National Defense University, Islamabad

Submitted By: Zunaira Sarfraz

Registration No.: Ndu-F18-2702
Semester: BS-IR 2nd semester (B)
Submitted To: Respected Sir Hamid Iqbal
Course: Foreign Policy of Pakistan
 (1)

i. Why do we study FP?

By studying foreign policy we learn the fundamentals upon which foreign policy
should be made. We also pay keen to varying behaviors of states in different
situations. Like we head back to the historical events to critically analyses state’s
moves and decisions in sensitive situation and how it turned out to be.
For example, we have learnt that the foreign policy of Pakistan during early years
of its birth was not so impressive because it did not keep Russia on board along
with. It would have dealt with both in a better manner so that Pakistan’s relations
with Russia would have grown positively.
ii. State:
A state possess following qualifications:
• Permanent population
An area with the living population which have been living there for good enough
time. A state is created for the good of people. State is nothing without them.
• Defined territory
A territory whose boundary is marked against its neigbors to define its territorial
capacity.
• Govt.
A sovereign to govern the population and run the institutions.
• Sovereignty
An absolute, indivisible, unlimited power of the state that no other state should
interfere in its internal business and its decision makings.
iii. Hard Power, Soft Power and Smart Power:
A capability to influence others is power.
•Hard Power: A power of influencing the behavior of other states through military
and economic strengths. Examples is China’s economy attracting states in Asia.
•Soft Power: Ability to influence preferences of other states through attraction
rather using any coercive manners. Example is United States’ reputation due to its
democratic legacy culture and hegemony. Majority of international institutions
are US based, etc.
•Smart Power: It is a combination of soft and hard power strategies which makes
an influence on others.
iv. Do UN and EU have foreign policy?
UN do not really have its foreign policy but it decisions are usually influenced by
hegemon i.e. Hegemon’s foreign policy graphs UN’s behavior. EU is a group of
countries to serve the collective interests of countries. It does not have any
foreign policy.
v. Anarchic nature of International system.
It is defined as the international system is working without central law making
body. It shows anarchic nature of international system where every state desires
for more and more power. In doing so, if one state acquires more power, it
becomes insecurity for the other and the race of gaining more power than other
goes on.
vi. Number of major powers:
Two major poles existed during the cold war. One was Western block and the
other Communist bloc. One lead by United States of America and the other by
USSR. These poles whenever remain balanced, peace remained. Scholars say that
such a pole that is bipolar world was more stable than the present multipolar
world. Polarity changes when the balance among them disrupts.
vii. Traditionally, who is the main actor in FP?
State is the main actor of Foreign Policy. As a sovereign entity and the main unit
of Foreign Policy, it determines the policy keenly observing its interest. Other
actors in the foreign policy are interest group, pressure groups, NGO, etc.
viii. Economic Patterns:
The development or the economic growth of the country is scaled by the
economic patterns. Three economic patterns are there to measure the
development of the state:
Core
Comprising of Developed states e.g. US
Semi-Periphery
Consisting of states approaching core e.g. India
Periphery
Constitutes nderdeveloped states e.g. Afghanistan
ix. Global norms and international law:
Global norms are defined as the common norms or behavior accepted by all
states in dealings. While international law is developed through treaties and IGOs
to deal with conflicts and to abstain from war like situations.
x. Patterns of military alliances:
Depending on the classification of military alliance which is:
Defense Alliance
Entente
Non-Aggression alliance
The patterns in my view would be flexible alliances and non-flexible alliances.
Flexible alliances are not strong i.e. they can be broken anytime, while non-
flexible are legitimate in every situation.
 Alliances build good relations.
 Alliance making avoids war.
 It can boost cooperative nature of states.
xi. Transnational Organizations and Networks:
the international non-governmental organizations, seeking their own interest, and
not for state or individual interests. These are neutral organizations, not siding
with any state but working for themselves. It is created to pursuit its sole interest
in the national units. It only does business in multiple nations.Transnational
organizations work across the boundary of state. It spreads in multi number of
states and its working is not designed by thee foreign policy of it’s headquarter
state. Examples are McDonalds and Nike. A transnational network is made by the
commonly shared interests of the organizations.
xii. International organizations and regimes:
International organizations are defined as an organization with international
scope or presence. They need to have membership of at least three states to
stand as an international organization. They do the following functions:
- Do research and survey
- Deliver services and aids
- Providing forums for bargaining
IGOs serve useful purposes to states to co-operate and work together. After
world war II, IGOs have emerged to avoid war and resolve issues. Examples are
UN, WHO, UNICEF, etc.
International regimes is the method of constructing international laws and
norms. International organizations is the platform where international laws
and norms are formed with the mutual decisions of states.

