IINDO-PAK RELATIONSI

Historical Background
Agha Shahi, a famous Pakistani diplomat terms Pak-India relationswith these words; "Pakistan and India, are the inheritors of two of the richest
cultures and Civilizations of the world. Along with other countries of South Asia, they are also among poorest segments of mankind... It is a
tragedy of their short history as independent states that their mutual antagonism plunged them into three wars and, when not engaged in
fighting,
has kept them close to brink”. Since partition, relations between Pakıstan and India have been characterized by rivalry and suspicion. Although
many isues divide the two countries, the most sensitive one since independence has been status of Kashmir. A major focus in Pakistan's foreign
policy is continuing quest for security against India, its large more powerful, and generally hostile neighbour.

Foreign Policy Agenda 2019

Indo -Pak Relations It is evident that Imran Khan, the PTI government and Pakistan's army chief desire normalisation with India. This sentiment is
not reciprocated, although Pakistan's unilateral gesture of opening the Kartarpur corridor put New Delhi temporarily on the defensive. In the
run-up to the 2019 Indian elections, the Modi government may seek to revive its flagging political fortunes by generating hostility against
Pakistan, or even 'limited' military action, on some cooked-up pretext. Pakistan must remain vigilant and defeat any aggressive move.
Normalisation with India is highly unlikely so long as it continues its oppression in occupied Kashmir and refuses to resume a comprehensive
dialogue with Pakistan. To defend Kashmiris' fundamental rights, Pakistan must launch an international diplomatic and media campaign to
project and condemn India's human rights violations in occupied Kashmir (confirmed and documented in the recent report of the UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights). Terrorism issue India's campaign to portray Pakistan as a sponsor of 'terrorism' is designed to constrict
slamabad's ability to advance its national security and economic development goals. urtunately, this campaign, although supported by the US,
has failed so far. Pakistan must kill it. 1o this end, it could: 1) fulfil its obligations under relevant UNSC resolutions (placing required Testraints on
designated entities and persons); 2) insist on elimination of the BLA and TTP Presence from Afghanistan in the context of an Afghan political
settlement, and 3) launch a Alghanistan and elsewhere.

Wars, Conflicts & Disputes

Kashmir Conflict — Kashmir was a Muslim-majority princely state, ruled by a Hindu king, Maharaja Har Singh. At the time of the partition of
India, Maharaja Hari Singh, the ruler of the state, prefer to remain independent and did not want to join either the Union of India or the
Dominion Pakistan. He wanted both India and Pakistan to recognise his princely state as an independers neutral country like Switzerland. He
offered a standstill agreement to both India and Pakistan India refused the offer but Pakistan accepted it. In 1948, war broke out between two
states in the Kashmir. Pakistani jihadists acquired some part of the territory. Finally, a standstill agreement was facilitated by UN on the condition
that a plebiscite would be conducted in Kashmir However, this plebiscite was never conducted in Kashmir and India continued its oppressive
regime in Kashmir. In 1962, China occupied Aksai Chin, the north-eastern region bordering Ladakh. In 1984. India launched Operation Meghdoot
and captured more than 80% of the Siachen Glacier, Pakistan now maintains Kashmiris' right to self-determination through a plebiscite and the
promised plebiscite should be allowed to decide the fate of the Kashmiri people, India on the other hand asserts that with the Maharaja's signing
the instrument of accession, Kashmir has become an integral part of India. Due to all such political differences, this dispute has been the subject
of wars between the two countries. The state remains divided between the two countries by the Line of Control (LoC), which demarcates the
ceasefire line agreed upon in the 1947 conflict modified in 1972 as per Simla Agreement. This is still the potential cause of nuclear war between
Pakistan and India. These concerns are clearly depicted by Pakistani premier. "Kashmir is a flashpoint and can trigger a fourth war between the
two nuclear powers at anytime." (Nawaz Sharif, December 2013) The killing of separatist leader Burhan Wani in June 2016 and subsequent
protests and killing of Kashimiris by indian army has further infuriated the local population. More than 55 kashimiris have martyred while 140
got injured Antonio Guteress, United Nations General Secretary claimed that a body was following the situation in Kashmir. His claim surfaced
few days after 17 people were killed by the Indian army in Held Kashmir in a fresh wave of violence in April 2018. He also told that Pakistan has
sought UN's mediation on Kashmir dispute but India has opposed it.

