It was not the first time that our Prime Minister has bent on his knees before Pakistan. In 2006 NAM Summit in Havana, the PM committed same folly to have declared Pakistan as a victim of terrorism. It gave Pakistan the escape rout to defend itself.
On the sidelines of the 15th NAM (Non-Aligned Movement) Summit at Sharm-el Sheikh, Manmohan Singh displayed diplomatic naivete. On July 16 2009, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Yousuf Raza Gilani issued a joint statement that Pakistan’s actions against terrorist groups operating from its soil were no longer a pre-condition for resumption of talks between the two countries. It is becoming clear that we are playing with our own security concerns. It is a well-known fact that India is a victim of Pak-sponsored terrorism. Our external and internal security is at stake due to cross-border terrorism. The most preferred goal of each sovereign state foreign policy is security. Foreign policy is defined as a state goal.
Our first goal with Pakistan should be getting assurance from Pakistan to stop cross border terrorism. How can India resume talk with Pakistan without stopping terrorism operating from its soil? On January 6, 2004, at the time of Vajpayee government, Pakistan had in a joint statement made commitment that it would not allow its land to be used for anti-India terror activities. But what Manmohan has given assurance on July 29, 2009 to Yousuf Raja Gilani that action on terrorism should not be linked to the composite dialog process. It was not for the first time that our Prime Minister has bent on his knees before Pakistan. In 2006 NAM Summit in Havana, the PM committed same folly to have declared Pakistan as a victim of terrorism. It gave Pakistan the escape rout to defend itself. The biggest blunder by the government in Havana, Cuba’s capital on September 16, 2006 was to agree to form an Indo-Pak joint anti-terror mechanism. Under this mechanism, there is an arrangement that India and Pakistan will share terror related information and evidence with each other. Taking advantage of this, on the basis of media reports, Pakistan had demanded the handing over the Malegaon accused Lt Col Purohit in the Samjhauta Express incident.
On July 16, 2009, Manmohan Singh went a step ahead and allowed inclusion of Balochistan in the joint statement. Now Pakistan will take advantage of this blunder and use it against India at international fora. He went to the NAM summit as victim of terrorism and returned back as sponsor of terrorism. Inclusion of Balochistan has given opportunity to Pakistan establishment to malign image of India inside Pakistan and outside Pakistan. Taking this advantage Pakistan interprets this issue in such a manner that will pretend India involvement in Balochistan. This type of thing has already done by Pakistan in Indo-Pak anti-terror mechanism as it has mentioned above. Responding over joint statement between Manmohan Singh and his counter part Yousuf Raja Gilani, Singh said India would follow a policy of trust and verify. But trust between countries can develop only on the basis of tried and tested assumptions about the identity of the other side. In other words,we need to know who is on the other side, what they stand for and what we can expect from them. Any covert maneuvering, any hidden agenda on their part will sow doubts and confusion on this score and undermine or nip in the bud whatever trust exists. Pakistan has full of treacherous history. How can one trust in Pakistan?
As far as mistake in drafting of joint statement is concerned, who is responsible for drafting PM or his foreign secretary? This responsibility should be fixed. Indian Foreign Minister of state Shri Shashi Tharoor defending the statement said that it was not legal document. Its okay. It’s not legal document but both PMs have signed on the joint statement. It is enough for Pakistan to create propaganda against India. Whether we accept or not here we are loser in diplomacy. To scraping precondition of action against terrorism for resumption of talks with Pakistan, Manmohan Singh’s desire to present individual idealism before world will be a wrong step. As a result of idealism Nehru received a rude shock in 1962, when China went to war with India on the border issue. Other developments such as two wars with Pakistan in 1965 and 1971-72, are result of Nehru Idealism. Whenever India has shown idealism, it has been a loser in foreign diplomacy. Idealism and morality are not guiding principal of foreign policy. The national interest is more reliable guide to intelligent policy. George Kennan, a renowned scholar of international politics, warns that our moral and ethical principles are valid only for ourselves, not for others and hence, we can’t impose them on others. So, India can’t expect morality and idealism from Pakistan. Only our national interest is guiding principle of our foreign policy. Why are our leaders not learning from our history? We have been victim of idealism and morality many a times earlier.