965, and a limited conflict in 1999.

The state remains divided between the two countries by the line of control (LoC),

which demarcates the ceasefire line agreed upon in the 1947 conflict modified in

1972 as per silma agreement.

Analysis These and many other such questions can be raised by any concerned observer of the South Asian region, where the disharmony between the two major players has adversely affected the ability of the region as a whole to attain its true potential, unlike, for instance, the advancements made in the ASEAN region. The continued conflict and tension in the relationship between the two countries, whose rivalry has a nuclear dimension as well, cannot be to anyone’s benefit. For the past decade or so, their differences have transcended their common borders and have also played out in Afghanistan. The biggest beneficiaries of this prolonged conflict have been the extremist elements in both countries and, more recently, the non-state actors (NSAs). The NSAs seemingly have the capability to disrupt and derail any effort towards resolving the outstanding issues between India and Pakistan at will, by perpetrating a violent incident. Major world powers have also promoted their geo-political interests by playing one country off against the other from time to time. Causes of Conflict The tensions between India and Pakistan are deeply rooted in their common history. Their failure to reconcile their differences ultimately resulted in the partition of the Sub-continent. The partition itself was the result of a legal and constitutional process approved by both the Indian National Congress and the Muslim League. Unfortunately, however, the actual partition was accompanied by mindless blood-letting and lasting acrimony resulting from complaints about the work of the Radcliffe Commission that was entrusted with the demarcation of the boundaries of the two states. The messy procedure adopted by the British for determining the fate of the Princely States sowed the seeds of the continuing conflict over the predominantly Muslim-majority state of Jammu and Kashmir. The festering Kashmir dispute has bedevilled relations between India and Pakistan. It has caused two wars (1948 and 1965), a serious border conflict (Kargil, 1999) and has brought immense suffering and hardship to the people of the state.

10

This unresolved dispute has also been a major drain on the resources of the two countries and has been a stumbling block to normalising relations between them. A problem closely related to that of Kashmir is the distribution of the water of the rivers flowing from there into Pakistan. Pakistan has a predominantly agrarian economy and, being a lower riparian state, has naturally been concerned about continuation of an adequate supply of irrigation water. The problem was thought to have been resolved in the early 1960s through the Indus Basin Treaty, mediated by the World Bank. But the problem is far from settled, as Pakistan has raised concerns over some of the Indian hydroelectric projects under construction on the western rivers that will affect waters for which Pakistan has the rights. The water problem has a serious potential to precipitate conflict in the future, given the rising requirements and shrinking supplies. Page 3 of 6

11

The Nuclear Dimension Some commentators hoped in 1998 that the overt possession of nuclear weapons by both India and Pakistan would bring about the realisation that any conflict between them would have catastrophic consequences for both countries and would, therefore, result in strategic stability. Unfortunately, that expected peace dividend is yet to be attained. Instead, a steady nuclear weapon and missile competition continues, in the absence of an overarching restraint regime. India has been propounding and war-gaming its provocative “Cold Start” and “pro-active Operations” doctrines since 2004. Pakistan has responded by introducing battlefield nuclear weapons. Afghanistan The conflict in Afghanistan has also had spill-over effects on Indo-Pakistani relations. The strategic partnership agreement between India and Afghanistan and the growing Indian presence in that country, have only added to Pakistan’s concerns that India is attempting to squeeze it from both the east and west. With uncertainties surrounding the internal dynamics of a post-NATO Afghanistan, it also could become an arena for India-Pakistan hostility to play out. That would have serious consequences, not only for the peace and stability of Afghanistan, but also for the region as a whole. Role of Non-State Actors The problem of Non-State Actors (NSAs) and their trans-frontier activities has been one of the most vexing issues between the two South Asian neighbours in recent years. In the past decade, it has brought the two countries to the verge of war in 2001-02 and again in 2008; it also derailed the Composite Dialogue process between them, which appeared to be regaining some traction after a hiatus of three years. Hopes were further raised by the election of Nawaz Sharif to the office of Prime Minister. Sharif has made no secret of his wish for peace and warmer relations between India and Pakistan, despite the fact that he has not received reciprocation from India. The recent eruption of violence across the Line of Control in Kashmir, which in normal times would be a routine affair, has been blown out of proportion by the Indian media and some political parties with an eye on the forthcoming national elections in India. Incidents such as the attack on the Pakistani High Commission in New Delhi by political activists can only add to the acrimony. Such incidents have compounded the already acute trust deficit between the two countries. India has accused Pakistan of sponsoring “cross-border terrorism” against it and, after the recent cross-LOC incident, blamed the Pakistani Army for fomenting trouble. Pakistan complains that India has provided