War of 1965 —The Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 started following Pakistan's Operation Gibraltar, which was designed to infiltrate forces into
Jammu and Kashmir to precipitate an insurgency against rule by India. The five-week war caused casualties on both sides. Most of the battles
were fought by opposing infantry and armoured units, with substantial backing from air forces, and naval operations. It ended in a United
Nations mandated ceasefire and the subsequent issuance of the Tashkent Declaration.

The debacle of East Pakistan —Pakistan, since independence, was geo-politically divided into two major regions, West Pakistan and East
Pakistan. East Fakistan was occupied mostly by Bengall people. In December 1971, following a political crisis in East Pakistan, the situation soon
spiralled out of control in East Pakistan and India intervened in favour of the rebelling Bengali populace.

Kargil War —During the winter months of 1998-99, the Indian army vacated the illegally occupied posts ryhish peaks in Kargil sector in Kashmir
as it used to do every year. Pak being the legitimate occupant of the area and India being the usurper locked horns. This resulted in intense ting
1
between Indian and Pakistani forces, known as the Kargil conflict. Backed by the Indian Air Force, the Indian army gained some of the posts.
Pakistan later withdrew from the remaining portion to ensure that the issue is resolved amicably.

Water Disputes —Being a lower riparian state, Pakistan is perturbed by Indian plans to construct dams and hydro electric projects on western
rivers that have allocated to Pakistan by the Indus Water Treaty, 1960. Pakistani sources claim that 12 dams and power generation projects are
under construction in Kashmir and about 155 such projects are in planning stage. If all this is true, Pakistan is bound to worry because such
projects can be used to store extra water, manipulate the flow of water into Pakistan and divert the river flow.

Samjhaota Express Bombing —The Samjhauta Express was an international train that ran from New Delhi, India to Lahore, Pakistan, and
was one of two trains to cross the India-Pakistan border. At least 68 people were killed, mostly Pakistani civilians but also some Indian security
personnel and civilians when blasts took place in the train. Prasad Shrikant Purohit, an Indian army officer and leader of a shadowy Hindu
fundamentalist group, was later identified and investigated as a key suspect responsible for the bombing. The attack was a turning point in Indo-
Pakistani relations, and one of the many terrorist incidents that have plagued relations between the two.

Mumbai Attacks —The 2008 Mumbai attacks by ten terrorists killed over 173 and wounded 308. The sole surviving gunman Ajmal Kasab who
was arrested during the attacks was blamed to be a Pakistani national. In May 2010, an Indian court convicted him on four counts of murder,
waging war against India, conspiracy and terrorism offences, and sentenced him to death. India blamed the Lashkar-e-Taiba, for planning and
executing the attacks. Islamabad resisted the claims and demanded evidence. India provided evidence in the form of interrogations, weapons,
candy wrappers, Pakistani brand milk packets, and telephone sets. Pakistan rejected the evidence because of lack of clarity.

Indian Interference in Balochistan/Karachi —India has repeatedly been interfering in the internal affairs of Pakistan, It has tried to fuel
insurgency in Karachi and in Balochistan. The statements of senior leaders of MQM regarding its relations with RAW, Indian secret agency,
surfaced in March 2016 when Mustafa Kamal made new party. 8. on March 24, 2016 news surfaced that security forces have arrested an Indian
spy Similarly, from Balochistan province. Balochistan Home Minister Sarfaraz Bugti confirmed that the Indian officer was arrested three days
ago. The Indian naval officer of the rank of commander was reportedly working for Research and Analysis Wing and was identified as
Commander Kulbhushan Yadav.

