Current Affairs File

7/27/2019 Current Affairs File

1/71

1

Pakistan US relations

Background

US - Pakistan relations in the last six decades have been unstable and moved in a cyclicalpattern with recurrent ups and downs, with frequent alternating episodes of close

partnership and sharp frictionreflecting engagement and estrangement in global and

regional geopolitics. They have flourished in periods of international tensions, such as in

the fifties, again in eighties, (and now in the days beyond 9/11), and have deteriorated

in conditions of dtente, as in the sixties and seventies and again in the nineties. The

United States and Pakistan relations, broadly speaking have been synchronized on the

same wavelength during the Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan presidencies. During the

Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Bush, and Clinton administrations, however, policy differences

have been more pronounced and significant.

Pakistan came into existence just as the cold war had started between America& Soviet

Union (USSR). The world was split into two camps soviet and US. Infant Pakistan and

India had to pick their camps...

History:

1950: Liaqat Ali khan (1st PM) was invited by Soviets and Americans. He chose to visitUS,

thus starting PAK-US relations. India chose Soviets.

1954: Pakistan grew closer to US, joining in defense agreement SEATO (alliance against,communism).

1955: an alliance, the Baghdad Pact, was formed between Britain, Turkey, Iran, Iraq, andPakistan (its name changed to CENTO )

Late 50s and early 60s:US aid starts flowing to Pak. with the military govt of Gen AyubKhan, Pakistan grew even more close to US. First US base opened at Badaber near

Peshawar. U2 flights originating from Badaber gained lot of information about Soviet

activities across the border.

In May 1960, the USSR shot U2 reconnaissance plane of US down over Russian soil, it hadtaken off from Badaber. The incidence brought lot of embarrassment both for Pak & US.

USSR also warned Pak.

1965: Indo-Pak war...Pak US relations suffer a setback when US places arms embargo onboth nations, knowing well that Pakistan was totally dependent on US arms and India did

not use any US arms. Soviets speeded up arms supplies to India. Pakistan gained air

superiority by using US supplied F-86 Sabers and F-104 Star fighters. Pakistans old enemy

King Zahir of Afghanistan ensured safety of Pakistans Western borders, allowing Pakistan

to remove it troops from that border. Iran opened her airfields to Pakistan Air force. China


2/71

2

moved her troops close to Indian border but US stopped supplies forcing Pakistan to sue

for peace offered under Soviets. It was the firstbetrayalby US.

1971: Civil war in Pakistan. India invaded Pakistan. Massive blood shed supervised byIndia. Pakistan asks her old time ally US for help. US tell Pakistan 7th Fleet is on its way.

Now after 25 years declassified documents revealed that US deliberately wanted to break

Pakistan to appease India. It was the second betrayal by US.

1970s: Pakistan feeling betrayed by the US decided to move away from US block.Venturing first into NAM (non aligned movement) then in OIC and finally started making

friends with soviets. Soviets started setting up steel mills in Pakistan and supplied some

military aid (Mi-8 etc). Pakistan moved on the road to socialism under Bhutto. US believed

that Pakistan was slipping to the other side. US grew hostile to Pakistan. Bhutto openly

challenged US in his speeches....

1977: CIA organized "Tehrik-i-Nizam-i-Mustafa" spearheaded by Jamaat-i-Islami a hardcore Religious party. BTW no religious party has ever won any significant votes in any

elections. They have always come to power using back doors. The movement gains

momentum and army topples Bhutto, who is finally hanged in 1979. This is what happens

to those who oppose USA. US also pass Symington law thereby stopping aid to countries

pursuing nuclear technology (Pak suffers).

1979: Iranian revolution...US lose a staunch ally in the region (i.e. Iran). Same year soviets

invade Afghanistan. Its a check mate for US as communism expands in Afghanistan.1980s: Pak-US friendship starts again as US badly needs an ally in the region. Pakistan

becomes a front line state in war against communism........US takes lenient view of Pak

nuclear program & restores its aid. Pak receives 3.2 billion.

1989-92:Soviets are finally defeated triggering a massive reaction all over the world whichfinally results in fall of communism....US is the sole super power...either u r with the US or

u r dead...

India quickly jumps ship and prostates before US.... Pakistan is ignored by US.... relations

suddenly become cold... Zia-ul-Haq is killed in a plane crash which many in Pakistan

believe was a work of CIA...

1990s: US closes its eyes on Pakistan again now that it is no longer needed. India becomesthe blue eyed baby. Nuclear sanctions again imposed on Pak. Pak aid stopped.

1998: India exploded nuclear device and threatens to attack Pakistan. World keeps mum.

Pakistan responds by its own nuke tests. India shuts up but US imposes sanctions onPakistan... Its third betrayal by US;


3/71

3

1999- 2000: Gen Pervaiz Musharraf topples Nawaz Sharif govt. West condemns Pak. Pakfeels isolated & in serious financial crisis.

2001: 9/11 again pushes US to seek its old ally. Pak, in its was against

terrorism. Pakistan as always agrees......now people in Pakistan see a 4th betrayal in the

making as US assures India that it will help India fight "terrorism" in Kashmir a veiledthreat that Pakistan will suffer same fate as Afghanistan... No one realizes that the terrorism

in Kashmir is by Indian army....Look at the statistics.... tens of thousands of Kashmir is

slaughtered by Indian occupation forces....yet when Kashmir is fight the Indian army they

are labeled terrorists...by that token George Washington was a terrorist, Charles DE Gaulle

was a terrorist, Nelson Mandela was even declared a terrorist by racist South Africa.

Pakistan is always there when US needed her...but US did not reciprocate.... we are a very

emotional nation.... we love our friends but nobody likes to be betrayed...

PostSeptember 11

After the September 11 attacks in 2001 in the United States, Pakistan once againbecame a key ally in the war on terror with the United States. In 2001, U.S. President

George W. Bush strongly encouraged Pakistan government to join the U.S. war on

terror. Prior to the September 11 attacks in 2001, Pakistan was key supporter of the

Taliban in Afghanistan, as part of their "strategic depth" objective vies-a-vies India

After 9/11, Pakistan, led by General Pervez Musharraf, reversed course underpressure from the United States and joined the "War on Terror" as a U.S. ally. Having

failed to convince the Taliban to hand over bin Laden and other members of Al

Qaeda, Pakistan provided the U.S. a number of military airports and bases for its

attack on Afghanistan, along with other logistical support. Since 2001, Pakistan has

arrested over six hundred Al-Qaeda members and handed them over to the United

States; senior U.S. officers have been lavish in their praise of Pakistani efforts in

public while expressing their concern that not enough was being done in private.

However, General Musharraf was strongly supported by the Bush administration a

common theme throughout Pakistan's relations with the U.S. has been U.S. support

of military dictators to the detriment of democracy in Pakistan.

In return for their support, Pakistan had sanctions lifted and has received about $20 billion

in U.S. aid since 2001, primarily military. In 2004, President George W. Bush designated

Pakistan as a major non-NATO ally, making it eligible, among other things, to purchase

advanced American military technology.

2002-2003: Pak deploys 80000 troops in tribal area (FATA) to crush the militants. Theresult has been a mix.

2005: US dis-satisfied over Pak performance in war on terror due to increased insurgencyalong Pak- Afghan border. It starts drone attacks in Pak territory violating its sovereignty.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attackshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_terrorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bushhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bushhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_terrorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks


4/71

4

Drones lead to huge collateral damage & death of innocent civilians leading to more

resentment among the tribal people. Militancy spreads. US pressurize Pak to Do more.

2006- 2007: The former President Bush signed off an internal security memo authorizingimportant operational changes to the US forces in Afghanistan. Not only could the drone

attacks be increased on the Pakistan side of the border, they could be conducted withoutprior intimation to the Pakistanis And, if and when any of the big guns (the top three) of

al Qaeda and the Taliban were located, the US forces were authorized to attack them

without being inhibited by the Pak-Afghan boundary. The first signs of a changing US

operational application emerged with the increasing frequency of drone attacks in the

FATA region and absence of any prior coordination of intelligence.

2008: When Obama took over in January 2008, one of his first orders of business wasa brief on the Afghan situation. He was briefed on President Bushs authorization of

enhanced operations. Reportedly, he expressed surprise at why such facilitation was notbeing fully exploited. He ordered an immediate increase in the frequency of drone attacks.