12

material support, through Afghanistan, to the insurgents in Baluchistan and parts of the Federally Administered Tribal areas in the north-west and is now unhappy that instead of a responding to peace overtures, India is ratcheting up the anti-Pakistan rhetoric. If the proposed meeting between the two Prime Ministers on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly meeting in New York in September takes place as planned, it will hopefully help in improving the atmospherics of India-Pakistan relations. Areas of Common Interest Peace and stability are pre-requisites for economic development, trade and politico-socio-cultural relations. This has assumed added urgency since South Asia has obtained nuclear capability, as there is now little margin for error. It is imperative that the security situation in South Asia is stabilised and made as resistant as possible to the periodic shocks caused by the actions of NSAs. Avoidance of crises, prevention of conflicts and the building of mutual confidence should therefore be common objectives for the two countries. There is a huge potential for the expansion of bilateral trade between India and Pakistan, especially now that the long-standing issue of Pakistan granting Most Favoured Nation status to India seems closer than ever to being resolved. But other issues, such as non-tariff barriers to trade, will have to be addressed before any positive move can be made towards increasing trade. There is also a long list of items on the negative list which have to be looked at before significant improvement can be achieved. The promotion of official trade will discourage smuggling and other means of illegal trade that at present cost the two countries substantial lost revenue. The serious energy shortages faced by both countries are hampering their economic development. India cannot maintain a healthy economic growth rate if its energy resources remain inadequate, as was made apparent by the total blackout of northern India in July 2012. In Pakistan, normal public life has been badly disrupted by chronic electricity outages for many years and the scarcity of energy has also adversely affected industrial output. It would be in the interests of the two countries to forge co-operation in the field of energy. While India has effectively withdrawn from the proposed Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline project, it still seems to be interested in the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) gas pipeline. TAPI depends largely on peace and stability in Afghanistan, which means that India and Pakistan should have a peaceful and stable Afghanistan as a common cause, rather than competing for influence there. In the much longer term, depending on the overall state of their

13

relations, the two countries could possibly also collaborate in the field of nuclear energy. , How to Achieve the Desired Outcomes The 1999 Lahore Memorandum of Understanding was the first Indo-Pakistani effort to come to grips with their mutual problems and to explore measures to reduce tensions in a nuclearised South Asia. Though the process was interrupted by the Kargil episode, the proposed confidence-building measures (CBMs) were taken up when the composite dialogue resumed in 2004, resulting in some significant bilateral agreements. It appears, however, that the list of CBMs agreed to at Lahore has been exhausted and currently there seems to be no discernible forward movement in the bilateral talks. It is important that negotiators think of new and innovative CBMs and establish an oversight and review mechanism to monitor the performance of past agreements, to give some impetus to the peace process. But CBMs can only be expected to provide temporary stability at best and, ultimately, the two countries’ outstanding political problems, including the Kashmir dispute, will need to be resolved. The efforts at building confidence and trust and seeking resolution of disputes can only bear fruit if the process is sustained and remains uninterrupted. On many occasions in the recent past, certain groups and individuals opposed to reconciliation between India and Pakistan have succeeded in disrupting the peace efforts. The two countries will have to resist these disruptive forces by evolving institutional mechanisms to deal with them. Past efforts were half-hearted and depended to a large extent on the character and attitudes of the individuals representing the two countries in the Joint Counter-terrorism mechanism. As the conflict in Afghanistan winds down, India and Pakistan will need to discuss their respective legitimate interests in that country. India will need to convince Pakistan that its interest in Afghanistan is not aimed at opening up a new front in the west or promote destabilisation in the two Pakistani provinces bordering Afghanistan. For its part, Pakistan will need to reassure India that it respects the legitimate and sovereign rights of India and Afghanistan to develop their bilateral relations. Due to its geographical position, Pakistan can either facilitate or block the trade between India and Afghanistan passing through its territory, but that will be entirely dependent on the state of India-Pakistan relations. Regular exchanges between the people of the two countries can create better understanding and goodwill. It is sometimes amazing to find how little their people know about each other’s countries and their socio-cultural environments, despite the often-repeated claims of having lived side-by-side for a thousand

14

years. Recent initiatives, such as the frequent discussions and exchanges of visits between parliamentarians and politicians from both the federal and regional parliaments, are moves in the right direction and need to be sustained. The agreement for a liberalised visa regime is also a positive development, if implemented in a positive spirit. As mentioned earlier, neither trade, economic co-operation nor socio-cultural harmonies can yield any dividends in the absence of peace and stability. India and Pakistan, therefore, need to remove the causes of the tensions underpinning their relations. India will have to move away from offensive and provocative military doctrines and Pakistan, which has responded by lowering its nuclear threshold, would need to pull back to a more stable, and less crisis-prone, nuclear posture. Role of the International Community The international community can continue to encourage and facilitate an uninterrupted peace dialogue between India and Pakistan. India has always been scornful of foreign mediation between them and prefers bilateral engagement, where it can bring its greater weight to bear. This continues despite the fact that the US involvement during the Kargil crisis went entirely in India’s favour. Pakistan, which has in the past sought external balancing and tried to invoke international mediation in its disputes with India, may well be wary of outside intervention after its Kargil experience. Nevertheless, friendly nudging by countries enjoying good relations with both India and Pakistan should be welcome. On the other hand, however, Australia’s decision to sell uranium to India is seen in Pakistan as being detrimental to its national security interests; just as the US-India nuclear deal was viewed as discriminatory and harmful to its security. The recent “Australia in the Asian Century” White Paper did not even mention Pakistan and would not have been well received there. These developments have, to a large extent, curtailed Australia’s ability to play the role of a facilitator in the India-Pakistan peace process. Its growing politico-economic relations with India, however, do place it in a position to encourage India to remain engaged in the composite dialogue with Pakistan

India desires peaceful, friendly and cooperative relations with Pakistan, which require an environment free from violence and terrorism.