Economic Relations
Security relations affect economic relations between both countries. Due to widesnree alienation trade links are absent. Non-tariff barriers are
aggravating the deteriorated econom situation. In 1948-49, 56% of Pakistan's exports were sent to India. For the next several vears period of
tense political relations - India was Pakistan's largest trading partner. Between 1947 and 1965, the two countries entered into 14 bilateral
agreements related to trade facilitation la 1965, the year Pakistan and India went to war over Kashmir; nine branches of six Indian banke were
operating in Pakistan. And in 1972, following another subcontinental war the previous vear the two sides concluded an agreement that produced
a resumption of limited trade. At the same time, trade ties have often become a casualty of the decades-old mistrust and enmity hampering
Pakistan-India political relations. The 1965 and 1971 wars "severely disrupted" cross border drade,, and it "never really recovered." In November
2011, the government of Pakistan announced its decision to grant Most Favoured Nation (MFN) status to India. This means that India, in
principle, will enjoy lower tariffs and fewer trade barriers in its economic relationship with Pakistan. The decision, which followed New Delhi's
extension of MFN status to Pakistan in 1996, underscores Islamabad's willingness to deepen commercial ties with its long-time nemesis. The
potential for greater trade between the two is considerable. Current trade volume is less than $3 billion, but some experts estimate that a
normalized trade regime could eventually send the figure soaring to $37.5 billion. (World Bank Report)

Indo-Pak Events In 2016-19

Pathankot Incident —The year 2016 could go down as one of the worst for Indo-Pak ties as terror attacks on both countries by different
groups stalled the peace process and India's surgical strikes drama raised fears of a large-scale conflict. The year began on a sordid note when
on January 2, mujahideen stormed the Pathankot airbase in Punjab and killed seven security personnel.

Burhan Wani Shahadat —The relations had not fully recovered from the blow when Hizbul Mujahideen commander Burhan Wani was
martyard in an encounter with Indian security forces in Kashmir in July 2016, setting in motion a chain of events which drove Pakistan and India
in opposite directions.

Diplomatic Row —A major diplomatic row erupted between the two countries at the end of October 2016 When India declared a Pakistan
High Commission staffer as persona non-grata for espionage activities after he was blamed by Delhi Police with sensitive defence documents
includie deployment details of BSF along the Indo-Pak border. Pakistan also declared an Indian High Commission official who was involved in
subversive activitis inside Pakistan as persona non-grata and asked him to leave the country withn 48 hours. In a further blow to Indo-Pak ties,
Pakistan pulled out six officials at its High Commission in November 2016. The six Pakistani officials, including four senior diplomats, named for
spying by a High Commission staffer, who was arrested and expelled for espionage, left India for home as bilateral ties continued to slide.

Pulwama Attack 2019 —On 14 February 2019, a convoy of vehicles carrying security personnel on the Jammu Srinagar National Highway was
attacked by a vehicle-borne suicide bomber at Lethpora in the Pulwama district, Jammu and Kashmir, occupied by India. The attack resulted in
2
the deaths of 49 Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) personnel and the attacker. The responsibility for the attack was allegedly claimed by
Islamist militant group Jaish-e-Mohammed. The attacker was Adil Ahmad Dar, a local from Pulwama district, and an allegedly member of Jaish-e-
Mohammed. India blamed Pakistan for the attack. Pakistan condemned the attack and denied any connection to it.

ICJ's Findings on Yadhav Case (July 2019)—The International Court of Justice (ICJ) announced its verdict on the KulbhushanYadhav case,
ruling that Jadhav be allowed consular access immediately and asking Pakistan to ensure "effective review and reconsideration of his conviction
and sentences". The ICJ rejected all other remedies sought by India, which included:
 Restricting Pakistan from executing the sentence.
 Securing Jadhav's release and ordering his return to India.
 The annulment of the military court decision convicting Yadhav.

