Tried, tested and failed. That sums up the erratic history of bilateral escalation between India and Pakistan — with the latest example being the reported surgical strike that the Indian military conducted early on Thursday, targeting militants based across the Line of Control in Kashmir and Islamabad’s pugnacious response to it.
With a rich history of shared bonds and heritage that tie the nuclear neighbours, such a situation contrasts sharply with the outreach between the two governments since they assumed power, including Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s presence at the inauguration of his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi in 2014, and Modi gatecrashing on Sharif’s birthday celebrations in Lahore last Christmas.
From tensions that began bubbling with an Indian crackdown on protests in Kashmir, following the killing of separatist leader Burhan Wani, to the attack on the Uri army base that killed 18 Indian soldiers — and which Delhi blamed on Pakistan-based militants — to Modi’s pledge to review a 1960 water-sharing bilateral treaty and the collapse of a scheduled regional summit in Islamabad, this self-propelling cycle of aggression must stop now.
Discounting the compulsions of both nations to satisfy their domestic constituencies and policy hawks by taking hardline action against a perceived hostile neighbour, there is still ample space in the sphere of public policy for both to engage in fruitful dialogue and cooperation. The chequered history of the past wars provide enough evidence for India and Pakistan that bombs, bullets and political bluster never provide any lasting dividend.
Of course, it is the prerogative of every country to defend its security interests and counter any territorial provocation. But, in the long run, New Delhi must concede that its fondness for strategic action may not be any more effective than the strategic restraint of the previous regime. Instead, a deeper engagement with the disgruntled people of Kashmir may bear better results. And for Islamabad, the road ahead is clear cut: To fulfil its role as a responsible partner in the battle against terror and ensure that any organisation that poses the threat of destabilising the neighbourhood or the world is immediately dismantled.
For both, there is ultimately no alternative to the negotiating table. More than any sporadic military surgery or political animosity, what the rocky relationship needs is a sustained civilian healing touch.