In April 2010, during the meeting between Prime Minister and then Pak PM Gilani on the margins of the SAARC Summit (Thimpu) PM spoke about India's willingness to resolve all outstanding issues through bilateral dialogue. Follow up

15

meetings were held by the two Foreign Ministers (Islamabad, July 2010), and the two Foreign Secretaries (Thimphu, February 2011). During the latter meeting it was formally agreed to resume dialogue on all issues: (i) Counter-terrorism (including progress on Mumbai trial) and Humanitarian issues at Home Secretary level; (ii) Peace & Security, including CBMs, (iii) Jammu & Kashmir, and (iv) promotion of friendly exchanges at the level of Foreign Secretaries; (v) Siachen at Defence Secretary-level; (vi) Economic issues at Commerce Secretary level; (vii) Tulbul Navigation Project/ Wullar Barrage at Water Resources Secretary-level; and (viii) Sir Creek (at the level of Surveyors General/ Additional Secretary).

Since then several efforts have been made by the two countries to enhance people-to-people contacts. Cross-LoC travel and trade across J&K, initiated in 2005 and 2008 respectively, is an important step in this direction. Further, India and Pakistan signed a new visa agreement in September 2012 during the visit of then External Affairs Minister to Pakistan. This agreement has led to liberalization of bilateral visa regime.

Two rounds of the resumed dialogue have been completed; the third round began in September 2012, when the Commerce Secretaries met in Islamabad. Talks on conventional and non-conventional CBMs were held in the third round in December 2012 in New Delhi. A meeting of the Working Group on Cross-LoC (Line of Control) trade and travel CBMs was held in New Delhi on March 4, 2014 in which issues including strengthening of standard operating procedures were discussed.

Pakistan's PML (N) party received a strong mandate in the elections held on 11 May 2013 which allowed its leader Mian Nawaz Sharif to form a new Government. In his letter of congratulations (May 12), Prime Minister expressed desire to work with the new Pakistan government "to chart a new course" in bilateral ties. PM's Special Envoy Ambassador S.K. Lambah met Nawaz Sharif on 27 May 2013 in Lahore to personally convey PM's message even before the latter formally assumed office - a gesture that was appreciated by the new Pakistan PM. Ambassador Shahryar Khan also visited India (4-6 July) as PM Nawaz Sharif's Special Envoy and met PM (5 July); during the meeting he also handed over a personal letter from Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to PM.

Following the dastardly attack on 6 Aug 2013 in which five Indian jawans were killed along the LOC with the involvement of Pak army, India called upon Pakistan to maintain ceasefire and uphold the sanctity of LOC, which is the most important Confidence Building Measure between the two countries and, together with Pakistan's assurance not to allow territory under its control to be used for anti-India activities, which formed the basis of bilateral dialogue. It was conveyed that

16

In their meeting on the margins of the UN General Assembly on September 29, 2013 in New York, Prime Minister and PM Nawaz Sharif agreed that the precondition for a forward movement in the relationship, which they both desired, was an improvement of the situation on the LoC where there had been repeated ceasefire violations and incidents. They decided to task the Directors General of Military Operations (DGMOs) to suggest effective means to restore the ceasefire and a way forward to ensure that that remains in force and in place. The meeting of the DGMOs took place at Wagah on December 24, 2013. Terrorism

Terrorism emanating from territory under Pakistan's control remains a core concern in bilateral relations. This is precisely why India has sought a firm and abiding commitment from Pakistan that it will not allow its territory and territory under its control to be used for the aiding and abetting of terrorist activity directed against India and for providing sanctuary to such terrorist groups. India has consistently stressed to its interlocutors the need for Pakistan to fulfill is oft-repeated assurances, given to us at the highest level, that territory under its control would not be allowed to be used for anti-India activities in any manner. It is critical for the security of the region that Pakistan undertakes determined action to dismantle the terrorist networks, organizations and infrastructure within its own territory. However, internationally sanctioned entities such as Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) continue to function in Pakistan under various aliases. LeT's leader Hafiz Saeed and his followers also continue to incite violence against India. Moreover, in the recent months, key terrorists such as Masood Azhar and fugitives from Indian law have resurfaced in Pakistan.