Measures
Kashmir First —In order to create better relations it is necessary to learn lessons from the past. Kashmir issue has always been a centre point
of the talks. Unless India softens its stance on Kashmir peace will be a distant dream in the region. India must desist itself from human rights'
violations and must admit the basic right of self-determination of the people of Kashmir.

Solving The Easy Issues First —For Pakistan, to have breakthrough in its relations with India it is necessary to start tackling the easy issues
first and then move on to the troubled waters later on. Kashmir issue can be handled or addressed according to the 2006 Draft Formula,
prepared by Musharraf's government. That will be an easy thing for both civilian and military sides to agree to. The Indian side was also willing to
accept it.
But due to lack of political strength + change of government in Pakistan, the Formula went into oblivion. But now seems to be the time that both
countries can move on those lines. Narendra Modi has a strong political grip over there; healso has some grand objectives which cannot be
realized unless there is peace with Pakistan. Such opportunities don't come along the way every day; it is now for the leadership how to capitalize
on them.

Us' Mediation Offer Over Kashmir —US President Donald Trump offered that he would like to mediate the vexed Kashmir conflict has set
the stage for a high profile diplomatic tug-of-war between India and Pakistan involving the world's sole superpower. While Trump's keenness to
play the mediator in the frozen conflict between the two nuclear-armed nations has enthused many, India appears less keen. There are historical
reasons for India's reluctance to third-party intervention on Kashmir, which we will dwell upon later.

Certain Preconditions
 Tangible, visible progress on the peaceful resolution of core disputes and issues, i.e. Kashmir, Siachin, Sir Creek, water sharing.
 Purposeful cooperationwith measurable results to reduce terrorism/subversion allegedly secretly supported by agencies of one country against the other
country.
 Growth in trade, cross-border investment, grant of Most Favored Nation (MEN) status by both countries and beneficial consequences for the two countries.
 Resumption and sustained contacts in sports by the exchange of teams, competitors directly visiting the other country instead of meeting in a third
country.
 Growth in mass travel across borders, ease in obtaining visas, ending of police reporting requirements for visitors, etc.
 The problems of terrorism and non-state actors need to be addressed jointly through institutionalized mechanisms.
 India and Pakistan need to understand each other's legitimate interests in Afghanistan and pursue them without coming into conflict with each other.
 Positive changes in how both news media and entertainment media report_to audiences in their own country about the other country.
Systematization, institutionalization of regular interaction through the formation of a NEW Indo-Pakistan Media Forum between:

 Media proprietors/chairpersons/CEOS  Reporters of both countries

 Content controllers of electronic media  Presenters, anchors, columnists, Editors

How To Achieve the Desired Outcomes?

Lahore MoU —The 1999 Lahore Memorandum of Understanding was the first Indo-Pakistani effort to come to grips with their mutual
problems and to explore measures to reduce tensions in a nuclearized South Asia. Though the process was interrupted by the Kargil episode, the
proposed confidence-building measures (CBMS) were taken up when the composite dialogue resumed in 2004, resulting in some significant
bilateral agreements. It appears, however, that the list of CBMS agreed to at Lahore has been exhausted and currently there seems to be no
discernible forward movement in the bilateral talks. It is important that negotiators think of new and innovative CBMS and establish an oversight
and review mechanism to monitor the performance of past agreements, to give some impetus to the peace process.

