Husain Haqqani, James Schwemlein and Brian Muzas on what might unfold in the region.
On Thursday, Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan announced that Islamabad will release an Indian Air Force pilot captured after a fighter jet he was flying was shot down in the Pakistani territory. The recent crisis started when, 44 Indian paramilitary force personnel were killed in a suicide attack in Pulwama on February 14, the responsibility for which was claimed by the Pakistan-based terror outfit Jaish-e-Mohammed. In retaliation, Indian fighter jets dropped bombs in Balakot, deep inside Pakistani territory, and Pakistan responded the next day with its own incursion into Indian territory.
The American Bazaar asked three South Asia experts in Washington, DC, about their views on the situation. Here are their responses:
Releasing Indian Air Force pilot him “will definitely ease tensions but not cure them,” and Pakistan has to shut down jihadi factories: Husain Haqqani
(Haqqani is a former Pakistani ambassador to the United States, and author of, most recently, Reimagining Pakistan: Transforming a Dysfunctional Nuclear State.)
“While it is a positive gesture from Pakistan’s end and it will de-escalate the tension, but let us keep it in mind that it will only temporarily diffuse the situation. It will not resolve the problem. We must remember that, in the past two decades, many such occasions have arisen when a terrorist attack has provoked India and subsequently a secondary issue has gained prominence. The downing of the plane and Indian pilot becoming prisoner of war is a consequence of the tension. So, releasing him will definitely ease tensions but not cure them.
“Pakistanis have to swallow a very difficult pill and that is that there is no solution to the problem of Kashmir, in the nature that they want. In the past whatever attempts Pakistan has made towards the Kashmir problem has only led India to become harder and harder and the sufferings for Kashmiris have only increased. Pakistan has to shut down the jihadi factories otherwise it will continually feel a global isolation.”
End game is potentially at hand, but another terror attack in India would deepen the “dispute in profound ways”: James Schwemlein
(Schwemlein is a nonresident scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a former U.S. State Department official.)
“I think the end game of this crisis is potentially at hand, but before I get to that let me note three key features of the current crisis. First, the level of violence engaged in at each stage of the current crisis exceeds previous flashpoints. It is very likely the next crisis will be even worse. Second, we should be less concerned about a directed escalation from either country’s leadership than about an unintentional escalation of the conflict, particularly with two large and nuclear-equipped forces operating in such close proximity to one another. Third, most analysis discounts the role that militants could very well play in escalating the current dispute. Another terrorist attack in India — even small compared to Pulwama — would deepen this dispute in profound ways.
“Prime Minister Imran Khan’s announcement that Pakistan will return the downed pilot, Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman, back to Indian on Friday is the type of overture that could work in the short term to ameliorate tensions. But this crisis will not end in any meaningful or lasting way without agreement on two points: first, to restore predictability along the line of control through a cease fire, perhaps in implementing again the 2003 cease fire agreement brokered by the United States; and second, to impose restrictions on the UN-designated terrorist group Jaesh-e-Mohammed and impose sanctions against its leader, Masood Azhar.
“Implementation of both steps is more likely with outside mediation, which is why it is so concerning that neither the United States nor any other power has stepped into the breach thus far to try to broker a diplomatic solution. The bottom line is there is high potential for a brokered solution, but also risk that the crisis could escalate.”
India and Pakistan should de-escalate the crisis, lest it “be deepened and the likelihood of outright war increase”: Brian Muzas
(Muzas is the Director of the Center for United Nations and Global Governance Studies and Assistant Professor of Diplomacy and International Relations at Seton Hall University.)
“The current crisis between India and Pakistan is the latest development in the ongoing dispute over Kashmir. Responsibility for the February 14th killing of about 40 members of India’s Central Reserve Police Force, the largest of India’s Central Reserve Police forces, was claimed by Jaish-e-Mohammed, a Pakistani jihadist group which was founded in 2000 and which seeks the incorporation of all of Kashmir into Pakistan. In response, the February 26th sorties flown by the Indian Air Force across the line of control in Kashmir were the first such actions since the Indo-Pakistan War in 1971. Reports of downed manned and unmanned aircraft, followed by suspensions of civilian air traffic, indicate the intensity of military operations and the severity of the crisis. In response, the United States, the United Kingdom, and China have called for de-escalation and restraint; Turkey has offered to mediate, and Iran has offered to host peace talks. In the short term, it would seem prudent for India and Pakistan to look favorably upon these appeals and offers lest the crisis be deepened and the likelihood of outright war increase.”
RELATED STORIES:
Neither India, nor Pakistan benefits from going down path of war: Aparna Pande (February 27, 2019)