After weeks of an intense diplomatic stand-off, tensions seem to be easing between India and Pakistan, which was visible symbolic gestures.
While the symbolism is positive, the countries need to address the important underlying issues to prevent a future crisis.
What are the recent symbolic gestures?
Pakistan had recalled its High Commissioner to India due to mounting tensions, but he been returned in time to host the ‘Pakistan National Day’ reception in New Delhi.
Responding positively, Indian government has stated that Minister of state for Agriculture Mr. Gajendra Singh Shekhawat would attend the reception.
Also, Indian High Commissioner to Pakistan was in attendance at the military parade in Islamabad to mark the same occasion.
Also, a sustained calmness has returned to the LoC which saw intense exchange of fire over the recent months.
More significantly, despite the usual hard-line towed by military, the Pakistan’s army chief, General Bajwa had indicated a desire to normalise ties with India.
While these are signs from both sides that normalcy is returning, discussions for eliminating factors that precipitated the crisis is needed.
Additionally, Pakistan should also work to curtail anti-India elements within its borders to further its outreach towards India.
What caused the diplomatic crisis?
Utilities - The Pakistani authorities are said to have disrupted contractor who were working on the Indian diplomatic residential complex in Islamabad.
India argues that its construction plans were duly authorised and that Pakistan was simply seeking trouble by intervening on trivial pretexts.
Contrarily, Pakistan argues that while the Indian complex in Islamabad is in an advanced state of construction, Pakistani diplomatic complex in Delhi hasn’t even been approved by authorities for long.
Club membership - Pakistan has refused to admit Indian diplomats to the recreational clubs like the “Islamabad Club”.
This is said to bein retaliation to corresponding Indian clubs charging Pakistani diplomats exorbitant amounts for membership.
Interesting, India’s contention that the government cannot interfere with how private clubs manage their membership procedures hasn’t cut any ice.
Rather, Pakistan had called for a “Memorandum of Understanding” for reciprocal club memberships for each other’s diplomats.
The backdrop – In addition to the above, ceasefire violations along the LoC and the resultant political rhetoric intensified the diplomatic standoff.
Consequently, a series of actions and counter-actions that amounted to harassment of each other’s diplomatic personnels unfolded.
These were violations of ‘Vienna Convention of diplomatic protection – 1961’ and it is also concerning that routine disagreements were allowed to escalate.
How did the previous standoff span out?
During the initial years of the insurgency in Kashmir in 1990’s there were heightened fears of an India-Pakistan military escalation.
The situation was far more tense that the current and had become particularly difficult for diplomats to work in each other’s countries.
But despite this, both countires managed to reach an agreement to protect each other’s diplomatic personnels from harrasment.
Notably, lower ranked officials of the host country usually aggravate tensions as they aren’t properly informed on how to deal with enemy diplomats.
While efforts to percolate the ‘code of conduct’ in dealing with diplomats have paid off, habitual mistreatment in certain cases continues nevertheless.
How should India and Pakistan treat spies?
The Trend - India and Pakistan have claimed that they do not carry out espionage, despite operatives being caught on both sides.
If an act of spying is established (or strongly suspected) in custody, then spies are subjected to the most inhumane forms of torture by the captors.
Hence, captured spies routinely pretend ignorance, even though when released from custody, they return home and openly brag about their espionage.
All counties involve in spying and to claim otherwise would be laughable, which hence mandates commissioning standard policy for dealing with spies.
Way forward - While disrupting under-cover operatives is essential, torturing spies doesn’t spell well for a humanitarian political setup.
Hence an agreement on punitive action espionage or exchange of spies like the ones during the cold war could be co-opted.
Hypernationalism and grandstanding can make professional handling of these issues difficult and hence a rationalistic approach is needed.
Are the communication networks functional?
The state of communication between India and Pakistan is at its lowest ebb in more than a decade and these needs to be revived.
Both countries have ‘Director-General of Military Operations’, who coordinate for easing border tensions, but they didn’t meet recently despite constant ceasefire violations.
Contacts between the respective High Commissions and the host governments have largely been through “summons, and stern warnings”.
Additionally, even planned high-level political engagements have been called off and even the discrete diplomatic initiatives have been a damper.
Reviving engagements across domains is a high priority for sustaining peace.