Continuity of the Dialogue Process —The efforts at building confidence and trust and seeking resolution of disputes can only bear fruit if
the process is sustained and remains uninterrupted. On many occasions in the recent past, certain groups and individuals opposed to
reconciliation between India and Pakistan have succeeded in disrupting the peace efforts. The two countries will have to resist these
disruptiveforces by evolving institutional mechanisms to deal with them. Past efforts were half-hearted and denended to a large extent on the
character and attitudes of the individuals representing the two countries in the joint counter-terrorism mechanism.
3
Afghanistan —As the conflict in Afghanistan winds down, India and Pakistan will need to discuss their respective legitimate interests in that
country. India will need to convince Pakistan that its interest in Afghanistan is not aimed at opening up a new front in the west or promote
destabilization in the two Pakistani provinces bordering Afghanistan. For its part, Pakistan will peed to reassure India that it respects the
legitimate and sovereign rights of India and Afghanistan to develop their bilateral relations. Due to its geographical position, Pakistan can either
facilitate or block the trade between India + Afghanistan passing through its territory, but that will be entirely dependent on the state of India-
Pakistan relations.

Cultural Exchanges —Regular exchanges between the people of the two countries can create better understanding and goodwill. It is
sometimes amazing to find how little their people know about each other's Countries and their socio-cultural environments, despite the often-
repeated claims of having lived side-by-side for a thousand years. Recent initiatives, such as the frequent discussions and exchanges of visits
between parliamentarians and politicians from both the federal and regional parliaments, are moves in the right direction and need to be
sustained. The agreement for a liberalized visa regime is also a positive development, if implemented in a positive spirit.

Trade —Neither trade, economic cooperation nor socio-cultural harmonies can yield any dividends in the absence of peace and stability. India
and Pakistan, therefore, need to remove the causes of the tensions underpinning their relations. India will have to move away from offensive
and provocative military doctrines and Pakistan, which has responded by lowering its nuclear threshold, would need to pull back to a more
stable, and less crisis-prone, nuclear posture.

Role Of International Community

The international community can continue to encourage and facilitate an uninterrupted peace dialogue between India and Pakistan. India has
always been scornful of foreign mediation between them and prefers bilateral engagement, where it can bring its greater weight to bear.
This continues despite the fact that the US involvement during the Kargil crisis went entirely in India's favour. Pakistan, which has in the past
sought external balancing and tried to invoke international mediation in its disputes with India, may well be wary of outside intervention after its
Kargil experience. Nevertheless, friendly nudging by countries enjoying good relations with both India and Pakistan should be wetcome.
On the other hand, however, Australia's decision to sell uranium to India is seen in Pakistan as being detrimental to its national security interests;
just as the US-India nuclear deal was viewed as discriminatory and harmful to its security. The recent 'Australia in the Asian Century' White Paper
did not even mention Pakistan and would not have been well received there. These developments have, to a large extent, curtailed Australia's
ability to play the role ofa facilitator in the India-Pakistan peace process. Its growing politico-economic relations with India, however, do place it in
a position to encourage India to remain engaged in the composite dialogue with Pakistan.

1. Former Foreign Minister Khurshid Mahmood Kasuri said long-lasting peace between Pakistan and India is
possible through people-to-people contact. (13 January)
2. India annouced the withdrawl of MFN status for Pakistan. (15 February)
3. The official broadcaster for the PSL in India, D-Sport, has suspended the broadcast of the T20 comptetion in
the wake of the recent deadly attack targeting ISFs in IoK’s Pulwama area. (17 February)
4. IAF vioalted LoC, following which, PAF immediately scrambled and indian aircraft went back. (26 February)
5. The announcement by PM Imran Khan to release teh captive Indian pilot as a goodwill esture has widely been
welcomed by almost all the political parties. (1 March)

