Indo Pak relation has always never been conducive since partition .How ever keeping in view changing world there is definite need for engagement to find solution for benefit of both countries.My friend Brig Gupta has analyzed the same.

1. Should India talk to Civilian Government in Pakistan
Article by Brig Gupta
Mian Nawaz Sharif heads a duly elected civilian government in Pakistan. It was for the first time
in the history of Pakistan that the power was transferred directly between the elected
governments. The newly elected Pakistani Prime Minister is trying to flex his muscles to regain
total control of the country’s affairs. Despite a hue and cry back home he decided to visit New
Delhi to be present during the swearing in ceremony of the new Indian Prime Minister Narendra
Modi. Some analysts in India considered it as declining influence of the Pakistan Army in the
civil-military equation in Pakistan. The relationship between the military and the elected
government in Pakistan has always been very delicate and tenuous. The United States as a matter
of policy continues to deal with Pakistan’s military leaders despite the fact that the military
handed over power to the civilian government six years ago.
Since the revival of democracy in 2008 the relationship between the military and the elected
governments has been characterised by mutual distrust. Despite the end of military rule, the
Army in Pakistan continues to control the levers of security and foreign policies. The type of
relationship with India is determined solely by the military. According to a popular Pakistani
joke, “all countries have armies, but here, an army has a country.” The Pakistan Army is an
authority unto itself and is unwilling to accept the civilian supremacy. Only deviation from the
past has been to shift its emphasis from ‘overt’ rule to an invisible ‘ruler’. Stephen Cohen in his
book ‘The Future of Pakistan’ states, “The fear of India drives the Pakistan Army and the Army
drives Pakistan.”
After the retirement of General Kayani, Mian Nawaz Sharif appointed his name sake General
Raheel Sharif as the new Chief of Army Staff after superseding two other generals. People
thought that Nawaz Sharif was trying to display his hold over the Army. But soon the relations
between the two Sharifs turned bitter. Nawaz Sharif was keen to extend an olive branch to the
Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) while the army was in favour of military solution to the
problem. Despite repeated failure of the peace talks and growing defiance of TTP, the
government did not yield to the army’s advice. Till one day when General Sharif thumped the
desk and said enough is enough. It is reported that Pakistan’s powerful Army Chief General
Raheel Sharif met the Prime Minister and told him that “ the time for talks with the Taliban was
over.” Pakistan’s Interior Ministry issued a clarification quoting the Interior Minister Chaudhry
Nisar Ali Khan, “ there was no decision to call off the dialogue process, nor was any such
demand made.” Just two days later Pakistan forces launched rare air strikes against terrorists
residing in North Waziristan and announced the launch of Operation Zarb-e-Azb. This put the
military firmly back at the centre-stage of Pakistan’s security policy much against the wishes of
the elected government.
The other bone of contention that has surfaced in the public domain is the trial of former dictator
Pervez Musharraf. The army was reportedly upset about the manner in which Musharraf trial
was being used to demean the image of the army and public humiliation of the former Chief. It
was conveyed candidly by General Sharif to the Prime Minister and the civilian government but
the ministers continued with their ‘army bashing’ rhetoric and did not pay heed to the army’s

2. reservations. The Army Chief then decided to go public and in a hard hitting speech at Ghazi
Base while addressing an elite commando unit (the unit commanded by Musharraf) he warned
the civilian government, “Pakistan Army upholds the sanctity of all institutions and will
resolutely preserve its own dignity and institutional pride.” This was contrary to the civilian
government’s claim of army and the government being “on the same page” on security and
foreign policy issues. Will the army have the last laugh in determining the fate of the former
dictator? The indications are positive and despite the reservations of the Nawaz government the
issue would be settled on the army’s terms.
The population on both sides of the border is emotionally attached to the issue of Indo-Pak
relations. While the moderators pray and hope that with new governments in place in both the
countries things may change for the better and could usher an era of good relations between the
two neighbours, the hard liners continue to stick to their old positions. Pakistan’s India policy is
undoubtedly scripted by the all- powerful Pakistan Army. Christine Fair, author of “Fighting to
the End,” a book on the Pakistani Army’s strategic culture says “The Pakistan military doesn’t
have to run the country to have its preferred policy operationalised.” The Pakistan Army is
obsessed with its anti-India policy and perceives no deviation from it. Repeated attempts by the
civilian governments in Pakistan to resolve issues bilaterally have met stiff resistance from the
army. The army’s strategy is simple, if they can’t restraint their own head of the government then
carry out such an act that forces India to unilaterally withdraw from the negotiations. The
Pakistan army abhors Shimla Agreement and its core policy of ‘bilateralism.’ In order to thwart
the Vajpayee - Nawaz Lahore initiative, Pakistan Army masterminded Kargil conflict. When
Zardari was trying to extend the hand of friendship, the Pak Army rolled the most heinous terror
attack in Mumbai on 26 November 2008.
One wonders that even now when the Pakistan Army has its hands full in North Waziristan and
in internal security duties why does it continue to repeatedly violate the ceasefire on the line of
control (LC) and international border (IB) to which Pakistan interestingly refers as ‘working
boundary’? Apart from the reasons of supporting infiltration and pushing in terrorists, the reason
most people fail to realise is to keep the public and government reminded of the fact that their
enemy No. 1 is India. The very basis of existence of Pakistan army is anti-India policy.
According to Hussain Haqqani, a former ambassador of Pakistan to US, “Pakistan Army still has
to embrace the concept that an army exists primarily to face enemies in the battlefield, but the
decision of who the enemy is should be taken by civilian leaders.”
India had decided to send her foreign secretary to Islamabad on 25th August for talks with her
Pakistani counterpart. Both would have discussed the issues of cross-border terrorism, ceasefire
violations and Pak sponsored proxy war. In matters of foreign policy, Indo-Pak relations in
particular, and security policy the civilian government generally plays second fiddle to the army.
With this background will the talks serve any purpose? Would they have yielded any results
without the nod of Pakistan army. There could be no hope from the government that does not
have the reins in its hands. The talks were doomed and likely to fail.
But it failed before starting because Pak Ambassador thought to interact with Huriat Leaders
night before Foreign Secretary meet and India decided to roll back meeting.
One was expecting that the new government in New Delhi would refrain from the antiquated
Pak policy of the previous governments and come out with an ‘out of the box’ approach. Alas! it

3. has not happened. The wisdom lies in learning quickly from the mistakes and resorting to mid-
course corrections. Time has come for us to learn from the Americans and have direct talks with
military authorities in Pakistan. A detailed plan needs to be formulated. Beginning must be
made with increased military to military contact. The DGMO level meet held recently should
not be a one-time affair but converted into a regular feature. Meetings at different levels over a
period of time should culminate in a one to one meet between the Chiefs of the two armies. As
long as the military continues to be the sole architect of foreign and security policies, talks with
the civilian government would yield no results and no headway can be made. Time has come for
India to actively pursue military diplomacy.