Progress in the ongoing Mumbai terror attack case in Pakistan is seen as an important marker of Pakistan's commitment to combat terrorism emanating from its soil. The trial of seven persons in an Anti Terrorism Court (ATC) for their involvement in the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks has however proceeded at a glacial pace. The trial has been subject to repeated adjournments, non-appearances of lawyers, and frequent changes of prosecution lawyers and judges. A Pak Judicial Commission undertook its second visit to India in September 2013 and cross-examined key prosecution witnesses. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif told PM in New York on September 29, 2013 that effective action on bringing the perpetrators of the Mumbai attacks to book was indeed Pakistan's intention, and now that the Judicial Commission had returned to Pakistan after gathering depositions and evidence in India, there would be further progress. Hearings in the case, however, continue to be disrupted for one reason or another.

17

Business Exchanges A strong tradition of exchange of trade delegations has also been built up

over the last two years. The first meeting of the newly created Joint Business Council (JBC)/ Forum, comprising 15 top level business representatives from each country was, held in Islamabad on 29 June 2013. The JBC decided to form ten task forces to examine the priority areas of economic cooperation in agriculture, pharmaceuticals, automobiles and healthcare. Its second and third meetings were held in New Delhi and Lahore, respectively in October 2013 and February 2014.

Among business-to-business exchanges since April 2012 are participation of

a CII-organised high level business delegation in the 2nd

Indo-Pak Aman ki Asha Economic Conference 'Dividends: Profits on Peace' in Lahore on 7-8 May 2012, Bombay Chamber of Commerce and Industry in 'My Karachi' exhibition in Karachi from 13-15 July 2012, 'India Expo' in Karachi in 2013, the second edition of 'India Show' in Lahore (February 14-16, 2014) - which was inaugurated by Federal Ministr fo

18

Commerce of Pakistan Khurram Dastgir Khan, 'Made in Pakistan' Exhibition mounted by the Federation of Pakistan Chambers of Commerce and Industry in Mumbai from August 31-September 4, 2012, and again from April 3-7, 2014, participation of Pakistan in Indian International Trade Fair in November 2012 and 2013, and in a number of other trade exhibitions and events, including those arranged by the PHD Chamber of Commerce and Industry in Chandigarh, Ludhiana, Delhi, etc. The next edition of 'Lifestyle Pakistan' is being planned. Humanitarian Issues

A joint 'Judicial Committee on Prisoners' comprising retired Judges from the higher judiciary of both countries looks into humanitarian issues related to prisoners and fishermen in each other's jails, which it visits alternatingly twice a year. Its last visit to India was in October 2013. The Committee's recommendations on better consular access, expeditious trial, provision of legal aid, humanitarian treatment, early repatriation after completion of sentences, and repatriation of fishermen along with their boats, are examined for implementation by the government on both sides. As a result of constant efforts by the Government, release of close to 2,000 Indian fishermen and 100 prisoners has been secured from Pakistani prisons since 2008. At present, there are over 300 fishermen and estimated over 200 prisoners believed to be Indian in Pakistani jails. Some of them have completed their sentences and await release. Since 2008, deaths of eight Indian fishermen and 3 prisoners while in custody of Pakistani authorities have been reported, with a few of these known or believed to have resulted from unnatural causes. The matter of reported auctions of confiscated boats of apprehended Indian fishermen has been taken up with concerned Pakistani authorities. Timeline:

1947 - Britain, as part of its pullout from the Indian subcontinent, divides it into secular (but

mainly Hindu) India and Muslim Pakistan on August 15 and 14 respectively. The partition

causes one of the largest human migrations ever seen, and sparks riots and violence across the

region.

1947/48 - The first Indo-Pak war over Kashmir is fought, after armed tribesmen (lashkars) from

Pakistan's North West Frontier Province (now called Khyber-Pakthunkhwa) invade the disputed

territory in October 1947. The Maharaja, faced with an internal revolt as well an external

invasion, requests the assistance of the Indian armed forces, in return for acceding to India. He

hands over control of his defence, communications and foreign affairs to the Indian government.

Both sides agree that the instrument of accession signed by Maharaja Hari Singh be ratified by a

referendum, to be held after hostilities have ceased. Historians on either side of the dispute

19

remain undecided as to whether the Maharaja signed the document after Indian troops had

entered Kashmir (i.e. under duress) or if he did so under no direct military pressure.

Fighting continues through the second half of 1948, with the regular Pakistani army called upon

to protect Pakistan's borders.

The war officially ends on January 1, 1949, when the United Nations arranges a ceasefire, with

an established ceasefire line, a UN peacekeeping force and a recommendation that the

referendum on the accession of Kashmir to India be held as agreed earlier. That referendum has

yet to be held.

Pakistan controls roughly one-third of the state, referring to it as Azad (free) Jammu and

Kashmir. It is semi-autonomous. A larger area, including the former kingdoms of Hunza and

Nagar, is controlled directly by the central Pakistani government.

The Indian (eastern) side of the ceasefire line is referred to as Jammu and Kashmir.

Both countries refer to the other side of the ceasefire line as "occupied" territory.

1954 - The accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India is ratified by the state's constituent

assembly.

1957 - The Jammu and Kashmir constituent assembly approves a constitution. India, from the

point of the 1954 ratification and 1957 constitution, begins to refer to Jammu and Kashmir as an

integral part of the Indian union.