Kashmir Issue—"More than anything else, in the aftermath of independence, it was the Kashmir dispute which was to create special bitterness
in bilateral relations between Pakistan an India, In fact, this has remained crux of difficulties between two countries. It seems that bot sides view
it not merely as a territorial dispute or an issue of right of Kashmiri people to sel. determination but there have been deep underlying ideological
antagonisms and centuries- old prejudices and misgivings.*** This dispute dates back to partition of British Indian Empire, in August 1947, into
two independent states, Pakistan and India. At that time, there were also around 565 princely states, large and small, which were under British
suzerainty but were not directly ruled by British. Most of these states wanted to join either India or Pakistan. But Radcliff Award also provided an
excess of Jammu Katwa road, which was only link between Gurdaspur and Batala, was given to India. In this way, this excess allowed India a safe
passage to Kashmir, which was great unjust on behalf of Radcliff. At core of Indian position on Kashmir is New Delhi's claim that decision of
Maharaja Hari Singh to accede to Indian Union, regardless of its circumstances, is "final and legal and it cannot be disputed." If there is any
"unfinished" business of partition, it is requirement that Pakistan relinquish control of that part of Jammu and Kashmir that it illegally occupies.
India further maintains that UN Resolutions calling for people will to be ascertained are no longer tenable because Pakistan has not fulfilled
precondition of withdrawal from territory it occupied through aggression. New Delhi further maintains that after Pakistan's attempts to alter
status quo, by force, of war in 1965, Islamabad has forfeited the right to invoke UN Resolutions. The will of the people does not need to be
ascertained only through a plebiscite. The problem of. Kashmir, according to India, is one of terrorism sponsored by Pakistan. The targets are
4
Muslims in Kashmir, belying Pakistan's argument that it is concerned about Muslims welfare in Kashmir. S.M. Amin describes in his book
"Pakistan's Forcign Policy, "India's efforts immediately after independence to undo Pakistan, particularly its attempt to seize Kashmir, were main
causes fcr the bitterness and sense of insecurity which gripped the Pakistani policy-makers from very outset. This perception was

Exploring Pakistan |371 to have a profound influence on the formulation of their defence and foreign policies." Historically, Government of
Pakistan has maintained that Jammu & Kashmir has been disputed territory. The state's accession to India in October 1947 was provisional and
executed under coercive pressure of Indian military presence. Disputed status of Jammu & Kashmir is acknowledged in UN Security Council
resolutions of August 13, 1948 and January 5, 1949, to which both Pakistan and India agreed. These resolutions remain fully in force today and
cannot be unilaterally disregarded by either party. After Indian repealing of article 370. the controversial position of Kashmir has also put both
the countries on the path of warfare if they would not decide with strong determined efforts in future.

Race for Nuclear Weapons—Pakistan's suspicions of Indian intentions were further aroused by India's entry into he nuclear arena. India's
explosion of a nuclear device in 1974 persuaded Pakistan to nitiate its own nuclear program. The issue has subsequently influenced the direction
of Pakistan's relations with the United States and China. In 1987, Zia-Ul-Haq declared that Pakistan was capable of developing nuclear weapons
(but has chosen not to do). In 1990s India and Pakistan's relations were strained because of nuclear policy. In May 1998, India and Pakistan
conducted a series of nuclear tests. Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee proudly proclaimed that India has become the sixth nuclear weapon
state and should be treated as such by other five (The Nation, 1998). This statement indicated that India whenever gets a chance would use her
nuclear capability against her enemy states in name of security. Pakistan's relations with China on this issue, however, have been influenced by
both countries' suspicions of India. In 1991 China called on India to accept Pakistan's proposal of a nuclear-free weapons zone in South Asia. In
the same year, Pakistan and China signed a nuclear cooperation treaty reportedly intended for peaceful purposes. This agreement included
provision by.China of a nuclear power plant to Pakistan. Sajjad Hyder, a well-known diplomat commented about the possession of nuclear
arsenals in this way, "In the context of Pakistan's economic and strategic security, the nuclear issue holds an unrivalled place. I make bold tó
state that Pakistan has no option but to develop its nuclear energy cycle, which more than any other single factor will give it the economic and
strategic security that it has sought since 1947."341 also put both countries to use the option of nuclear weapons in case of any future conflict,
which would be a great disastrous for the people of both countries. After repealing of article 370 of Kashmir by India