This has remained the principal plank of the US strategy to counter al Qaeda and Taliban

groups lodged in the mountainous recesses of the Pak-Afghan border. It has also

subsequently been proposed as the main underlying strategy for the counter-terrorism

(CTR) approach by Vice President Biden as an alternate to the currently ongoing counter-

insurgency (COIN) campaign in Afghanistan.

For Pakistan, since 2008, the drone attacks have acquired a different dimension: itsblowback and retaliatory suicide bomb blasts by militant organizations have risen inproportion, causing widespread death and destruction in the major cities of Pakistan.

The CIA also believed at that time Osama Bin Laden to be hiding in Pakistan. U.S time to

time accused Pakistan of giving safe-haven to the Taliban& for not conducting the military

operation sincerely. In order to increase pressure US has started demanding pak to DO

MORE & has shown its displeasure over Pak performance almost constantly.

2009:- In October 2009, the U.S. Congress approved $7.5 billion of non-military aid (Kerry

Lugar bill) to Pakistan over the next five years. But the disbursement of aid was madeconditional to Pak performance. Various other humiliating terms were also included in the

bill.

2010: US demands Pak to launch an operation against Haqqani group (in NorthWaziristan) responsible for dangerous attacks on American forces. Pak shows reluctance.

No of drone attacks cross over 85 (highest) in this year producing no result.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_Bin_Ladenhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talibanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talibanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_Bin_Laden


5/71

5

2011-2012: Important Events;

a. Jan- Feb, 2011, Raymond Davis case: He was an American contractor whokilled 2 citizens in Lahore & was arrested. Under tremendous public demand he was

tried according to our law. US wanted Pak to release him immediately. Pak

ultimately succumbed to American pressure & released him. US proving its might

over Pak.

b. Haqqani group: American pressure increases on Pak to Do more against themilitants. US continuously asking for operation against Haqqani network.

c. May 02, 2011, Abbottabad operation: The unilateral and unauthorizedOperation was carried out by US forces in Abbottabad, ultimately killing Osama Bin

Ladin, the most wanted fugitive of the century. The operation turned out to be a

watershed in the context of US-Pakistan relationship. Despite the fact that there is a

compulsion for Pakistan - as well as US, to keep the partnership in war on terror onan even keel, the brash American action, regardless of Pakistani priorities and

sensitivities, has driven the mounting tension between the two nations ever close to

the limits of a breaking point. Pakistans credibility also torn apart.

d. July, 11: Congress discusses at cutting aid to Pak. $800 million aid blocked for Pak.e. July- Aug, 11: Halfhearted efforts are under way by Americans to minimize the

damage to the relations as Pakistan army takes a tough stance & refuses to cooperate

with US.

f. July, 12: Ending a bitter stand-off, Pakistan agreed to reopen key NATO supplyroutes into Afghanistan. The action was taken in lieu of the US Secretary of State

Hillary Clintons statement, commenting that she was sorry for the loss of life in the

botched air raid on Silala check post.

g. December, 12: The United States assures Pakistan of an early release of $600 millionin Coalition Support Fund (CSF) arrears, increasing OPIC support for projects in

Pakistan from $100 million to $1 billion, launching an $80 million Pakistan

Investment Fund for SMEs in January 2013. It also reaffirms a $200 million

commitment for the Diamer-Basha Dam.

Analysis on the whole situation: Historically, the US has dominated Pakistans external affairs and internal politics, of

course in collusion with its obliged civilian and military leadership, thanks to a

political vacuum created by authoritarian regimes. As revealed by WikiLeaks, the

US continues to play a key role in our national affairs, be it the PPP-Musharraf deal,

restoration of judges, or the recurring patching up of the civil-military power

centers. No wonder the CIA-run drone operations go on unabatedly violating our

sovereignty, disregarding the parliamentary resolution against them.

True, in the recent Pasha-Panetta talks, Pakistan has sought to work out a narrow

framework within which to restrict the CIAs drone and other operations in

Pakistan. But it is unlikely that the Obama administration would scale down the

drone attacks, which are billed as the most lethal weapon against terrorism.


6/71

6

But the US unilateral actions are bound to prove counter-productive for the war on

terror and political stability in Pakistan. If the Gallup polls are any indicator, there

has grown a groundswell of anti-US public opinion, which in the coming weeks and

months may prove too difficult for both the US and the civilian-military leadership

to ignore. Already, the Raymond Davis case has vividly exposed the combined

government-US power vis--vis public opinion.

More alarmingly, the general perception is gaining ground that Pakistan has

suffered $ 68 billion in economic losses and more than 35,000 civilian and military

causalities because of this US war. Moreover, the rising anti-US sentiment is

increasingly merged with the public discontent on the deteriorating socio-economic

and security environment in the country, providing an easy handle to the rightwing

politicians and the hardline Islamists to beat the US and the coalition government

with. The circumstances require that the US must dispel these impressions. It must

realize that the war is pushing the country to an economic abyss and needs massiveeconomic assistance, a new Marshall Plan.

Our leadership should also be realistic. Riddled with a leadership crisis and eternally

tied to the US economic lifeline, the country cannot possibly have an equal say in

prosecuting the war but it can protect its own interests within the mutually agreed

strategic framework.

The US has been enjoying undocumented & unclear rules since Musharraf regime. But now

Pak wants clear& specified engagements with US in the war on terror, which is good sign.

Pak is a sovereign state & US cannot keep defying our laws with impunity. The frequent

movements of US diplomats have caused serious problems in Pak as several unwarrantedincidents have occurred in past where these diplomats have to be given relaxation despite

their inappropriate conduct. Besides Raymond Davis issue US consulate cars with fake

number plates have been caught many times. There have been reports of resistance& failure

of US Diplomats in disclosing their identity to the security agencies in Pak.

The US sudden & unexpected raid on Osamas hide out at Abbottabad was also an

encroaching attempt in Pak territory. The incidence caused immense embarrassment to

both the governments & military of Pak. US found another opportunity to humiliate our

military forces & blamed them for either protecting Osama or incompetent to find him out.

We disregarded our contribution& services in war on terror. It threatened Pak with aid cu

off & other consequences.

Similarly drone attacks have also been a bone of contention between the US & Pak as these

attacks are being carried out without respecting the sentiments of our people & openly

damaging our sovereignty. Last year 85 attacked were conducted while over 45 strikes have

been made this year so far. Pak is worried over not only at the increase in their number but

also due to huge civilian losses. Pak then also has to face the resentment of the people in

tribal areas. US have threatened to strike Baluchistan with drones as well & even to go for

unilateral actions in Pak.On the night of November 25/26, US/NATO airplanes and helicopters made a predawn

attack on two Pakistani border check posts at Salala in Mohamand Agency and killed 24


7/71

7

soldiers, besides injuring 13. It is the most serious tragedy to date. The Abbottabad and

Salala attacks have turned the public outcry

Against blatant acts like the broad day light killing of two young men by

Raymond Davis, a lowly hired hand of American intelligence, into deep

Seated dismay and resentment against US policies. Pak-US relations

Have hit an all-time low. The NATO supplies have been blocked and

The Shamsi airbase has been got vacated. Pakistan boycotted the Bonn Conference on the

future of Afghanistan. Pakistan eventually succumbed to the US diplomatic-cum-economic

pressures. Apparently, the Defense Committee of the Cabinets decision to re-open the

NATO supply line is a compromised reaction after US officials agreed, in a backdoor

dialogue after US Secretary of State apologized on July 3, 2012 for the Salala incident.

PAK-US Relations: Solutions

The prevailing opinion in Pakistan is that after Obamas re-election one would witnessmore of the same in Pakistan-US relations in the next few years. However, there is also thepossibility for the two countries to make a new beginning. The important question iswhether the two sides would have the wisdom and the courage to realize this possibilityfor the improvement of Pakistan-US relations on a sustainable and mutually beneficialbasis.

Five main factors will determine the substance and direction of Pakistan-US relations in thecoming years. They are the issues of terrorism, Afghanistan, nuclear proliferation, US-

China relations and US-India relations.

In principle, the positions of the two countries on terrorism are similar. Both are opposed toterrorism in any form or manifestation. Both Pakistan and the US have been the victims ofterrorism. In fact, Pakistan has suffered far more than the US at the hands of terrorism, interms of material destruction and loss of precious human lives.