(2)

i. Why states need foreign policy?

Foreign policy is defined as management of external relations and activities of
sovereign state towards other states to achieve goals for national interests.
• No country is self-sufficient in terms of needs and resources. Hence, to meet its
needs, a state has to keep good relations with others. US does not have oil
resources. Hence, it is keeping good relations with Saudi Arabia.
• Through foreign policy a state connects not only with other states but with
international Sometimes organizations. This help build interactions. Like UN, EU,
etc.
• Sometimes, foreign policy is aggressive towards other states. It is either to
please states with which it has good relations or to support its stance. Like
Pakistan does not have good relations towards India because of Kashmir stance.
Moreover, Pakistan has not yet recognize Israel because if it does, it will weaken
its stance for Kashmir.
ii. Do non-state actors have foreign policy towards states?
Non-state actors are defined as groups or individuals having influence but
independent of state government. Like Al Qaeda, ISIS, TTP, .etc.
Yes, they have their own foreign policy regardless of state’s policy. For example,
ISIS’ policy towards Iran is aggressive now a days. Last year, ISIS conducted attack
inside Iran’ Parliament building.
iii. Do MNCs and TNCs also have foreign policy?
No, they do not have their own foreign policy but influence state’ foreign policy.
Because, they have great share in state’s economy and investments in research
and trade. So they not only affect government policies but have a great part in
designing state’s foreign policy too.
MNC (multinational corporations) have headquarter while TNC (Transnational
companies) don’t.
iv. What is the difference between traditional, current and emerging IR? How
do they define foreign policy?
Traditional IR:
-One actor
-State-state relations
-State centered
-State centered foreign policy
Current IR:
-Diversified
-Multiple actors (NGOs, MNCs, non-state actors)
-Globalization hence more interactions
-Addresses global issues
-More interdependence
Emerging IR:
-Change in world order
v. Models of Foreign Policy:
Three basic models play an important part in the decision making of foreign
policy:
-Rational Choice
By rational model means to order the goals according to the importance. Analyze
alternatives and choose the best alternative to achieve the goal.
-Organizational process model
It means to follow the standardized procedure to make policy while keeping in
mind the responses.
-Government politics model
It means is not made at once. Government needs to bargain with agencies to
make it legitimize.
vi. Do you think public interest and national interest are exclusive qualities?
Yes, public interest and national are exclusive in nature at times. For example, in
the present days, rising price is good for the economy which is in national interest
but it does not entertain public interest for they are greatly under the burden of
inflation crisis.

(3)