Siachen Glacier—Siachen Glacier is situated near north-eastern tip of Baltistan and forms part of Gilgit Agency. Strategically, it lies to north of
terminus of Line of Control (NJ 9842) which was also terminus of Cease Fire Line of 1949 and of the Line of Control, as formalized in the Simla
agreement in 1972. Since 1947 this area has been controlled and administered by Pakistan as part of its Northern Areas. Pakistan maintains that
the area west of point NJ 9842 of the LOC and the Karakoram Pass has always been under Pakistan's control as Pakistan had been granting
permission to foreign mountaineering expeditions visiting area. However because of its inaccessibility, it had remained undemarcated and
unoccupied until India moved in its troops in April 1984 in clear violation of Simla agreement that requires both sides not to unilaterally alter the
situation. in order to forestall further incursions by Indians, Pakistani troops took up positions in area. The issue was further discussed between
Pakistani and Indian leaders in December 1985 and Pakistan proposed that two

Exploring Pakistan |372 sides should demarcate line through bilateral negotiations and that troops be withdrawn from area pending this
delineation. The Indian Prime Minister, while agreeing to the proposed delineation, suggested that line be drawn north-wards but made no
comment on proposal with regard to withdrawal of troops from the Glacier. At November 1998, Indian side stated that situation since 1989 had
completely changed and the two sides should now address the issue in light of new ground realities. They proposed a comprehensive cease-fire
in Siachen based on a freeze on present positions but refused to talk about re-deployment. Their purpose obviously was to gain time for
consolidation, including improvement of their tenuous communication links while minimizing their losses as a result of cease-fire. Responding to
Indian cease-fire proposal, Pakistan stressed that monitoring of cease-fire would require a neutral party such as UNMOGIP. Pakistan side also
stressed that a cease-fire would effectively freeze situation with all its attendant problems such as continued confrontational deployment of
forces, loss of life due to severe weather conditions and continued expenditure on maintaining troops Siachen. Accordingly, Pakistan refused to
accept cease-fire proposal. It reiterated its position that India's occupation of Siachen was illegal and a violation of Simla Agreement. The 1989
Defence Secretaries agreement called for withdrawal and re-deployment of forces to positions on ground 'so as to conform to Simla Agreement'.
During a press.conference after talks, Indian DGMO asserted that whole of Siachen was an integral part of India and there was no question of
any Indian withdrawal from area.

Line of Control Line of Control—LoC separates two opposing armies of Pakistan and India in disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir. It
was preceded by cease-fire line established on basis of the Karachi agreement of 27 July 1949 that was re-established after war of 1965 The
cease-fire line resulting from war of 1971 was thereafter called LoC, making minor adjustments taking into account ground positions, and was
confirmed by Simla Agreement of 2 July 1972. Pakistan has fully respected LoC and fulfilled its commitments under Simla Agreement that states
that neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally. However, India violated LoC in 1972, by occupying Chorbat La area, establishing five posts on
Pakistan controlled side of LoC upto a depth of 3 kilometres. In 1984, India occupied Siachen glacier in violation of Simla Agreement, usurping an
area of 2500 sq. kms. In June 1989, India agreed to re-deploy troops from Siachen but renounced the agreement in a matter of hours. In 1988,
India took over Qamar Sector, initially establishing 3 posts which have now been increased to 12 posts and covers an area of 33 sq. kms. Since
1996, Indian troops have used long range and heavy artillery to cut off Neelum Valley from rest of Azad Kashmir. Such interdiction still continues.

5
In May 1999, an attempt by Indian forces to occupy high peaks across LoC in Shyok Şector was repulsed by Pakistan. During recent escalation of
tension in Kashmir, Indian army repeatedly violated LoC by carrying out heavy artillery shelling across LoC resulting in loss of lives of innocent
civilians. The Indian air force also violated LoC on a number of occasions resulting in shooting down of two of their planes in Kargil sector.