In order to keep Pakistan bridled, the US coined do more mantra, kept levelingunsubstantiated allegations, resorted to coercive diplomacy and subjected it to dronestrikes. It made Pakistan a convenient scapegoat to hide its failures. Pak-US relations, which

remained lukewarm because of bossy and mistrustful attitude of American officials andtheir outright leaning toward India and Afghanistan, nosedived after the incidents ofRaymond Davis in January 2011, stealth attack in Abbottabad on 2 May, Admiral Mullensdiatribe in September describing Haqqani network as the veritable arm of ISI, and brutalSalala attack on 26 November. In utter frustration, Pakistan was forced to close Shamsiairbase, block NATO supply routes for over seven months and cease military cooperation.These steps meant to impress upon the US to respect Pakistans sovereignty and to treatPakistan as an ally rather than a target further widened the trust gap and brought Pak-USrelations to a near-breaking point.

In the wake of security situation in Afghanistan spinning out of control of US-NATO-forces despite the two US troops surges, depleting US economy and increasing homepressure to end the unwinnable war, the US initiated a political prong to induce the Talibanto negotiate for a political settlement. This initiative enhanced Pakistans importance and in


8/71

8

order to lure Pakistan to help in convincing the hard-line Taliban leaders, the process ofstrategic dialogue was started in 2010 which provides a platform to both Pakistan and theUS to convey their expectations and demands. The main purpose behind the Pak-USstrategic dialogue was to understand and address the interests and concerns of each other.The US interest was to find a way for a safe and honorable exit from Afghanistan with

Pakistans assistance. Pakistan on the other hand was mainly interested in US assistance toimprove its faltering economy, overcome its energy crisis and to address its militaryimbalances.

It is unfortunate, therefore, that there should be misunderstandings between the twocountries. These misunderstandings have arisen because of policy differences between thetwo governments in fighting terrorism. It also shows that the two sides have not been ableto convey to each other convincingly their respective points of view on the subject. Obamasre-election offers new opportunities to the two sides to understand each others point ofview and better coordinate their respective anti-terrorism policies.

From the perspective of Pakistan, Pakistan has been seeking a civil nuclear deal like the oneUS concluded with India and considers it imperative for restoring balance in the region. Itwants this agreement to overcome the energy crisis it is facing. Pakistan wants to have abalanced relationship with the US and not a discriminatory one. It expects from the US torestrain rather than encourage Indian meddlesome role in Pakistan using Afghansoil. Pakistan was not given an improved US trade access for its textile exports. It is crucialfor Pakistans economy to restore its declining industrial sector through trade access whichis more effective than aid.

The US has been making tall promises but has failed to deliver. Pakistan didnt receivefrom the US the support it expected over its national security concerns. Rather, it squeezedPakistan by stopping the payment of committed aid installments and even withheld $1.2billion which it had to pay against CSF for services rendered by Pak Army. Pakistansrequest for a free trade agreement has not been ceded to. The Reconstruction OpportunityZones (ROZ) legislation that would give market access and trade concessions to Pakistanand Enterprise Fund Projects and construction of two hydro electric dams in FATA are stillpending. As against total $ 18 billion Pakistan received from the US since 2002, it lost $70billion in fighting the war on terror. Human losses have crossed the figure of 35000. 5000fatalities suffered by Pakistan law enforcement agencies are far more than the casualties

suffered by 48 countries involved in war on terror. That is unfortunate for the simple reasonthat post-Afghanistan withdrawal, Pakistan will need the US more than the US will needPakistan. After the Americans have pulled out, their interests in Central and South Asiawill be better served by maintaining close and friendly relations with Afghanistan andIndia. The Americans are interested in obtaining access to the fabulous energy and mineralriches of Central Asia. A Pentagon report estimated Afghanistans mineral wealth at over atrillion dollars. The Central Asian states have known reserves of gas and oil as well.Americas other geopolitical interest in the area is containing the rising China. That is betterserved by a close association with India. This logic, therefore, essentially marginalizesPakistan in the eyes of the policymakers in Washington.

But Islamabad must find a way of staying on the right side of America. This is for goodeconomic reasons. For as long as the country is unable to generate a greater amount ofdomestic resource for investment and for as long as it fails to exploit the riches available


9/71

9

from taking what should be its share in expanding international trade, Pakistan will remaindependent on external flows of capital. Foreign savings are needed to close the domesticinvestment-savings gap, as well as the gap between export earnings and expenditure onimports. In the past, America has played very important roles in helping the country withthese two gaps. It has provided both direct assistance, as well as pressured institutions such

as the International Monetary Fund to come to Pakistans assistance. With the palpablecooling of relations, help from America may not be as readily available as was the caseduring several balance of payments crises in the past. It is recognized in Pakistan that thecountry, as it moves towards another general election, will face a new balance of paymentscrisis. There will be only two ways of solving it. Islamabad could severely tighten its beltand thus slow down even more its tepid rate of growth. Or hope that a large flow ofexternal assistance would be forthcoming to tide over the coming difficulties. The formerapproach would have serious political and social consequences. The latter approach wouldneed setting relations with America on a less rocky course.

Conclusion:

Without taking care of Pak national interests, the US has always imposed its own interests&

agenda on Pak. The partnership has never been stable. US is still treating Pak withstick. Besides blocking the military aid of Pak, US is harping the same drum on Pak to Do

more. US have been treating Pak civilians & military with contempt. American demands

have no end& Pak has its own limitations & scarce resources. US must treat Pak on equal

footings; realize our sacrifices & huge financial losses. We have also rendered thousands of

lives in this regard &are ourselves in a mess. There is a need to cooperate with each other

on long term basis, understand each others sensitivities & show mutual trust & respect.

Terrorism is dual enemy ofboth & cant be eliminated wit out the support of other

partner


10/71

10

History of the India-Pakistan Conflict

Introduction

The conflict between India and Pakistan originated as a clash between Indian and Muslimnations during British colonial rule. As the British government retreated from South Asia

after WWII, it served notice on these two organizations to negotiate a constitutional

framework for postcolonial India before its departure in 1947. But the bitter tensions

created by the colonial legacy of divide and rule made it impossible for the parties to meet

this demand within the prescribed time. Consequently, the British government imposed its

own plan and departed. According to this plan, areas whose populations were

predominantly Muslim were to join Pakistan, while Hindu-majority areas were to be part

of India.

In the 565 princely states of South Asia, which were not governed directly by the British,

the decision to join either India or Pakistan was left to their rulers. Jammu and Kashmir had

a largely Muslim population but was ruled by a Hindu who decided to join India.

1947: First Kashmir WarIndia intervened in Kashmir in 1947 on the pretext that as a regional great power, it had an

interest in maintaining order in this strategically sensitive region near China and the Soviet

Union. Pakistan had inherited a very small army that was almost completely reliant on

British officers. The British Commander-in-Chief of Pakistans Army initially refused to

send Pakistani troops to bolster the rebellions against Hari Singh, the ruler of Kashmir. As a

result, Pakistans political leadership felt the urgent need to acquire military readiness.

The competition for control over Jammu and Kashmir led to the first war between India

and Pakistan in 1947. The continuation of the conflict and tension between the two

countries led them to begin an arms race and helped consolidate the influence of their

national security institutions.

1960: Indus Water Treaty1960, India and Pakistan concluded The Indus Water Treaty, which enabled them to

peacefully share water from the Indus and its tributaries. As the Indus-basin irrigation

system was central to survival of the ecology that sustains life in the northern region of

South Asia, it was important for the two governments to arrive at an agreement.

The international community took an interest in the problem and made World Bank funds

and technical knowhow available. The two countries set up a joint body to carry out the

treaty and to handle disagreements. Even when India and Pakistan have been at war, theyhave meticulously observed their obligations under this treaty.


11/71

11

Although the construction of huge dams and the displacement of people have had very

destructive consequences, the fact is that the two governments did devise and run a system

that maintained peace. This illustrates the ability of India and Pakistan to successfully

resolve a serious problem.

1965: Second Kashmir WarWhen Pakistan failed to get the Security Council to take new diplomatic initiatives to

resolve the Kashmir dispute in 1964, it tried to compel India to make concessions by

fomenting an uprising in Indian-administered Kashmir. India retaliated by attacking

Kashmir and its army also crossed into Pakistan in the Punjab and Sindh. Pakistan

prevented India from capturing any important towns, but as it had a small army and

munitions, it would have faced difficulties if the war had continued.

As both the U.S. and the Soviet Union feared that China would enter the conflict on behalfof Pakistan, the UN Security Council called for an end to hostilities and the war stopped

after seventeen days on September 22, 1965.

Pakistans government, led by President Ayub Khan accepted an offer for mediation made

by the Soviet Union. Indian Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri and Khan met in

Uzbekistan and concluded the Tash-kent Declaration on January 10, 1966.

