Pakistan-India trade should not be resumed despite the floods
https://arab.news/jnptp
There is no denying that trade forms an important component of interstate relations. And this is more so in the age of globalization. It is also suggested that trade is particularly necessary in an adversarial relationship as it helps better atmospherics; it can complement efforts towards resolving interstate disputes. The key is, the argument goes, that trade should be kept separate from politics. Periodic tensions should not be allowed to affect bilateral trade, for even temporary disruption is hurtful especially for ordinary people.
However, though no sane person can demur to having normal Pakistan-India relations, history is never sparing in judging those poorly who sacrifice principles at the altar of ephemeral expediencies.
There are voices arguing to the contrary. As Pakistan reels from devastating floods, arguments are heard again in favor of resuming trade with India. It is being contended that Pakistan will likely face massive shortages of essential food items and cotton which will in turn not only lead to further inflation, but also dent Pakistani exports. This situation can be partially mitigated by importing these items from India, they say. In short, their point is that there is no better option for Pakistan than India under these hugely stressful economic and financial circumstances. If life-saving drugs can be imported from India, why not essential food items, goes the argument.
Yes, from a purely economic standpoint, these views make perfect sense. But geoeconomics can hardly be sequestered from other variables when it comes to Pakistan-India relations.
A reminder that it was not Pakistan which upset the proverbial applecart in the first place. Reacting to the Pulwama attack on February 14, 2019, India withdrew Pakistan’s Most Favored Nation status, imposing 200% custom duties on imports from Pakistan. The latter did not respond in kind. Pakistan only stopped bilateral trade, besides downgrading diplomatic relations, when India unilaterally annexed Kashmir on 5 August in the same year. India’s unconstitutional step in defiance of even its own Supreme Court, left no option for Pakistan but to react the way it did.
The continuing indifference on the part of the international community does not mean Pakistan should be giving up its principled positions vis-à-vis India, writes Abdul Basit
Abdul Basit
Ironically, even much before the flooding, in Pakistan we had started hearing suggestions of restoring bilateral trade. In the PTI dispensation, Commerce Minister Razzak Dawood and Finance Minister Hammad Azhar publicly touted for the same. The Economic Coordination Committee had even prepared a summary to the effect, subsequently to be shot down by the cabinet. And Foreign Minister Bilawal Zardari soon after taking over also articulated in favor of trade with India while addressing an Islamabad-based think-tank.
Such important foreign policy decisions cannot and must not be addressed in such a casual manner. One day, Finance Minister Miftah Ismail told the nation that Pakistan was considering importing essential food items from India, and the next day PM Shehbaz Sharif negated his own finance minister and said nothing of the sort was on the cards. So much for our decision-making process on critical foreign policy issues.
Understandably, officially India responded to the discussion by leaving the door ajar, saying New Delhi would consider the matter once a formal request was received from Islamabad. Whereas the Indian media quoting some unnamed officials repeated the trite mantra that “Trade and terror cannot go together.”
It goes without saying that India would be very keen to see Pakistan leaving aside its position on Kashmir and moving in the direction of restoring relations as existed prior to August 5, 2019. Pakistan’s National Security Committee in its meeting on 7 August 2019 took some decisions which resonated with the widespread public sentiment in Pakistan. Kashmiris all over the world also welcomed Pakistan’s well-considered response to India’s ill-considered August 5 decision.
It is true that Pakistan has not been able jolt the world out of its discouraging nonchalance on Kashmir. However, the continuing indifference on the part of the international community does not mean Pakistan should be giving up its principled positions vis-à-vis India. In his inaugural address as prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif rightly reiterated Pakistan’s position that unless India restored the status quo ante, Pakistan could not engage with India bilaterally. India was visibly perturbed as it was expecting that under the new leadership, Pakistan might be open to walk past the hard position adopted by the Imran Khan government.
Needless to say, resuming bilateral trade without India moving an inch from its hardbound position will be another setback for Kashmir. Islamabad must not provide legitimacy to India’s unconstitutional steps which were also in violation of the United Nations Security Council resolutions on Kashmir and the 1972 Shimla agreement. Pakistan can ill-afford to acquiesce, even implicitly, in the status quo which India is hell-bent to consolidate as a new normal.
Moreover, reengagement with India will further dampen Kashmiris’ morale, especially on the other side of the Line of Control. They are keeping their struggle alive under the heaviest of odds. Scapegoating Kashmiris when other sources are available to import onion, tomato and cotton would be most unfortunate. Pakistan should even stop importing medicines from India by exploring other possibilities.
The country must show perseverance and patience, double down its Kashmir diplomacy and avoid being inveigled into ill-timed and unilateral flexibility. A question comes to mind: Will India, to begin with, publicly revoke its decision on imports from Pakistan taken in the wake of the Pulwama attack?
- Abdul Basit is DG, Islamabad Centre for Regional Studies. He was previously Pakistan ambassador to Germany and Pakistan High Commissioner for India.
Twitter: @abasitpak1