Extremist Elements—The major irritant in Indo-Pakistan relationship is presence of extremist elements and tendencies existing on both sides
of decision makers. Due to loss of their selfish interests, these elements do not want making cordial relations between both states which they
gain as result of spreading propaganda against efforts of friendship and peaceful co-existence. Sometimes these elements are either involved in
Bombay attacks or Bomb blasts in Pakistan. It is necessary to sideline these elements from dialogue of peace and harmony.

Disputed Indian Water Plans

Indian Threat & Pakistan’s Search for Security

Acceptance of People's Republic of China: In 1950, Pakistan recognized new People's Rep Kashm conflict and refugee
settlement etc their interaction was limited. S.M. Amin gives an economic logic. "Pakistan was faced with a major
economic problem in 1949 when India has suddenly stopped trading with Pakistan since it had not followed India's
example in devaluating its currency. Pakistan was, therefore, desperate to find an alternative market for selling its raw
jute and cotton as also to locate a supply source for coal. Trade with China thus fitted in very admirably with this
situation For these reasons, Pakistan was among first nations to recognize Communist China and establish relations with
it 1i. Joining of SEATO and CENTO: Owing to Indian threat, which had not really accepted partition, Pakistan was obliged
to join Western Pacts in 1954 with SEATO ostensibly directed against China However, China accepted Pakistan's
response that this was purely Tor national security The similarity of their worldview, was established when two
cooperated at Bandung Conference in 1955 Ti. Sino-Indian Tussle & Chinese Changing Stance of Kashmir: The border
issue between India and China isolated Chinese internationally After Sino-Soviet 1959 rift, India felt encouraged taking
advantage and adopted a Forward Policy that led to a border conflict in late 1962 During Sino-India border conflict of
1962, Pakistan had to suffer and withstand enormous pressure mounted by our Western allies to support India and
condemn China US and UK rushed military aid to China without consulting their ally Pakistan, which now realized need
to improve relations with China A well-known scholar, S.M. Burke describes, Chinese understanding about Kashmir like
this, "During the discussion of Sino-Indian boundary by Indian and Chinese officials in 1960, China refused to discuss the
boundary west of Karakoram Pass between China's Sinkiang and Kashmir because of present actual situation in Kashmir
It was at this juncture that India, for first time, woke up to reality that China had declined to recognize accessSion of
Kashmir to India The deterioration in Sino-Indian relationshat culminated in the 1962 border war provided new
opportunities for Pakistan's relations with China The two countries reached agreement on the border between them,
and a road was built linking China's Xinjiang-Uygur "autonomous Region with the Northern Areas of Pakistan." Pakistan-
China friendship got off to a very good start as China conceded an area of over 750 square miles on its side of the
Karakoram watershed, which was used seasonally by pastoral nomads in the Hunza area This fact contradicts Indian
allegations that Pakistan conceded a large area to the Chinese. "In anuary 1963, Pakistan and China signed a trade
agreement followed a few months later by an agreement on air services. In fact, relations between Pakistan and China
kept improving. to such an extent that, in July 1963, Foreign Minister Bhutto told Parliament that, in case of an India
6
attack Pakistan wauld not be alone as such an Indian attack would involve the ferritorial integrity and security of the
largest state in Asia. Iv. Failure of Operation Gibralter& Wars of 1965 & 1971: "Neither lIndia nor Pakistan had, planned
the 1965 War in fact, the two countries got drawn into this war through a series of It is a tragedy of their short history as
independent states that their mutual of China. As Pakistan was preoccupied by internal challenges in first few years like
Shahi, Agha, p.238 M Amin, Shahid, Pakistan's Foreign Policy (Oxford University Press. 2004).p 157-158 Ahmed, Javeed,
Pakistan's Political, Economic & Diplomatic Dynamics, p152 "Burke, S M. Pakistan's Foreign Policy, p 218 M Amin,
Shahid. Pakistan's Foreign Policy (Oxford University Press, 2004),p.160