This declaration became very unpopular in both countries. As both sides tried to convince

people that they had achieved spectacular gains in the war, the accord was widely

perceived as a bad bargain

1971: Another WarIndia attacked East Pakistan in December 1971 and the conflict spread to the Western

borders as Pakistan launched limited air strikes and made a determined military push in

Kashmir. The war ended on December 17, after the Pakistan army surrendered in East

Pakistan. Bangladesh then emerged as an independent state.

The conclusion of this conflict was also followed by a realistic appreciation of the new

situation by the political and military leadership of Pakistan. Bhutto, Pakistans new

civilian president, held negotiations with Indias Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. They

concluded the Simla Agreement on July 2, 1972 and agreed to resolve their disputes

through bilateral negotiations. They also agreed not to unilaterally alter the existing "Line

of Control" dividing their armed forces in Kashmir.

1984: Siachin conflict- Kashmir AgainIn 1984, the Indian Army captured Siachin. This placed the Indian army near Pakistans

access routes to China. Casualties claimed by the harsh climate were greater than thosecaused by actual fighting.


12/71

12

1989: Campaign in KashmirA massive public campaign for Azadi (independence) emerged in the Valley of Kashmir in

1989. This movement dramatically increased the tension between India and Pakistan and

brought them to the brink of full-scale war.

The Azadi campaign began peacefully and was led mostly by secular nationalists. It quickly

turned violent when Indias armed forces fired on peaceful public demonstrations. The

Indian government then cracked down on kashmiris.. They used "cordon and search"

operations The Indian army eventually crushed the resistance. Pakistan was initially

surprised by the Azadi campaign. Once it began, Pakistans military leadership tried to

guide it in a direction that would be in its own interest. Besides the military, politically-

powerful Islamist groups were also ready to offer support to Kashmiri youth that were

compelled to flee the Indian army. Weapons were easily available from the pipeline set up

for the Afghan jehad. As a result, Indian armed forces continue to face effective resistancein Kashmir.

1998: Nuclear TestsWhen the BJP formed the government in India in 1998, it moved swiftly to satisfy the

demand of Indias national security establishment to test nuclear weapons. Pakistan

responded with its own nuclear tests. When the Indian and Pakistani leaders began

negotiations in 1999, Pakistans Prime Minister thanked his Indian counterpart for

conducting the nuclear tests, for it had provided Pakistan the pretext to come out of thenuclear closet.

1999:Kargill- Battle in KashmirIn 1999, Vajpayee and Pakistans Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif declared their intent to

discuss Kashmir. This did not stop the fighting in Kashmir. Later that year, it was

discovered that Pakistans army had captured strategic heights in Kashmirs Kargil region.

India responded with massive force to evict Pakistan troops, and Pakistan was isolated

diplomatically and agreed to leave Kargil. Differences arising from the handling of this

episode led to the overthrow of Sharif by Pakistans army. General Pervez Musharraf

became the countrys new ruler.

In July 2000, the Hizb-ul-Muja-hideen (HM), the leading Kashmiri group resisting Indias

armed forces, unilaterally offered a truce. Vajpayee accepted the offer and agreed to

negotiate outside the framework of the Indian constitution. The truce broke down when

India rejected the HMs insistence on including Pakistan in the negotiations.

In July 2001, Vajpayee invited Musharraf for talks in India (Agra summit). Theirmeetings ended without a commun-iqu, as Vajpayee couldnt convince HomeMinister L.K.Advani to endorse the Pakistani demand for talks on Kashmir. During


13/71

13

Musharrafs visit to India he made a persuasive case for talks on Kashmir that was

appreciated by many Indian opinion makers.

2001: Terrorist Attack on Indian parliament at DelhiThe U.S. response to the September 11 attacks confronted the political leaderships of

both Pakistan and India with unique challenges and opportunities. Pakistan had to quicklychoose whether it would become an adversary of the U.S. and risk the expected

consequences, or side with it, and confront its own Islamic-fundamentalist allies in Pakistan

and Afghanistan. It chose to side with the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan.

India wanted the U.S. to categorize all Islamist resistance to Indian armed forces in Kashmir

as terrorism, and it wanted endorsement for its efforts to crush them. The U.S. did declare

two such Islamist groups to be terrorist organizations, but the Indian expectation that all

Islamist resistance in Kashmir be categorized as "cross border terrorism" was not realized.

India watched with concern as Pakistan again emerged as a frontline state in the latest U.S.

assault on Afghanistan as Pakistan now had the chance to improve its economy and

rehabilitate itself in the Western world. Sanctions imposed on Pakistan and India after the

nuclear explosions of 1998, and Pakistans military coup of 1999, was rescinded.

On December 13, 2001, five people were killed in a terrorist attack on the Indian parliament

which India said was orchestrated by Pakistani agents. India deployed its armed forces

along the border and moved missiles to where they could be launched against Pakistan.

Pakistan responded in similar fashion.

Nov 2008 -Mumbai Terrorist AttacksWhen in November 2008, a group of terrorists, traced to Pakistan, attacked the important

Indian city, Mumbai. It seemed that a war could break out between these two nuclear

weapons upstarts. Thanks to the restraint exercised by their governments as well as hectic

diplomacy by the United States, the United Kingdom and other major players, a major

disaster was averted between pak & India. The abandonment of open conflict did not mean

that peace and normality had been restored; on the contrary its major casualty was the

peace process that both sides had been claiming for quite some time that it was about to

furnish a historic resolution of all outstanding disputes between the two rivals. There can

be no doubt that those who planned and carried out the attacks wanted fear and hatred

between India and Pakistan to deepen and even result in war. At the end of 2009, South

Asia is still held hostage to the India-Pakistan confrontation."

India alleged that the recent 2008 Mumbai attacks originated in Pakistan, and that the

attackers were in touch with Pakistani personals and other handlers in Pakistan. Various

sites in Mumbai were attacked. More than ten coordinated shooting and bombing attacks

across Mumbai, India's largest city, by terrorists allegedly from Pakistan. The attacks beganon Nov. 26, 2008 and lasted until Nov. 29, killing at least 173 people and wounding at least

308 others.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Mumbai_attackshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Mumbai_attacks


14/71

14

The Mumbai attacks had serious impact on the peace process between the countries as it

caused break in composite dialogue, envisaging all the outstanding issues including

Kashmir, started in 2004 and continued till 2008. Infact India hardened its tone after

Mumbai incidence, refused to hold bilateral talks & tried to imposed immense pressure on

Pak to come to the Indian terms. India wanted Pak to completely destroy all terrorist camps

on its soil, stop sponsoring terrorism & punish the Mumbai attackers.

Although a meeting between Manmohan Singh and Gilani was held at Sharm-el-Sheikh

(Egypt) in 2009 but Singh was in no mood to resume dialogue till Pak punished theMumbai terrorists & complied with other Indian demands. India repeated the same

allegations, time & again till 2010, alleging that Pakistan is still sponsoring terrorist groups

in the state of Kashmir, funding, training and arming them in their war on attrition against

India. India put conditions for dialogue that Pak should destroy all the 150 camps

established for the purpose of Terrorism. Pak strictly denied all the Indian allegations &stated them as base-less & lacked any concrete evidence.

2010-2012 The ice breaks, finallyAlmost after two years of break, India agreed to resume composite dialogue in Feb 2010

under intense international pressure. The foreign ministers, Shah Mahmood Qureshi & S.M

Krishna broke the ice in July 2010 in Islamabad. The meeting did not produce any positive

outcome. The attitude of Krishna remained inappropriate & stubborn during the meeting.

He was not interested to avail the opportunity to improve the tense environment between

both countries & to set the agenda for future talks. The negotiations finally failed wit out

chalking out any further plan.

Previous year did see many positive developments in the peace processbetween India andPakistan. Our prime minister, Gilani met Mr Manmohan Singh while attending the World

Cup Semi Final in India (Sports diplomacy). Our interior minister had also met with his

Indian counterpart in Bhutan. After a long interval of about three years, the first meeting

between Hina Khar & S.K Krishna, the foreign ministers of the two countries finally took

place in Delhi (July 2011). In September 2012, Pakistan and India agree to ease the existing

restrictive visa regime between them, launch a Karachi-Mumbai ferry service and start

daily flights connecting Islamabad and Delhi, as the foreign ministers of both countries

wrap up the latest round of peace talks by promising to continue their dialogue. In

November 2012, Federal Minister for Commerce Makhdoom Amin Fahim says Pakistan is

committed to the implantation of MFN status for India from January 1, 2013, and there will

be no delay.