i. What is security?
Security has been the main focus of International Relations because of the
massacres of world war 1 and 2. It is defined as a ‘absence of threat ’. Feeling
protective against antkinf of threat either internal (nightmares, depression, fear,
etc.) and external (physical harm) threats.
Pakistan’ internal threats include extremism, sectarianism, etc.
External threats to Pakistan include political, economic and social threats.
ii. What makes security?
A protective shield against any harm creates security. If we talk about state in the
context of security, then it’s the economic and military powers which makes it
secure against anykind of threats. When a state feels that it is being vulnerable, it
starts moving towards security developments. When India became nuclear
power, it made Pakistan uneasy. Hence, soon Pakistan started working on nuclear
development and became nuclear power in 1998. A first Muslim country to cash
the nuclear power.
iii. Who provide it?
With the perspective of IR, economic and military capacity, alongwith resources
and defense powers provie security to the state. Any element which protects 4
main units of the state, are to be said as the
Resources provide security to our economy.
iv. Is security objective or socially constructed? What power elite make of it?
Security is both objective and socially constructed. If I’m alone in jungle, I would
think of protecting myself against wild life. This shows objective perspective.
Same is the case with state. According to Realist perspective, state has to self-
help.
Sometimes security is socially constructed term to help elite power achieve its
goal. Behind the veil of
‘War against terror’ US invaded major oil producing states to help meet its needs
and to suppress rising powers.
v. Do you think debate of security creates insecurity?
Yes, constantly talking about security generates discomfort and insecurity. During
the extreme edge of terrorism, whenever anything wrong occurred, people
started associating it with terrorism.
vi. Is security discourse that generates debate of national/international
security?
We can say that security is a discourse in some cases. Not all the time. A state
when made to think about threats, it turns out toward security and a debate to
secure protection agaist any threats starts debate between national and
international units.
vii. Is security not achievable?
There’s always threat of economic loss, human security and imbalance. Even
states wwith rich natural resourcs and stable governments face issues of inflation
etc. Even when you have achieved security, you cannot keep calm unless and
uuntil you keep a consistency in it. A state needs to remain constant in its
security against threats. A consistence behavior against threats is always there.
viii. What about individual security? Can we include human security in national
security?
A nation is nothing without its people. Hence human security is included in
national security for state is to ensure the territorial security first and then comes
the human security. To make sue human security, a state first comes up to
protect territorial integrity to provide shelter to its peple.
ix. Is it priority of power elites that construct the discourse of security issue?
Yes, it is. If we talk about companies producing armament, they would definitely
create security issues among countries. In this way, they will better run their
companies.
Modi in last days fanned the hatred of its people against Pakistan to get its
interest. He first created security issue among its citizens and went on attacking
Pakistan to satisfy them.
x. Is security ever absolute?
No, security is both psychological and physical. If we talk about state, a state fears
war against it and along with it, its territorial integrity on the same scale.
xi. Is security a jargon to make sense of FP?
National security tops the list of national interests and foreign policy is never
made without thinking of the national interest, It’s the national interest around
which our foreign policy revolves. So yes, oreign policy is always made keeping in
mind the national security of a state, which is never to be compromised.
xii. Is security a discursive term to serve the interests of political elite on global
level too?
Yes, somewhat it is so. Weaponry is being sell to states, creating a hollow of
security threat around them. A discourse could be used to put threat into the
minds of the leaders.
xiii. Can a state subsume anything under national security?
National security is a subject under which you can even justify intervention in
other state and a war too. So, a state can hide behind the shield of National
Security. US is putting sanctions on Iran along with other states, justifying that it’s
building nuclear weapons which is threat to the international security.
xv. What is security?
A security is protection against treats which could be of any kind i.e. internal and
external. For state, a security is of human, economic progress, a strong military to
secure its borders. A state is at the stake of self-help but it works with other
countries to cope up with threats.
 (4)
i. Role of media in FP:
Media plays an important role in the present world, where world is more
globalized and interconnected. Media affects and is affected by foreign policy. It is
through social and press media national and foreign policies are influenced. In
recent days, when Indian aircrafts crossed Pakistani borders. Every citizen
demanded retaliation from Pakistani Army. Media (social media too) conveyed
the sentiments of Pakistanis. Through this reaction, Pakistan army was bound to
counter-attack. Moreover, many times, Media has links with leaders and
government. When government makes decision, it asks media to build a discourse
to convince its people.
ii. Role of culture in FP:
Culture makes up the framework upon which FP operates. If the culture between
two nations is same, this would create harmony among two states and help
construct FP satisfying the cultural commonality of the nations.
iii. Role of technology in FP:
With the advancement of science, ideas and thoughts can travel faster from one
person to the other. With the advent of internet, ideas are advocated and
through social media, policies of the govt. are influenced.
iv. Role of Interest groups:
Interest groups influence foreign policy to achieve its goal. They do it by
mobilizing or educating public. They engage in election activities
v. Difference in Interest groups and Pressure groups:
Interest group is defined as a group which aims at gaining its interest with or
without influencing policy while pressure groups aim at influencing policy.
Pressure group which is political in its nature is the kind of interest group.
vi. Role of social system in FP:
Social system does not seem to affect foreign policy. It is the mutual interest
which matters the most. As we can see, Pakistan and China are having good
relation though they have opposite social system. Relations between India and
USSR in the history can be seen as not being influenced by the social system.
vii. Role of economic system in influencing FP:
Economic system does not really play a significant role in the construction of
foreign policy. A long as state’s interest is fulfilled, it can make relations even with
the state of opposite economic system.
viii. Role of Islam in pursuance of FP of Pakistan with other states:
It was the mutual religion of Islam which based the foundation of Organization of
Islamic Countries. It helped Muslim states together and Pakistan was the founding
member. Iran was the first Muslim country to recognize Pakistan. Relationship
between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have been good. But Pakistan’s relation with
Afghanistan have never been that good. So I would say that any kind of
commonality, let’s say of religion cannot be the sole reason of developing relation
among states. It is only one of the reasons which might or might not work.