1963 - Following the 1962 Sino-Indian war, the foreign ministers of India and Pakistan - Swaran

Singh and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto - hold talks under the auspices of the British and Americans

regarding the Kashmir dispute. The specific contents of those talks have not yet been

declassified, but no agreement was reached. In the talks, "Pakistan signified willingness to

consider approaches other than a plebiscite and India recognised that the status of Kashmir was

in dispute and territorial adjustments might be necessary," according to a declassified US state

department memo (dated January 27, 1964).

1964 - Following the failure of the 1963 talks, Pakistan refers the Kashmir case to the UN

Security Council.

1965 - India and Pakistan fight their second war. The conflict begins after a clash between border

patrols in April in the Rann of Kutch (in the Indian state of Gujarat), but escalates on August 5,

when between 26,000 and 33,000 Pakistani soldiers cross the ceasefire line dressed as Kashmiri

locals, crossing into Indian-administered Kashmir.

Infantry, armour and air force units are involved in the conflict while it remains localised to the

Kashmir theatre, but as the war expands, Indian troops cross the international border at Lahore

on September 6. The largest engagement of the war takes place in the Sialkot sector, where

between 400 and 600 tanks square off in an inconclusive battle.

By September 22, both sides agree to a UN mandated ceasefire, ending the war that had by that

point reached a stalemate, with both sides holding some of the other's territory.

20

1966 - On January 10, 1966, Indian Prime Minister Lal Bahdaur Shastri and Pakistani President

Ayub Khan sign an agreement at Tashkent (now in Uzbekistan), agreeing to withdraw to pre-

August lines and that economic and diplomatic relations would be restored.

1971 - India and Pakistan go to war a third time, this time over East Pakistan. The conflict begins

when the central Pakistani government in West Pakistan, led by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, refuses to

allow Awami League leader Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, a Bengali whose party won the majority

of seats in the 1970 parliamentary elections, to assume the premiership.

A Pakistani military crackdown on Dhaka begins in March, but India becomes involved in the

conflict in

December, after the Pakistani air force launches a pre-emptive strike on airfields in India's

northwest.

India then launches a coordinated land, air and sea assault on East Pakistan. The Pakistani army

surrenders at Dhaka, and its army of more than 90,000 become prisoners of war. Hostilities

lasted 13 days, making this one of the shortest wars in modern history.

East Pakistan becomes the independent country of Bangladesh on December 6, 1971.

1972 - Pakistani Prime Minister Zulifiqar Ali Bhutto and Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi

sign an agreement in the Indian town of Simla, in which both countries agree to "put an end to

the conflict and confrontation that have hitherto marred their relations and work for the

promotion of a friendly and harmonious relationship and the establishment of a durable peace in

the subcontinent". Both sides agree to settle any disputes "by peaceful means".

The Simla Agreement designates the ceasefire line of December 17, 1971, as being the new

"Line-of-Control (LoC)" between the two countries, which neither side is to seek to alter

unilaterally, and which "shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognised

position of either side".

1974 - The Kashmiri state government affirms that the state "is a constituent unit of the Union of

India". Pakistan rejects the accord with the Indian government.

On May 18, India detonates a nuclear device at Pokhran, in an operation codenamed "Smiling

Buddha". India refers to the device as a "peaceful nuclear explosive".

1988 - The two countries sign an agreement that neither side will attack the other's nuclear

installations or facilities. These include "nuclear power and research reactors, fuel fabrication,

uranium enrichment, isotopes separation and reprocessing facilities as well as any other

installations with fresh or irradiated nuclear fuel and materials in any form and establishments

storing significant quantities of radio-active materials".

Both sides agree to share information on the latitudes and longitudes of all nuclear installations.

This agreement is later ratified, and the two countries share information on January 1 each year

since then.

21

1989 - Armed resistance to Indian rule in the Kashmir valley begins. Muslim political parties,

after accusing the state government of rigging the 1987 state legislative elections, form militant

wings.

Pakistan says that it gives its "moral and diplomatic" support to the movement, reiterating its call

for the earlier UN-sponsored referendum.

India says that Pakistan is supporting the insurgency by providing weapons and training to

fighters, terming attacks against it in Kashmir "cross-border terrorism". Pakistan denies this.

Militant groups taking part in the fight in Kashmir continue to emerge through the 1990s, in part

fuelled by a large influx of "mujahideen" who took part in the Afghan war against the Soviets in

the 1980s.

1991 - The two countries sign agreements on providing advance notification of military

exercises, manoeuvres and troop movements, as well as on preventing airspace violations and

establishing overflight rules.

1992 - A joint declaration prohibiting the use of chemical weapons is signed in New Delhi.

1996 - Following a series of clashes, military officers from both countries meet at the LoC in

order to ease tensions.

1998 - India detonates five nuclear devices at Pokhran. Pakistan responds by detonating six

nuclear devices of its own in the Chaghai Hills. The tests result in international sanctions being

placed on both countries. In the same year, both countries carry out tests of long-range missiles.