No major breakthrough on contentious issues between the two countries has been reported.

However, they reaffirmed the commitment to resolve all outstanding issues through acomprehensive and uninterruptible dialogue. It is hoped that no other bloody act of

terrorism mars this commitment.


15/71

15

It would be unfair, not to appreciate the positive mark made by our first lady foreign

minister with her confident appearance and gestures, despite being so young and not very

experienced. She promoted a liberal and moderate image of Pakistan.

Nevertheless, on her return to Pakistan Ms Hina Khar disappointed us by emphasizing, as

a point of achievement, that neither Pakistan nor India deviated from their stated legal

and political positions. This may be so. But other than boosting egos on both sides, this

does not in any manner serve the interests of the people of India and Pakistan or help in

resolving any of the issues between the two countries. Repetition of the rhetoric of the

stated legal and politicalpositions has not helped in resolving the most contentious issue

of Kashmir, in over 63 years nor is it likely to do so in future.

The establishments of the two countries must accept that neither the Security Council nor

the General Assembly of the UN are willing to implement their own resolutions on

Kashmir nor are members of the OIC willing to offer more than lip service on this issue.Despite suffering colossal losses in the four wars we have fought with India, we could not

force India to agree to the implementation of the UN resolutions.

Similarly, the so-called jihad and the jihadist organizations have, in the name of the

liberation of Kashmiris, have caused phenomenal damage to the name, image, politics,

economy and people of Pakistan rather than causing any substantial loss or damage to

India. In the meantime, many more important issues particularly the issue of water,

without which the people of the two countries cannot survive, remains unresolved mainly

due to the failure to resolve the Kashmir issue. A conducive atmosphere is imperativefor resolving other more important issues, which are causing incalculable hardship, losses

and problems to the people of both Pakistan and India.

We have to move forward and agree upon alternate solutions to resolve the Kashmir issue.

In the SAARC Conference at Islamabad in January 2004, the leaders of the two countries

had shown some flexibility on this issue. Mr Asif Ali Zardari, soon after his election as the

president, in his address to the Times of India via satellite, expressed, in November 2008,

very positive sentiments and objectives for future relations between India and Pakistan as

well as for the entire SAARC region. Unfortunately, just a few days later, the terrible

Mumbai attacks of 2008, prevented any such positive developments from materializing.

It is an undeniable reality that neither India nor Pakistan can physically force the other to

surrender the part of Kashmir under their respective control. On the other hand, there are

clear indications that India and Pakistan are also not inclined to accept the third option

the independent state of Kashmir. In view of these incontrovertible realities both states

shall have to show flexibility in their respective positions on Kashmir. One solution could

be to accept, at least in de-facto terms, the Line of Control, with some adjustments

necessary for the convenience of the people of two countries, such as an international

border.It would be in the best interest of the people of India, Pakistan and Jammu & Kashmir, that

both India and Pakistan accept the Line of Control as the international border for all


16/71

16

practical purposes, at least for the time being.

Acceptance of this proposal must coincide with a treaty between the two countries saying

(a) that both the countries would desist from, and prevent aggressive actions, policies or

propaganda against each other and militancy or terrorism in any form or manifestation, be

it at the hands of the armed forces or non-state elements such as religious fanatics or

terrorists; (b) the borders between the two countries and between parts of Kashmir

occupied by both sides should be opened to the people at large with free access, free trade,

and cultural exchanges.

If peace is established and borders are opened for all practical purposes the division of

Kashmir will cease to be a barrier between the people of Kashmir as well as between India

and Pakistan, without either side surrendering an iota of sovereignty. We have suffered

enough due to self- destructive policies. Poverty and terrorism have become our worst

common enemies. We must eliminate them with mutual cooperation between our twocountries. The peace process needs to be propelled forward with common trust &

positive intentions. Dialogue is the only way to normalize the relations.

INDO-Pak Relations: Overall Outlook, Current Situation & Solutions.

Relations between Pakistan and India are anything but simple. Characterized by periodicups and downs and intermittent breakdown, sometimes verging on all-out war, formerIndian politician Inder Gurjal accurately described the relationship as a tormented one.Indeed, the heated issues of Kashmir, terrorism and nuclear arms remain as challenging asever. Despite this, though, the silver lining in the troubled relationship is that disruption indialogue is never permanent; the governments of both countries invariably return tonegotiation. Looking forward, there are a number of opportunities that Pakistan and Indiamay capitalize on in order to build a deeper relationship in the longer term.

The normalization of relations holds great benefit for both countries, especially when oneconsiders their shared economic interests. In addition, with the drawdown of United Statesforces from Afghanistan in 2014, the two nuclear-armed rivals will need to find a consensusin order to stabilize Afghanistan and the region more generally, especially amid growingconcerns over the potential Italianization of Pakistan. Therefore, although future relationsare uncertain, these issues and the roles that both states can play in promoting regionalstability will see Pakistan-India relations remain of critical importance in the comingdecade.

Despite the wish of both countries to normalize relations, two main challenges continue toobstruct it. The first is reaching a resolution on Kashmir, a prospect that appearsincreasingly difficult given the political roadblocks that currently exist. The second is theissue of terrorism and Pakistans inability to curtail militant activities and prosecu te

terrorists. If Pakistan-India relations are to improve, these two challenges must beovercome.


17/71

17

Although Pakistani and Indian leaders have acknowledged a mutually agreeable basis forsettlement, the issue of Kashmir remains unresolved and continues to hamper relations.The contested area has divided the two states for some 60 years and, as such, is a highlysensitive issue. Any resolution therefore faces political roadblocks and widespread publicdiscontent. This is especially the case since the Mumbai attacks, as nationalism has

increased and the popular images of one another have hardened. To be sure, as the publicsentiment in India is hostile, and Pakistani political parties have disowned the progressmade in the Composite Dialogues, contending that frameworks agreed upon wereauthorized by a military dictator seen to lack the mandate for such unilateral decisions.

If recent official statements are anything to go by, any solution to the Kashmir issue appearsout of reach. As recently as 1 October 2012, the two states were engaged in a war of wordsover the issue at the United Nations General Assembly. Both countries continue to espousethe same rhetoric that has dogged negotiations for decades. Pakistan continues to supportthe Kashmiri cause, while India maintains that the people of Jammu and Kashmir have

peacefully chosen their destiny in accordance with democratic practices and they continueto do so. The issue of Kashmir may not be as salient as other recent concerns such asterrorism, especially given that the ongoing stalemate has lasted almost 60 years.Nevertheless, it remains a significant hurdle and has the potential, along with relatedviolence and its ability to spark nationalistic movements, to once again derail relations, as ithas in the past.

The other issue related to it or can be seen as an individual basis is a problem of waterresources between the two countries. The water issue is gaining increasing prominence in

bilateral relations between Pakistan and India. Recent disputes over the Baglihar andKishanganga dams have placed great strain on the long-standing water sharingarrangement based on the Indus Water Treaty. As water stress becomes an increasinglyglaring reality, the whole world will be watching how our nuclear armed countries chooseto address this challenge.

The existing Indo-Pak water sharing paradigm may no longer be able to address theemergent tensions. Despite numerous rounds of bilateral talks, India and Pakistan are backin the Permanent Court of Arbitration over Indian dam building aspirations in Kashmir.More innovative approaches have called for an integrated approach towards water

management instead of trying to merely divide waters of the Indus basin. Such anapproach would not only be more sensitive to the ecological and environmental challengestaking place in the region, but potentially help nudge our neighboring countries towardsbroader cooperation as well.

Positive confidence building steps would include greater information sharing concerningriver flows. Launching joint Indo-Pak dam ventures such as the Tala Hydroelectric Project,recently initiated between India and Bhutan, would be a further step in the direction ofincreased cooperation.

A second point of divergence in the Pakistan-India relationship is terrorism. So far,Pakistan has proven unable to curtail militant activities and prosecute those responsible forterrorist attacks. This is a serious concern for India, especially after the 2001 and 2008


18/71

18

terrorist attacks by Pakistani based militant organizations, which India believes the ISI wasbehind. Of particular concern is the future of Hafiz Saeed, the alleged mastermindbehind the Mumbai terrorist attack that killed 166 people. His future and accountabilitycontinues to dominate the agenda between the two states.India has vowed that it will only move forward on normalizing relations once Pakistan

demonstrates a commitment to countering terrorism. Many believe that Pakistan lacks therequisite will and capacity, however, and is therefore unable to satisfy Indias demands. On26 September 2012, Pakistans President Asif Ali Zardari told leaders at the 67th UnitedNations General Assembly that no country and no people have suffered more in the epicstruggle against terrorism, than Pakistan. Certainly, Pakistan has suffered immensely atthe hands of terrorist attacks.