(5)
Pak-China Relations

Will CPEC bring peace to Baluchistan?

When infrastructure of the area would develop, people will get basic necessities
and this would help avoid any kind of insurgency. According to Beribuzdan, if the
people across borders are provided with basic facilities, the peace prevails. When
people at the borders are not made to look towards the developed region of the
state on the opposite, they remain calm. Hence if people of Baluchistan are given
the status and basic needs, the insurgency will undermine.
Will CPEC be ever materialized?
China Pakistan Economic Corridor is a trade route passing through Pakistan’s
three areas of Peshawar, Baluchistan and Gilgit Baltistan and linking it to the
Gwadar port. CPEC, a very big project, which had cost 3.65 Billion dollars in the
completion of its first phase needs, constant hard work and investment. If both
the countries keep doing it with dedication and if there may not be seen any
resistence, it is expected to be materialized.
Why Iran needs to explore participation in CPEC?
Iran is under sanctions of US due to its uranium’s extensive growth due to which
US questions it to be preparing for a nuclear weapons and quite isolated at the
time. Several states following United State’s norm has stopped trading with Iran.
Hence, it is in dire need of getting out of isolation and continuing trade relations
with others. CPEC is a great chance for Iran to come out of isolation and get in link
with 68 countries indirectly to trade and establish relations.
Do you expect CPEC to be a game changer for the whole region?
Yes, not only for Pakistan but CPEC would help in a positive way for the whole
region. Since it would create economic inter-dependence among the regional
countries and help get united and establish regional peace in the region. But the
question lies whether China is flirting the regional states by giving them a loan
which they might not be able to return in the future.
Is it Punjab-China corridor or Pak-China?
China Pakistan Economic Corridor is a Pak-China corridor, since, it covers area
from Khunjrab to Rawalpindi and Quetta to Gwadar. It’s the militants naming it
Punjab-China to create disturbance in its success. Indian fed militants in the
Baluchistan are scheming it this way since India does not seem to be fine with
this project.
Why China’s investment in Pakistan is a big deal?
China’s investment in Pakistan is a big deal for it will reduce the route of oil
imports of China from 1000 miles to 300 miles. Moreover, Pakistan is a gateway
to central Asia and Middle East. Pakistan’s Gwadar port will come out to be Dubai
port in the coming years, which connects province of China, Xinjiang to the
Arabian sea. Through which China can trade it’s good to other states with short
roue. Moreover, Gwadar port will provide China with a listening post to observe
Indian and American naval activities in Indian ocean.
How terrorism can derail OBOR?
Terrorism is of course a great threat. If any one point of OBOR get diseased by
terrorism, the whole OBOR project will face issues. Uyghurs terrorism in China
would be threat for OBOR too. Secondly, this multistate project will make China
vulnerable to terrorists. In consequence, businessman will feel hesitant to invest
in OBOR
What challenges CPEC faces domestically and regionally?
Domestically, East china is less developed, so the weak infrastructure over that
area will create hurdle. Secondly it’s the terrorism in China due to Uyghurs which
will be a great friction. In Pakistan it’s the the residents of Baluchistan and Gilgit
Baltistan fearing that Chinese presence in the region will create further inferiority
to them. Regionally, Indian oriented militant groups might gear up and US in a
silent way responded to CPEC that it passes through disputed territory of Kashmir.
Both the countries will continue to create hurdles for this project.
Do you think China’s introduction to Indian ocean will be sino-indian
competition?
Yes, because China is threatened of maritime hold of Indian ocean by US and
India. Through OBOR China too will make sure its presence in the oceans. China
through CPEC is achieving many diplomatic goals with maritime hold one of them.
Gwadar port will provide China an eyesight to make sure its presence and
observe maritime movements of US and Indian ocean inn the region.
Is China’s dream of becoming great power coming with risks?
Nothing comes without any risk. Everything has it pros along with cons. By CPEC
China will be able to expand its export but at the same time it has consequences
of not going profitable. Moreover, China will be more vulnerable to terrorism.
 (6)
PAK-AFGHANISTAN Relations