1999 - Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee meets with Nawaz Sharif, his Pakistani

counterpart, in Lahore. The two sign the Lahore Declaration, the first major agreement between

the two countries since the 1972 Simla Accord. Both countries reaffirm their commitment to the

Simla Accord, and agree to undertake a number of 'Confidence Building Measures' (CBMs).

Some of the diplomatic gains are eroded, however, after the Kargil conflict breaks out in May.

Pakistani forces and Kashmiri fighters occupy strategic positions on the Indian side of the LoC,

prompting an Indian counter offensive in which they are pushed back to the other side of the

original LoC.

Kargil is the first armed conflict between the two neighbours since they officially conducted

nuclear weapons tests.

In October 1999, General Pervez Musharraf, the Pakistani chief of army staff, leads a military

coup, deposing Nawaz Sharif, the then prime minister, and installing himself as the head of the

government.

2001 - Tensions along the Line of Control remain high, with 38 people killed in an attack on the

Kashmiri assembly in Srinagar. Following that attack, Farooq Abdullah, the chief minister of

Indian-administered Kashmir, calls on the Indian government to launch a full-scale military

operation against alleged training camps in Pakistan.

22

In July, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf and Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee

meet for a two-day summit in the Indian city of Agra. That summit collapses after two days, with

both sides unable to reach agreement on the core issue of Kashmir.

On December 13, an armed attack on the Indian parliament in New Delhi leaves 14 people dead.

India blames Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad for the attacks.

The attacks lead to a massing of India's and Pakistan's militaries along the LoC. The standoff

only ends in October 2002, after international mediation.

2002 - President Musharraf pledges that Pakistan will combat extremism on its own soil, but

affirms that the country has a right to Kashmir.

2003 - After Musharraf calls for a ceasefire along the LoC during a UN General Assembly

meeting in September, the two countries reach an agreement to cool tensions and cease hostilities

across the defacto border.

2004 - Vajpayee and Musharraf hold direct talks at the 12th SAARC summit in Islamabad in

January, and the two countries' foreign secretaries meet later in the year. This year marks the

beginning of the Composite Dialogue Process, in which bilateral meetings are held between

officials at various levels of government (including foreign ministers, foreign secretaries,

military officers, border security officials, anti-narcotics officials and nuclear experts). In

November, on the eve of a visit to Jammu and Kashmir, the new Indian prime minister,

Manmohan Singh, announces that India will be reducing its deployment of troops there.

2006 - India redeploys 5,000 troops from Jammu and Kashmir, citing an "improvement" in the

situation there, but the two countries are unable to reach an agreement on withdrawing forces

from the Siachen glacier.

In September, President Musharraf and Prime Minister Singh agree to put into place an Indo-Pak

institutional anti-terrorism mechanism.

2007 - On February 18, the train service between India and Pakistan (the Samjhauta Express) is

bombed near Panipat, north of New Delhi. Sixty-eight people are killed, and dozens injured.

The fifth round of talks regarding the review of nuclear and ballistic missile-related CBMs is

held as part of the Composite Dialogue Process. The second round of the Joint Anti-Terrorism

Mechanism (JATM) is also held.

2008 - India joins a framework agreement between Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan on a

$7.6bn gas pipeline project. A series of Kashmir-specific CBMs are also agreed to (including the

approval of a triple-entry permit facility).

In July, India blames Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) directorate for a bomb attack on

the Indian embassy in Kabul, which kills 58 and injures another 141.

In September, Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari and Indian Prime Minister Singh formally

announce the opening of several trade routes between the two countries.

23

In October, cross-LoC trade commences, though it is limited to 21 items and can take place on

only two days a week.

On November 26, armed gunmen open fire on civilians at several sites in Mumbai, India. The

attacks on the Taj Mahal Palace & Tower, the Oberoi Trident Hotel, the Chhatrapati Shivaji

Terminus, Leopold Cafe, Cama Hospital, Nariman House Jewish community centre, Metro

Cinema, St Xavier's College and in a lane near the Times of India office, prompt an almost three-

day siege of the Taj, where gunmen remain holed up until all but one of them are killed in an

Indian security forces operation. More than 160 people are killed in the attacks.

Ajmal Kasab, the only attacker captured alive, says the attackers were members of Lashkar-e-

Taiba.

In the wake of the attacks, India breaks off talks with Pakistan.

2009 - The Pakistani government admits that the Mumbai attacks may have been partly planned

on Pakistani soil, while vigorously denying allegations that the plotters were sanctioned or aided

by Pakistan's intelligence agencies.

Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and Indian Prime Minister Singh meet on the

sidelines of a Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) summit in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, issuing a joint

statement charting future talks. Singh rules out, however, the resumption of the Composite

Dialogue Process at the present time.

The Indian government continues to take a stern line with Pakistan, however, with its coalition

government saying that it is up to Pakistan to take the first step towards the resumption of

substantive talks by cracking down on militant groups on its soil.

In August, India gives Pakistan a new dossier of evidence regarding the Mumbai attacks, asking

it to prosecute Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, the head of Jamaat-ud-Dawa, an Islamic charity with

ties to Lashkar-e-Taiba.