One avenue with the potential to change Pakistan-India relations is economic co-operation.In recent times, efforts to unite Kashmir through cross-Line of Control bus service, partialliberalization of visa regimes and the creation of intra-Kashmir business entities, such as theFederation of Jammu and Kashmir Chamber of Commerce and Industry, have symbolized

an attempt to approach the problem of Kashmir, emblematic of larger bilateral challenges,through less conventional means.

Beyond Kashmir, trade ties between the two states have great potential. In 2008, tradebetween the two accounted for a mere $2 billion, or roughly one per cent of each countrysoverall trade. Since then, trade has been improving steadily and there are promising signsheading into the future. Pakistan, in particular, has much to gain if it can penetrate thebuoyant Indian market. In order for this to happen, however, it will need to reciprocateIndias granting Pakistan most favored nation (MFN) status in 1996. In November 2011,

Pakistans Cabinet gave an in-principle approval for trade normalization with India andsaid that MFN status would be granted gradually. As India expert and FDI Senior VisitingFellow Dr Sandy Gordon notes, Pakistan has promised to grant MFN status to India byDecember [2012] ... by moving from a system in which only items stipulated on a positivelist could be traded, to one in which a small negative list covers excluded items, forexample, those relating to defense.India, meanwhile, will need to reduce its current non-tariff barriers, which have provedmajor impediments to improving economic ties. Should these events materialize, the tradepotential between the two states could be as much as $20 billion annually, roughly a tenfoldincrease on current figures. Indeed, both sides have shown some impetus for change. On 28

April 2011, Pakistan and India issued an ambitious joint statement that vowed to improvetrade ties. In addition, both countries have agreed to try and increase bilateral trade fromthe current $2.7 billion per year to $6 billion by 2013-14. More recently, in October 2012, thetwo sides struck a visa deal which, while not bringing great trade benefits, is a positive stepforward in the relationship.

Given this, there is reason for optimism. These high hopes were captured by Indian PrimeMinister Manmohan Singh when he declared: if there is co -operation between Pakistanand India and not conflict, vast opportunities will open up for trade, and travel anddevelopment will create prosperity in both countries. At the same time, increased economicco-operation should act as a deterrent to future conflict and may well flow on into other,

more troublesome, areas of the Pakistan-India relationship.

Another opportunity to build better relations lies in finding a security agreement


19/71

19

concerning Afghanistan as the US withdraws the bulk of its troops in 2014. Analysts inWashington assert that the relationship between the two could well turn out to be the mostimportant factor in Afghanistans future. US Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta, has goneon the record as saying that co-operation between Pakistan and India was required for astable Afghanistan.

Despite this, Pakistan and India are divided as to how to approach the security situation inAfghanistan. India would like to see ongoing peace in Afghanistan, especially given anyinstability could spill over into its borders. New Delhi has therefore poured billions ofdollars of aid, as one of Afghanistans largest regional donors, in order to achieve this aim.Similarly, in October 2011, India and Afghanistan signed a strategic partnership agreement,the first Afghanistan signed with any country, in which India would train Afghan forces.This is important; although the Afghan National Security Force has reached its goal ofrecruiting 350,000 troops, it will mean little if it does not receive the ongoing training that isneeded to ensure the Taliban cannot take control of the country again.Conversely, Pakistan is wary of any partnership between India and Afghanistan, especially

as the current Afghan government appears more sympathetic towards India than Pakistan.Pakistan has tolerated, so far at least, the insecurity in Afghanistan and its own northerntribal areas because the groups that operate in those places counter Indias regional cloutand influence. But the spill over of insurgent groups into Pakistan may force Islamabad intoco-operating with India in order to halt such activities within its borders.The future of Pakistan-India relations is far from certain. There are both major problemsand opportunities that could tilt the relationship either way. The protracted issues ofKashmir and terrorism will remain a thorn in the side of both states and will continue tohamper the normalization of relations into the future. That said, there are alsoopportunities which both states can capitalize on in order to improve their economic and

security ties and possibly normalize the relationship moving forward. Economic tiescontinue to gain momentum with piecemeal initiatives and reforms, and there is muchhope on both sides that trade will continue to grow. Afghanistan appears less certain, butboth states would do well to fashion a security agreement that promotes peace and securityin the region while taking into account the various national interests of all the statesinvolved. If that can be achieved, then the problem of militant insurgency, especially inPakistans north, which continues to concern India, would become less significant. That,too, would certainly contribute to better relations between Pakistan and India in the future.


20/71

20

Pak China Relations

1. Introduction / History:The year 2011 has been designated the Year of China Pakistan Friendship. Both thecountries have been holding a series of activities; form the beginning of this year, in the

fields of politics, economy, economic trade, military, culture, sports and education to

commemorate the strength of our bilateral relations and to show the resolve to take it to

new heights. Pakistan has a long and symbiotic relationship with China. The long

standing ties between the two countries have been mutually supportive. Pakistan is one

of the first groups of countries that have recognized China. On May 21, 1951, the two

countries officially established their diplomatic relations. Since then, China and Pakistan

have witnessed smooth development of friendly and neighborly relation as well as

mutually beneficial cooperation.

1. Cold relations in the early Years (1940s & 50s).. of theestablishment of Sine Pakistani diplomatic relations, Pakistan maintained cold

relations with China, as it was an ally of the West (Pak joined US camp). Due to little

general. During the Bandung Conference in 1955, Premier Zhou Enlai held two

friendly talks with Pakistani Prime Minister M. Ali, and both sides shared the view

that exchange and cooperation in various areas should be strengthened between the

two countries. The talks played an important role in promoting understanding and

developing friendly relations and cooperation between the two countries. After the

Bandung Conference, there was a gradual increase of high level exchanges of visits

between the two countries, In October 1956, at the invitation of the Chinese

Government; Pakistani Prime Minister Suharwardi paid an official visit to China. In

December the same year, Premier Zhou Enlai visited Pakistan. They successful

exchange of visits between the Pakistani Prime Minister and Chinese Premier within

one year greatly promoted the development of friendly relations and cooperation

between the two countries and strengthened the friendship between the two

peoples.

2. Second Phase in the early 1960s. the leadership of the twocountries steered Pakistan China relations towards closer understanding and

solidarity. 1961, Pakistan voted for restoration of Chinas seat in the United Nations.

In 1963, china and Pakistan signed a boundary agreement. This was a significant

milestone, as it underlined and displayed the emerging trust between the two

neighbors. The agreement was signed in February 1963 in Beijing by Pakistans

Foreign Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. This also showed Pakistans independence in

its foreign policy and its growing faith in Sino Pakistan friendship.

3. Third Phase of relations (1970s to date).. Between two nationsbegan which was characterized by mutual confidence, deep trust, and growing


21/71

21

cooperation. This period can be called a period of consolidation and expansion and it

has continued up to this point. In the succeeding decades, china and Pakistan have

not only deepened their ties but also stood by each other in difficult times. China

helped us during the 1965 and 1971 wars. We advocated Chinas entry into the

United Nations we also facilitated friendship between the US and China in 1971 by

arranging a secret visit of US foreign secretary to Beijing. Both US & China thanked

Pak for paving way to their bilateral relations. In return, China coordinated our

policies during the turbulent period of the Afghan resistance against the Soviet

Union in the 1980s; and is now fully cooperating in the fight against terrorism since

2001.