Reasons of US decision of with drawl from Afghanistan:

As we see America’s interests are changing. In its report, it stated that America’s
greater threat is no more terrorism but China as a rising power. So, instead of
wasting its economy and muscles over Afghanistan without any gains, which it has
been doing so for last 2 decades, it is trying to use its economic power against
China in the economic war which has started recently.
How will I measure US with drawl from Afghanistan?
US with drawl from Afghanistan less shows its weakness rather its changing
priorities. If it had spent so much economic and military power so far, it can keep
it going. It’s just the shift of priority towards rising China power. For, US threat of
terrorism is inn past and the China which is a rising economy is the present. A
trade war which is fought among them and US in a try to win it, tries to save
Afghanistan aid and use it to accelerate its econoy.
In case of US drawdown how you see the future of Afghanistan; a stable state or
a state in chaos and disorder once again?
If we observe the present scenario, Taliban seems to establish the control over
Afghanistan in a legitimate manner. Sharia law, which has been the focus of
Taliban activities in their last tenure would be placed. Chances of war between
Taliban and Govt. are there , that civil war would erupt and it might end up like
Venezula.
Highlight the Afghan Taliban attitude towards the current Afghan government
and how it will affect the US-Taliban reconciliatory process?
As we have noticed, Afghan Taliban are not inviting Afghan govt. in the peace
talks. Through this we can notice how Afghan Taliban dislikes them and gives a
view that they might be asking for Afghan power in return of reconciliation.
In case of agreement what role do you expect for the regional players like India,
Iran, Central Asian states?
Since, no country wants its neighborhood or regional unit in destruction for it
causes direct or indirect effects. Hopefully, they all would hope for a peaceful
Afghanistan. Because regional peace assures the economic progress and
development of the states in region.
How do you gage Pakistan’s role in the peace process and what possible ways it
will affect Pakistan?
PM Imran Khan in the last days gave an idea of interim govt. to sort out the issue,
which Taliban did not really appreciated. If Pakistan plays a more vital role, that
might help build better relations in future. Well, Pakistan would be great player in
negotiations.
What expectations and reactions do you see in case of Taliban coming to power
in the post withdrawal scenario?
As we see people of Afghanistan are satisfied with Afghan Taliban and Sharia law.
So if Taliban come to power, there’s expectation that they would establish sharia
law and there might be less chances of war against them from the people.
Draw a comparison between the US possible withdrawal from Vietnam and
Afghanistan.
US started war in both the states to stop communist expansion. But sadly it was
defeated badly in both. Both the wars costed US billions of dollars without any
gain. Since both the states are even more destructed. US then moved towards
peace talks when realized its gloomy defeat. But war in Vietnam continued for a
decade while for Afghanistan case it’s been 2 decades. The economic spending of
US in Afghanistan is more than it was for Vietnam.