2010 - In January, Pakistani and Indian forces exchange fire across the LoC in Kashmir, the

latest in a string of such incidents that have led to rising tension in the area.

In February, India and Pakistan's foreign secretaries meet in New Delhi for talks. This meeting is

followed by the two countries' foreign ministers meeting in Islamabad in July.

In May, Ajmal Kasab is found guilty of murder, conspiracy and of waging war against India in

the Mumbai attacks case. He is sentenced to death.

2011 - In January, Indian Home Secretary GK Pillai says India will share information with

Pakistan regarding the 2001 Samjhauta Express bombing. The two countries' foreign secretaries

meet in Thimpu, Nepal, in February, and agree to resume peace talks "on all issues".

2012 - In November, India execute Pakistani national Mohammad Ajmal Kasab, the lone

survivor of a fighter squad that killed 166 people in a rampage through the financial capital

Mumbai in 2008, hanging him just days before the fourth anniversary of the attack.

24

2013 - In January, India and Pakistan trade accusations of violating the cease-fire in Kashmir,

with Islamabad accusing Indian troops of a cross-border raid that killed a soldier and India

charging that Pakistani shelling destroyed a home on its side.

2013 - In September, the prime ministers of India and Pakistan meet in New York on the

sidelines of the UN General Assembly. Both the leaders agree to end tension between armies of

both sides in the disputed Kashmir.

2014 - On February 12, India and Pakistan agree to release trucks detained in their respective

territories, ending a three week impasse triggered by seizure of a truck in India-administered

Kashmir coming from across the de facto Line of Control for allegedly carrying brown sugar.

2014 - On May 1, Pakistan's Army chief General Raheel Sharif calls Kash

Pakistan–India Relationship in 2015 To date, it seems premature to talk about qualitative changes or

significant adjustment behaviour of India and Pakistan in relation to

each other. But over the last year, during the rule of Narendra Modi

in the Indian government, each of the parties has had the opportunity

to define its position.

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), that came to power following the results of the

parliamentary elections in May

2014, sharply criticized the previous government led by the Congress, stating that

"a cursory look at a lost decade

demonstrates the deviation and loss of direction in its relations with its neighbours,

misguided diplomacy towards

Pakistan and short-sightedness in the determination of foreign policy with the

island states of the Indian Ocean."

Exactly from this standpoint the government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi

built relationships in the region.

2014 was characterised by another round of tension in relations between the two

countries. Islamabad emphasised

25

the presence of "...some fundamental differences with New Delhi". According to

statements of its foreign minister,

"… the process of normalization was hampered by the lack of composite dialogue

between the countries, but we are

striving to renew it on all unresolved questions".

Adjustments of the approaches of the general line of foreign policy of Pakistan and

India in 2014 - 2015 are

connected with several reasons:

- Firstly, the accession to power of new leaders in Pakistan (Prime Minister

Muhammad Nawaz Sharif -

May 2013), and in India - Prime Minister Narendra Modi as a result of the

parliamentary elections in

May 2014, and subsequent changes in their foreign policy vectors;

- Secondly, the modification of the general geopolitical content in the region after

the completion of the

combat mission of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan

(ISAF) and the withdrawal

of the major part of the coalition forces in December 2014;

- Thirdly, the military establishment of Pakistan had an impact on the development

of foreign policy,

particularly in the Indian direction.

In 2014/2015 Islamabad adjusted its approaches on the Kashmir issue in

comparison with the former administration

headed by the president Asif Ali Zardari.

The Kashmir sovereignty issue was again included as a major point in the agenda

of Pakistani-Indian relations. The

former ruling in 2008-2013, the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) avoided to raise the

issue as a priority in its dialogue

26

with New Delhi in 2011-2013. On the contrary, the government urged to "freeze"

this and settle some technical

issues, visas (providing expedited visa regime for certain categories of citizens of

the both countries), transportation

(bus routes in Kashmir), etc.

Muhammad Nawaz Sharif and Narendra Modi met in May, 2014 for the first time

when the head of the Federal

Cabinet of Ministers of Pakistan was invited to the inauguration in New Delhi. But

the first political battles were

turned by them against each other at the end of September 2014 at the UN General

Assembly. Pakistan severely

criticized the position of India directed at blocking the execution of a referendum

in Kashmir. The main accusation

of the Indian party came down to the characterisation of Pakistan, as a "main

source of terrorism". A little later, in

January 2015, this point was again voiced during the visit of President Barack

Obama in New Delhi.

Several traditional and new "painful points" appeared in the relations between

Islamabad and New Delhi in 2014 and

the first half of 2015:

- armed conflicts along the Line of Control and Working boundary in Kashmir

from September, 2014 to

March, 2015;

- strong statements of Pakistan with the purpose of blocking plans of India for the

construction of new

settlements in the Indian part of Kashmir;

- further delay by Pakistan of the issue of granting India the status of most

favoured nation;

- Islamabad once again accused New Delhi of using Afghan territory for terrorist

attacks in Pakistan, as

27

well as the involvement of the Indian intelligence agency (RAW) to the activities

of terrorist

organizations in Pakistan;

- the strengthening of confrontation between India and Pakistan for influence in

Afghanistan, or socalled

"proxy war".