4. Areas of Cooperation:a) As we come to the recent history of Pakistan China relations, we express

satisfaction from the fact that the two sides have fashioned a very effective,practical, and flexible architecture for engagement and cooperation in

strategic, defense, economic, commercial, and cultural fields. This architecture

is responsive to the changing times.

b)Where are these relations today? Pakistan China joint Statement, issuedin Islamabad on December 19, 2010 on the conclusion of Premier Wen Jiabaos

historic visit of Pakistan, highlighted the following points: (1) It is important

to deepen the China Pakistan all weather strategic Partnership; (2) China

Pakistan relation have gone beyond bilateral dimensions and acquiredbroader regional and international ramifications; (3) Friendship and

cooperation between Pakistan and China serve the fundamental interests of

the two countries, and contribute to peace, stability and development in the

region and beyond; and (4) The two sides will enhance their strategic

coordination, advance pragmatic cooperation, and work together to meet the

challenges. Pursuing friendship with China has become the bedrock of

Pakistans foreign policy, which enjoys a consensus across the political

spectrum. Pakistan deeply appreciates the support and assistance China has

given for our economic and social development. Pak also fully support

Chinas principled stand on Taiwan, Tibet, Xingjian, and other human rights

issues. The Chinese government and people reciprocate these sentiments and

consider Pakistan to be their most reliable friend and partner. Developing

relations with Pakistan is high on Chinas diplomatic agenda. China supports

Pakistans efforts in safeguarding its sovereignty, independence and

territorial integrity. The fuel for this relationship comes from the hearts and

minds of the people. The prudent, farsighted policies of both the governments

buttress it through multiple frameworks.c) The 2005 Pakistan China Treaty for Friendship and Cooperation

and Good Neighborly Relations is a key instrument, which enables us to


22/71

22

strengthen our strategic, economic and cultural relations. High level visits

play a crucial role in this regard. In December 2010. Pakistan and China

decided to establish and annual meeting mechanism between leaders, set up

foreign ministers dialogue mechanism and reinforce contact and dialogue

between the foreign ministries. President Asif Zardari has visited China nine

times since assuming office. Former Prime Minister visited China five times

since early 2008. Prime Minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf visited Tianjin in 2012.

Chinese premier Wen Jiabao also visited Pakistan in Dec 2011 & signed a big

deal of $ 36 billion projects with Pakistan. A joint Economic Commission (JEC)

helps both to simulate growth of economic and traded ties. Both use a face

year development program on trade economic cooperation for his purpose.

The list five year plan, which will be completed this year, had focused on port

development, educational exchanges, the establishment of Pakistan China

Joint investment Company (JIC), automobiles, Chemicals, fertilizers,telecommunications, and energy projects. The second five year program has

been launched in 2012. Under this plan, the two sides have identified 36

projects covering educations, healthcare, water conservancy, agriculture,

transport, energy, ICT, and industry. Chins leading brands, such as China

Mobile and Hailer, are doing good business in Pakistan and their operations

are poised to expand as we set up exclusive economic zones for China. China

is now Pakistans largest trading partner; and Pakistan is Chinas second

largest trading partner in South Asia, though the gap between the first and

second trading partner is big. Last year, both countries established a JointEnergy Working Group, which now coordinates implementation of all energy

projects, including hydro, thermal, coal-fired, alternate and civil nuclear

energy. A Pak Rupee-Renminbi Currency Swap Agreement for $1.6 billion

has been signed. The ICBC has opened branches in Islamabad and

Karachi. Pakistanis are exploring with the CBRC the possibility of opening a

subsidiary of a major Pakistani bank in China. Strong private Chinese

enterprises are entering into Pakistani market. They will invest in the energy

sector and infrastructure development. Chinese state and non-state

enterprises have years of cumulative experience of doing business in

Pakistans defence and civilian sectors. For them, ease of doing business in

Pakistan is higher than for any other country. Pakistani enterprises, though on

a modest scale, have made entry into the Chinese market. Netsol - a software

developer based in Lahore - is one such example.

d)Energy: The two sides are now working on the creation of an energycooperation mechanism that would create an interface between the relevant

departments and entitles dealing with conventional (hydro, thermal, and coal

fired) alternate (wind, solar), and nuclear energy. Following the massive flood

in Pakistan (2010), China gave Pakistan generous, timely and unconditional

assistance. Chinas assistance to Pakistan to Pakistan was the highs level


23/71

23

disaster relief assistance give to a foreign country. The Chinese companies

have also participated in the post flood reconstruction, especially in the

agricultural and infrastructure projects.

e) Pakistan and China have signed Free Trade Agreements (FTAS) on goods,investment and services. A free Trade Commission (FTC) meets regularly. Ithas started consultations for the second phase negotiations of China Pakistan

FTA to enhance trade liberalization and prompted economic and trade

growth of the two countries. It will also look into the issues of dispatch of

official purchase missions form China to Pakistan, visa facilitation measures

and development of an Electronic Data interchange (EDI) system.

f) The Armed Forces have very close cooperation with each other. Last year,chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff committee of Pakistan held the eight rounds of

Defence and Security with the PLA chief of general staff. Both have unanimityof views to pursue peace and security in the region and to defeat terrorism,

extremism, and separatism. Their active collaboration in this regard has

produced results. The defence cooperation covers high level military

exchanges, structured defence and security talks, joint exercises training of

personnel in each other s institutions, joint defence production, and defense

trade. Joint production of the JF-17 fighter aircraft, F22-P frigate, and Al-

Khalid tanks are good examples of cooperation between their defence

industries. This year Pakistan and china signed a document for bilateral

military cooperation. The visit of Chinese delegation this year commences 9 thround of Pakistan-China Defence and Security talks.

This year special efforts are also under way to promote understanding and friendship

between our people by enhancing exchanges in culture, education, media, sports, tourism,

and public health. Both sides are especially encouraging visits by researchers and scholars

so that they could give in depth and perspective to the narrative of the Pakistan china

friendship. Within this context, their emphasis is on exchanges between the younger

generations of Pakistan and China, so that they can inherit this narrative and propagate it.

They have set a good tradition of visits by youth delegations comprising 100 members fromboth sides. Both believe that these exchanges will lay the foundation for understanding and

cooperation among the young men and women of China.

III. Final Analysis;

China is arising power in fact it has risen fast and overtaken all economic powers but one.

The leadership of China is modest in its approach and declares that the country would

continue its march towards comprehensive development by boosting per capita income, by

redistributing wealth and resources among all citizens, by bridging the gaps between therural and the urban areas as well as the eastern and western parts of the country, and by


24/71

24

generating domestic demand. All these measures will have a salutary impact on Pakistan,

the Asia Pacific region, and the international economy.

China is developing its western region, especially Xinjiang, with immense speed. Khorgos

and Kashgar will be Shanghai and Shenzhen of tomorrow. Pakistan has a natural affinity

with this region. Already every year hundreds of Pakistani traders participate in theKashghar trade fair and the Urumqi China-Eurasia Expo. If Pakistan is integrated into this

region, the economies of Gilgit-Baltistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and of the southern parts

of Pakistan would take off simultaneously. China is big. It is getting bigger by the day. To

accelerate Pakistan-China economic partnership, Pakistan has to think big, with its feet still

on the ground. Pakistan needs to develop competencies and adopt efficient implementation

strategies. As we do that, China - our brother and partner - may step forward to help

Pakistan develop these competencies. Only then we will have a fuller interface between the

two economies.

Pakistan supports Chinas of a harmonious world a world that works for win -win

partnerships instead of win-lose paradigms. Pakistan hopes that Afghanistan would move

towards stability and national reconciliation. Pakistani government hopes to eliminate the

networks of terrorism and create conditions for economic and social development of our

people. Towards east, Pakistan aspire our outstanding issues, to pave the way for a

cooperative environment, and to make South Asia a safe and secure region.

Important developments in Post 9/11 era:

2011. A joint ventured Chinese Pakistani tank, Al Khalid comes into full production.

2002. Ground breaking ceremony for Pakistans Gwadar deep sea port. China provides $

198 million for $248 million joint project.

2007. Sijo become Pakistans biggest arms supplier with no conditions attached, a true

strategic partnership.

2007. Sino Pakistani joint ventured fighter aircraft JF 17 Thunder is fomoly rolled out.

2008. Pakistan stats mass production of the aircraft.

2008. China and Pakistan sign an FTA free trade agreement). It is the first such agreement

signed by the two countries,. As a direct China has opened new industries in Pakistan and

Pakistan has been given free trade zones in China.

2008. China vows to help Pakistan in civil nuclear technology by building and helping in

the Khusab Nuclear Programme providing technology to Pakistan for better maintenance

of civil nuclear plants.

2008. Pakistan and China to build first ever train route though the Karakoram Highway,ultimately linking Chinas rail route net to Gwadar Port.


25/71

25

2008. The F-22P frigate comes into service with the Pakistani Navy. The first frigate was

inducted in Pakistani Navy in July 2009 and last one is expected to be in 2013.

2009. Pakistani intelligence agencies helped the Chinese government of catching several

suspected Uyghur terrorists seeking haven in Pakistan and planning to launch illegal

operations.

