A wasted moment

By ending talks with Islamabad, Delhi fails vision test

Prime Minister Narendra Modi began his tenure with considerable wisdom when it came to relations in the neighbourhood. He visited Bhutan and Nepal, and ensured that the idea that India was an interfering big brother received a quiet burial. All the members of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation, or Saarc, sent their leaders to Mr Modi's swearing-in; and, in a meeting subsequently with his Pakistani counterpart, Mr Modi revived the talks process. This engagement was due to continue although back-and-forth fire on the Line of Control in Kashmir was continuing - something that was seen as a sign of maturity on the part of the new government.

Sadly, however, all these sensible steps appear to have come to nothing - and the Indian government must share the blame. The two countries' foreign secretaries were due to meet in Islamabad next week. As has been the regular practice before such meetings, Pakistan's High Commissioner in India set up appointments with separatist leaders from the Kashmir Valley. These appointments amount to nothing of importance - they are merely a signal to noisy domestic constituencies in Pakistan that their government remembers that Kashmiris exist. Islamabad's man in Delhi has been meeting the Hurriyat since 1995 to this end - pure atmospherics, no substance. However, this time, the Indian government chose to make an issue of it, and called off the talks because separatist leader Shabir Shah was invited to the Pakistani high commission for tea. This is as immature as the earlier steps were mature.

India gains nothing from this move. Perhaps the intention of the Prime Minister's Office - and, by all reports, this was a decision taken there and not in the foreign ministry - was to pressure Nawaz Sharif's government into concessions just when Mr Sharif is being weakened by military-backed protests being led by Imran Khan and a charismatic Muslim preacher from Canada. If so, that shows a lack of understanding of Pakistani politics, and a lack of vision about where engagement with Pakistan should lead - to the strengthening of pro-trade civilians, not weakening them. More cynically, it might be the case that the intent is to ensure that the issue dominates the upcoming elections in Jammu and Kashmir, thereby helping the Bharatiya Janata Party to capture most of the seats in Jammu.

The simple fact is that not talking with Pakistan will not get India anywhere. Currently, these talks are perhaps the only lever India has over Pakistan. This lever has not been used judiciously. The point of the talks was to create more levers for Indian influence in Pakistan; to strengthen Pakistan's civilian government; and to open up its markets. These are necessary steps towards the eventual aims: to isolate Pakistan from the United States' and Chinese support, and to prevent a negative fallout on India of Pakistan's ever-burgeoning problems. But the strategic vision needed to achieve those aims is not visible in the decision to suspend talks. It is to be hoped that the new government, still fresh in office, is willing to learn from such mistakes.