The process of reforming the UN Security Council In 2014, Pakistan called on the

UN General Assembly to prevent

the creation of new permanent seats in the Security Council and at the same time

emphasized the need to

strengthen the role of the 193 members of the Assembly. Pakistan opposed

granting India the status of a permanent

member of the UN Security Council.

Reforming the Security Council, according to Islamabad, should reflect the

interests of the wider membership of the

United Nations. He pointed out two major obstacles to India in the UN Security

Council: firstly, the idea of new

permanent members of the Security Council will create additional centres of

power, and, secondly, India, according

to Pakistan, is not eligible for special status in the Council, as it violated UN

Security Council resolutions on Jammu

and Kashmir, and the right of the Kashmiri people to self-determination. Pakistan

believes that a country that has

violated the UN Charter is not entitled to a permanent seat in the UN Security

Council.

During his visit to New Delhi in January 2015, the US President Barack Obama

expressed support for India's

candidature to the UN Security Council, a privileged international forum. Pakistani

media very sharply reacted to

this statement.

28

Pakistan is not opposed to civil nuclear cooperation and membership of the

Nuclear Suppliers Group -NSG, which

have not joined the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. But at

the same time it opposes granting

membership to India in the NSG, believing that it will be a severe blow to the non-

proliferation regime. The USIndian

nuclear deal in 2008, according to Islamabad, is aimed at building up the nuclear

capabilities of India, that

has not done much for its transparency.

Islamabad expressed concerns about the capacity growth of Indian military

potential Its defence expenditures have

increased by 12% in 2014-2015 and up to $38.35 billion US. According to

Pakistan, the US-India defence

agreement for a period of ten years will further strengthen the existing imbalance

of conventional and nuclear

weapons and therefore lead to a destabilization strategy in South Asia.

In February 2015, the government of the BJP joined the rush for a conventional

arms race. The Prime Minister N.

Modi announced the reforming of its defence procurement policy with the priority

on domestic production and

cancelled restrictions on foreign investments in the defensive area.

In response, Pakistan stated that "... it has never been a part of an arms race with

India and will adhere to this policy

in the future. However, bearing in mind the situation in the region, Pakistan has the

right to maintain a balance of

conventional weapons ... and, despite financial difficulties, for the government to

meet the needs of their armed

forces, will continue this strategy in the future."

Islamabad has expressed concerns at the deterioration of the strategic imbalance

during heightened Pakistan-India

29

tensions, the violation by India (according to Pakistan) of the ceasefire along the

Line of Control and Working

boundary.

But on a high note of the discussion of military budgets, on February 13, 2015

India made the first step towards:

Prime Minister Narendra Modi called Prime Minister Muhammad Nawaz Sharif.

The next step of India is the visit to

Islamabad in March 2015 of the Indian Foreign Subrahmanyam Jaishankar. In

other words, the parties started

negotiations on the level at which they had been "frozen" in August 2014 (on

August 25, 2014 a meeting was planned

at the level of secretaries of the foreign ministries. But the planned scenario was

disrupted. Preceding the Indian

side was a meeting of the High Commissioner of Pakistan in India, Abdul Basit

(the Pakistan envoy to India Abdul

Basit) with leaders of Kashmir (Hurriyat Leaders), despite protests from New

Delhi. In response, India unilaterally

cancelled the talks. Pakistan put the responsibility for the failure of negotiations on

its eastern neighbour.)

In March 2015, the main attention was paid to the discussion of bilateral issues:

Jammu and Kashmir, Siachen, Sir

Creek and water issues. They confirmed that for in order to find their solutions

concerted efforts are required and

the resumption of the dialogue process, maintaining the ceasefire (2003), the main

mechanism for the stabilization of

the situation on the Line of Control and the Working boundary between the two

countries. The visit of the Secretary

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of India in Pakistan was generally formal and was held

on the eve of the SAARC summit,

30

which will take place in Islamabad. Analysts pointed out that it had not brought

much hope for a qualitative

breakthrough, improvement of bilateral relations. At the same time, according to

the Pakistani side, it opened the

way for future negotiations. However, without a specific date of the event.

And in May 2015, the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi confirmed his

intention to "break the ice" in relations

with neighbouring countries through the "cricket diplomacy": "... We have decided

to start a series of games of

cricket between the teams of the two countries, and it will be the first step towards

normalization of relations." The

games are planned in the United Arab Emirates, away from the unpredictable

behaviour of the majority of the

fans. "Cricket diplomacy" is a return to the positions of the parties in 2011-2012,

when former Pakistani Prime

Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani arrived in India on an unofficial visit, and together

with the former Prime Minister of

India M.Sindhom watched a cricket match. And so all the years of these

relationships - one step forward, two steps

back.

References:

Web:

www.aljazeera.com www.futuredirections.org.au

www.india.org.pk magazine