2009. Trade between both crosses $7 ban (2008-9) from meager $700 man.

2009. Growing military ties between China and Pakistan are a serious concern to India.

2010. Pakistan and China have a joint military drill for anti terrorism China donates $260

million (USD) to flood hit Pakistan and further sends 4 military rescue helicopters to

Pakistan to assist in rescue operations, it was first time China has ever sent such rescue

operations overseas.

Pak China Air Cargo Service launched (2012).

China begins military drill with Pakistan (Nov 2012).

China, Pakistan sign joint communiqu to cement partnership (Dec 2012).

100 member youth delegation from china at the Prime Minister house.

China has given the list of terrorist group of Xinjiang.

Pakistan, China agreement on solar power project.

Pakistan Afghanistan relations

AfghanistanPakistan relations have never been easy & they have always been estranged.

Afghanistan and Pakistan are usually described as inseparablestates due to their historical,

religious, cultural, linguistic, and ethnic ties, as well as their multiple trade and economic

ties. Both neighbouring states are Islamic republics and part of the OIC &South Asian

Association for Regional Cooperation. However, the relationship between the two has been

affected by the Durand Line, the issues of Pashtunistan and Balochistan, the 1980s Sovietwar, the rise of the Taliban in 1990s, the 2001-present war in Afghanistan, and

Afghanistan's relations with India .

1. The issue of Durand LineThe Afghan government does not recognize the Durand Line as the official border between

the two states, claiming that the Durand Line Agreement has been void in the past due to

violations by Pakistan as well as other reasons. Pakistan, on the other side, issued a

warning to Afghanistan that it would not "tolerate any violations of its borders".

Relations have continued to be strained, as several top Afghan officials stated that they are

weary of Pakistan's negative influence in the country. The Afghan government usually
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inseparablehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Afghanistanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_grouphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tradehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_republichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Asian_Association_for_Regional_Cooperationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Asian_Association_for_Regional_Cooperationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durand_Linehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtunistanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balochistan_%28region%29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talibanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_%282001%E2%80%93present%29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan%E2%80%93India_relationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Afghanistanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durand_Linehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durand_Line_Agreementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Void_%28law%29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Void_%28law%29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durand_Line_Agreementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durand_Linehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Afghanistanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan%E2%80%93India_relationshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_%282001%E2%80%93present%29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talibanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balochistan_%28region%29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtunistanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durand_Linehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Asian_Association_for_Regional_Cooperationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Asian_Association_for_Regional_Cooperationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_republichttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tradehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_grouphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culturehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Afghanistanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inseparablehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inseparablehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan


26/71

26

accuses Pakistan of using its intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), in

aiding the Taliban militants (since 1994). Pakistan has denied the allegations but has said it

does not have full control of the actions of the ISI. Relations became even more strained as

the United States supports an Afghan invasion of troublesome tribal regions.

2. Other contemporary issuesFollowing the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, the Pakistani government played a

vital role in supporting the Mujahideen and assisting Afghan refugees. Pakistan absorbed

an estimated 3.5 million refugees and provided shelter, education, and places to work.

After the Soviet withdrawal in February 1989, Pakistan, with cooperation from the world

community, continued to provide extensive support for displaced Afghans. In 1999, the

United States provided approximately $70 million in humanitarian assistance to

Afghanistan and Afghan refugees in Pakistan, mainly through multilateral organizations

and Non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

Pakistani strategists view Afghanistan as providing "strategic depth" in the event of a war

with neighboring India. In the event that the Indian Army crosses into Pakistan, the

Pakistan Army would temporary locate supplies in Afghanistan and prepare for a counter-

offensive. Furthermore, many Pakistanis see in Afghanistan and Afghans a common bond

based on religion, history, culture, language and ethnic ties. At various times, Pakistan

backed the mujahideen against the Soviets, mujahideen against each other and the Taliban

against the Iranian-backed Northern Alliance.

3. The overthrow of the Taliban regime in November 2001The overthrow of the Taliban regime in November 2001 has seen somewhat strained

relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan. The present Karzai administration in Kabul

feels that the remnants of the former Taliban government are being supported by factions

within Pakistan for the same above reasons. However, Pakistan has said the government

cannot control all elements of its intelligence agency, the ISI, which several countries accuse

of contributing to instability in Afghanistan. In 2006 Afghan PresidentHamid Karzai

warned that "Iran and Pakistan and others are not fooling anyone" when it come tointerfering in his country.

"If they dont stop, the consequences will be that the region will suffer with us equally. In the past

we have suffered alone; this time everybody will suffer with us. Any effort to divide Afghanistan

ethnically or weaken it will create the same thing in the neighboring countries. All the countries in

the neighborhood have the same ethnic groups that we have, so they should know that it is a different

ball game this time.(Hamid Karzai)

4. Pakistan, Afghanistan ties in post-bin Laden era (May 2011)Osama bin Laden's death (Abbottabad operation, May 2011) is likely to put more stress on

Pak Afghan relations, Karzai was very vocal & harsh on Osamas presence in Abbottabad
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-Services_Intelligencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideenhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_refugeeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-governmental_organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Iranhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Alliancehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_Hamid_Karzaihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabulhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_Afghanistanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_grouphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamid_Karzaihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamid_Karzaihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_grouphttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_Afghanistanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_Afghanistanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabulhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_Hamid_Karzaihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Alliancehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Iranhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-governmental_organizationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_refugeeshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideenhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter-Services_Intelligence


27/71

27

He blamed again that Pak has always been protecting the militants & Osama was also

hidden in Pak with Armys collaboration.

5. Latest developmentsFebruary 2012: Pakistan should have a key role in Afghanistan : J Kerry

March 2012: Hina Rabbani Khar said: She hopes for a relationship with Afghanistan based

on trust and called for leaving behind the past associated with interference in that country

and support for Taliban. Further added, if we are looking for any strategic depth it can not

be achieved militarily or can come through a proxy war. The only way to do is through

building trust with the Afghan state.

June 2012: Karzai calls on Pakistan to help end Afghan war during the latest round of talks

on future of Afghanistan.

Jul 2012: Afghanistan and Pakistan agreed to extend APTTA to Tajikistan which will be the

first step for the establishment of North-South Trade Corridor. The proposed agreement

will provide facilities to Tajikistan to use Pakistans Gawadar and Karachi ports for its

imports and exports while Pakistan will trade with Tajikistan under terms similar to transit

agreement with Afghanistan.

November 2012: After D8 Summit in November 2012, Foreign Secretary Jalil Abbas said

that D8 countries agreed that peace & stability in Afghanistan is important for development

in the region.

November 2012: Four people were killed in the Narai Area of South Waziristan when

mortar shells were fired by Afghan National Army.

6. Final Analysis:The relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan have always been at odds with each other,

the level of mistrust between the two countries is troubling. A continuous dialogue at the

political and civilian level is the only antidote to prevent further erosion of the relationship

between the two countries.

The main reason behind the uneasy relationship between the two countries is mainly

because Karzai govt. is concerned that Pakistan is supporting militants in the region. Karzai

also lamented on Pakistan when Osama was killed by Americans in May 2011 alleging that

Pakistan had been protecting him & was playing double game. While on the other side,

Pakistan is also concerned that Indian economic and political involvement in Afghanistan

could lead to unfriendly governments on both its eastern and western borders or in simple

words Pakistan fears its encirclement by India.

Unfortunately the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan is a proxy war that takes its roots from

the deficiencies in political, national and establishment fields plus the uneasy relations with


28/71

28

neighbor countries.

Both the countries possess great possibilities and reserves that can be used for peace,

stability and progress in the region, the very first step in this connection should be giving

confidence and trust to the concerned groups with the support and backing of international

community and both sides government that peace and stability can prove more beneficialfor boosting economic relations and development instead of negative political

competitions.

First of all bringing political trust between the two countries is necessary for which the

following steps must be taken.

Afghanistan should ensure Pakistan that in the presence of other countries especiallyIndia their assistance and aid wont prove counterproductive to the national interest

and security of Pakistan.

Both countries should prioritize transit and economic affairs than politicalcompetitions because economic relations can rapidly fill the cold gap in political

relations.

Both countries should conduct their relation on state to state level that is the bestlegitimate way of relationship. Trust and confidence can be build with avoiding and

cutting off any kind of tacit relationship with parties, personalities, warlords or

militants

A broad based regional approach can pro

Documents

Current Affairs File