(7)
Pak-US RELATIONS
It is believed that having too much mistrust/distrust between Pakistan and US,
still the US needs Pakistan more than Pakistan need it. Do you agree are
disagree?
I do not agree with it. US needed Pakistan during 1979 onwards till war on terror
started and it worked a bit. But now when Russia has withdrawn and US is getting
out of the region, US does not need Pakistan anymore. And its implications can be
seen by observing how US gives cold shoulder to Pakistan in the recent time.
Why currently the US is giving cold shoulder to Pakistan?
US needed Pakistan in the time of cold war and during war on terror. It has been
successful in withdrawing Russia with the help of Pakistan and now when it’s
withdrawing from Afghanistan, there’s nothing in America’s interest to support
Pakistan. Moreover, we have always seen United State’s behavior of divorcing
Pakistan when it achieves it goals. Same thing is being repeated now when US is
giving cold shoulder to Pakistan in the recent days, cutting military and financial
aid to Pakistan.
How you see US relations under the new American president (Trump the great)?
Trump, the great, is a racist and aggressive person who publicly claim its hatred
against Islam. If we analyse Trump’s tweet in which he blamed Pakistan for not
doing anything but only hatching funds from US shows that the friction is to be
seen in future between Pakistan and United States in Trump’s administration.

(8)
PAK-INDIA Relations

How the Chinese rise is a strategic threat to the US interest in South Asia?
Chinese rise means China being regional power in South Asia. As we see through
OBOR the whole region would get dependent on China and China will start
influencing the regional states. In this scenario, US will no longer influence states.
How India plays the role of linchpin for Washington in the region?
United States declared India as the linchpin of its strategy in Asia. India is helpful
to US in many ways. Washington can use India as a regional power against China
so that it would remain no regional power. In America’s view India could be used
as a balancing power against China in South Asia. Moreover, just like America and
India showed distrust against Iran’s nuclear progress diplomatically through its
strategies towards it.
What to you understand by “a tar pit diplomacy”?
Obama called Kashmir a ‘tar pit diplomatically’ . He said it is one of the critical
tasks of his administration to sort out the issues between India and Pakistan. A
‘tar pit’ is a phrase he used to elaborate how Kashmir has become an issue which
created instability in the region and it implications the linked states to India and
Pakistan too.
How the post Pulwama attack was an embarrassment for India and why
Pakistan was supposed to respond?
Besides its Gujral Doctrine, India violated the UN laws by hurting the sovereignty
of another country. It embarrassed her even more when she said it has killed 33
people who were involved in Pulwama attack including Jaish-e-Muhammad, while
international media denied the statements. Moreover, when Pakistan responded,
it brought two pilots to its knees.
Since, Pakistan’s security power was questioned so it had to respond. Sovereignty
was hurt by the traditional enemy. If Pakistan had not responded now, India
would have built confidence and would try the same tactica again.
What benefits the US can reap from the conflict in South Asia and highlight the
main reasons of the US intervention?
If the region remain as a conflict zone, nothing else would be a greater hindrance
in the path of rising China than the conflicted region. US invaded south Asia to
keep a check on China and create a conflict in the region by.
Why the Chinese remained in shadow and how it balance its relations viz-a-viz
India and Pakistan?
China never cut off from India. Despite its relations with Pakistan it has succeeded
in developing good relations with India. In the project OBOR, a maritime route
goes through Calcutta, showing China is determined to develop even better
relations with the India. China even gave permanent membership to India in SCO
which will further flourish the relatios.
Elaborate the Chinese three fold vision of Foreign policy?
China’s three fold policy are the three key phrases:
- Peace and stability in the region:
Establishing a peace in the region. Because conflicted region creates friction
towards the development of states. Hence China constructs ispolicy with a
vision to stabilize the region.
- Improvement of relations through dialogue and compromise
Issues are better resolved by dialogue and talks. It dedicates itself to bring
others on the table to negotiate and resolve issues.

- Respect for territorial integrity

Never to hurt territory of other states and respect the territorial
boundaries.
How do you see the future of Indo-Pakistan Relations and being student of IR
what suggestions do you forward to policy making circle of Pakistan?
Future of Indo-Pak relations would be the same as it has been for decades. It’s
totally in the benefit of them both if they end up this rivalry by sorting out the
Kashmir issue. Better option is to give independence to the Kashmiris and sort out
the issue which is in the good of both. The military muscles and economic
strengths that we’ve been using to defend ourselves might be used somewhere
else which could be more critical after the defense of country.

(9)
PAK-Central Asia Relations

Who will benefit more and why by greater expansion of SCO?

China seems to benefit more not just economically but diplomatically. With the
addition of Pakistan and China, SCO represents 40% of world population and 20%
of GDP. Diplomatically speaking, inclusion of Pakistan and India might bring peace
in the region and development of SCO will send China’s good image to the world
because it was created by China. Economically, with the addition of India and
Pakistan SCO’s focus would be divided from Central Asia towards South Asia and
this would benefit China in OBOR etc. The major goal of SCO is the regional peace
which seems to be at stake due to Pak-India dispute. This expansion will help
initiate reconciliation among Pak-India and help China resolve its border issues
with India too. When issues get resolved, Region will be more stabilized. And to
stabilize its hegemony, China is more concerned about the peace in the region.
Some say India’s presence in SCO might counter the influence of China in the
organization and increase India’s trade with Central Asian states but the benefits
China can hatch are more than India still.
Is it possible for both Pak and India to function together and will India work
with China and Pak?
In my view, India and Pakistan can function together unless and until it serves
their national interests. In fact, SCO can help India and Pakistan in sorting out
disputes for the main agenda of SCO is resolving border disputes. If India was
keen enough to become a member of SCO, it can work with China and Pakistan.
As we see, China has opened many economic projects in the whole region and
started projecting its influence through economic interdependence. Due to this,
India cannot remain cut off because a state can never ignore economic gains.

In your opinion Pakistan and India’s inclusion in SCO as permanent member be

more counter-productive or vice versa?
In my view, we cannot analyze Pakistan and India’s inclusion in SCO while
observing SAARC. If we look to the progress of SAARC which has not progressed
greatly and one of the reasons is Pak-India traditional dispute. But SAARC and SCO
are not comparable. In SAARC, it was India which was hegemon and presently in
SCO, it’s China which is economically strong. So there should be an optimistic
view of Pak –India membership of SCO. I do not think if it would prove to be
counter-productive.
Do you see any risk that SCO expansion could overshadow the importance of
Central Asia and other more urgent matters, and even alter the initial structure
and concept of the organization?
If we see, the main focus of SCO has been Central Asia. It entertains them more.
But with the addition of Pakistan and India, the focus divides to South Asia too.
The main concept of organization was to establish peace in the region but now we
are supposed to see that economic development would be there because of
OBOR.
Do you think the extending membership to Pakistan and India there is a chance
of an alliance in the future like NATO (military bloc) in Eurasia?
As we see, SCO covers 40% of the world population and after Central Asia, it has
diverted it focus on South Asia too. In the coming days, it seems to cover Europe if
it could add Turkey which is an observer state at the moment. Cutting long story
short, it happens to cover Asia and Europe. So yes, there are chances that it will
turn into NATO block which will cover Europe and Asia through Russia’ Eurasian
Economic Union.