thumbnail_15027737723_cc0592cdb1_o

News reports about backdoor contacts between Pakistan and India have recently emerged and the flexibility in statements by the government officials of the two states also suggest the same.

According to media,United Arab Emirates (UAE) is playing a leading role to bring the two nuclear-armed states- India and Pakistan to the negotiation table.The news was also confirmed by Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi. However, the main power behind the curtain is believed to be the United States of America.

Prime Minister Imran Khan, at a recent rally in Kashmir said that “for the sake of peace in South Asia, we should build-up cordial relations and India should make a possible move by retracting her actions leading up to the revocation of Article 370/35A.” Similarly, during the Islamabad Security Dialogue, Army Chief General Bajwa called for better Pakistan-India relations and said that both countries should “bury the past and move forward”. Reciprocally, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi sent warm wishes to PM Imran Khan for his recovery from COVID-19. With this positivity in the air, hopes for better peace in the region have increased.

Kashmir is the most important issue between the two states but apart from that, there are multiple bilateral issues including Siachen, Indian violations of the Indus Waters Treaty, Sir Creek etc. However, India has always in the past tried to steer the negotiations away from these core issues and rather focus on people-to-people contact, resumption of Afghan transit trade, bilateral trade or have made negotiations conditional to Pakistan’s compliance to Indian demands of addressing terrorism.

One of the possible reasons behind the current flexibility of the Modi-led BJP government in terms of negotiations is to regain the soft image of India that has been jeopardized by its regional aggressive policies,particularly towards Pakistan and the people of Kashmir. The abrogation of Article 370 and the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019have unveiled the true face of Indian leadership. Furthermore, Prime Minister Imran Khan’s efforts to highlight Indian atrocities in Kashmir and for the right of self-determination of the people of IIOJ&K at the regional and global level have further struck a blow to the soft image of India and shown its cruel ugly face to the world community.

The second possible reason can be attributed to the change in United States’administration. The new Biden administration does not want any kind of Pakistan-India hostility. This is because US considers India as a key player in its “Indo-Pacific” strategy that focuses on the containment of China and reducing its influence in the region. Moreover, the US believes that the two-front confrontation strategy of India would be badly damaging for the country or can even lead to its dismemberment as it does not possess the power and capability to conduct a two-front war. India’s unpreparedness was slammed in the last surgical strikes conducted by the Indian Air Force (IAF) as they not only missed the targets, on thevery next day, two of its jets were downed by the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) and a pilot was captured. Considering these ground realities, the United States is also pressurizing India to reduce tension with Pakistan and focus on China.

For the abovestated reasons, India is under pressure both domestically andinternationally to revisit her approach towards Pakistan and to halt human rights violations in Jammu and Kashmir. Indians would use these negotiations as a card to derail the negotiation process by taking up issues ofleast importance, diverting attention from the key ones and convincing the international community that they werecommitted to the process. Therefore, Pakistan at this stage should take the lead by raising core issues on the negotiation table and remaining firm on them. Furthermore, the prime focus shouldremain on Kashmir.If this does not happen, then it will alienate the Kashmiri people by making them think that Kashmir is of secondary importance for Pakistan. Besides, other important issues like water, Siachen, and Sir Creek should be resolved and issues like Afghan transit trade, bilateral trade, and people-to-peoplecan be discussed as additional points.

In order to achieve peace in South Asia, it is important that there is peace between these two countries. Pakistan-India relations are complex and there are long-standing issues between the two that need to be resolved in order to normalize ties.However, Pakistan should be cautious this time as the results of all past engagements suggest that India has always tried to hijack the negotiations and blamed Pakistan for their failure on one pretext or another. Pakistan needs to play her cards right and must not let this chapter turn into another diplomatic stunt by India forregional / international marketing.

Zuhaib Anwar is a researcher at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS) and can be reached at [email protected]. The article was first published in Pakistan Observer. He can be reached at [email protected]


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The Cover-up: IAF Narrative of the May 2025 Air Battle

Even after one year since the India-Pakistan May war of 2025, the Indian discourse regarding Operation Sindoor remains uncertain under its pretence of restraint. The Pahalgam attack on 22 April, which killed 26 people, triggered an escalatory spiral. New Delhi quickly accused Pakistan-linked elements, while Islamabad refuted the allegation and demanded an independent investigation. On 7 May, India launched attacks deep inside Pakistan under what it later termed as Operation Sindoor. The political motive was intended to turn the crisis into coercive signalling by shifting the blame onto the enemy and projecting a sense of military superiority.
This episode, however, began to fray immediately as war seldom follows the intended script. Within minutes PAF shot down 7 IAF aircraft including 4 Rafales. On 8 May, Reuters reported that at least two Indian aircraft were shot down by a Pakistani J-10C, while the local government sources reported other aircraft crashes in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir

Read More »

Why the IAF’s Post-Sindoor Spending Surge is a Sign of Panic

After Operation Sindoor, India is spending billions of dollars on new weapons. This is being taken by many people as an indication of military prowess. It is not. This rush to procure weapons is in fact an acknowledgement that the Air Force in India had failed to do what it was meant to do. The costly jets and missiles that India had purchased over the years failed to yield the promised results.

Sindoor was soon followed by India in sealing the gaps which the operation had exposed. It was reported that Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to speed up its purchases of more than 7 billion USD. This will involve other Rafale fighter jets with India already ordering 26 more Rafales to the Navy in 2024 at an estimated cost of about 3.9 billion USD. India is also seeking long-range standoff missiles, Israeli loitering munitions and increased drone capabilities. Special financial powers of the Indian military were activated to issue emergency procurement orders. The magnitude and rate of these purchases speak volumes.

Indian media and defence analysts have over the years considered the Rafale as a game changer. When India purchased 36 Rafales aircrafts at an approximate cost of 8.7 billion USD, analysts vowed that the aircraft would provide India with air superiority over Pakistan. Operation Sindoor disproved all those allegations. Indian aircraft did not even fly in Pakistani airspace when the fighting started. India solely depended on standoff weapons that were launched at a safe distance. The air defence system of Pakistan, comprising of the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system and its own fighters, stood its ground.

Read More »

May 2025: Mosaic Warfare and the Myth of Centralised Air Power

Visualise a modern-day Air Force commander sitting in the operations room, miles away from the combat zone, overseeing every friendly and enemy aircraft and all assets involved in the campaign. In a split second, he can task a fighter, reposition a drone, and authorise a strike. In today’s promising technological era, he does not even need an operations room; a laptop on his desktop will suffice. The situation looks promising as it offers efficiency, precision, and control. The term used for such operational control is ‘centralisation’, which has been made possible with advanced networking, integrating space, cyber, surveillance, artificial intelligence, and seamless communication, enabling a single commander to manage an entire campaign from a single node. Centralised command and control, championed by the Western air forces and then adopted by many others, has thus been seen as a pinnacle of modern military power.
The concept of centralisation, enabled by state-of-the-art networking, may seem promising, but it is nothing more than a myth.

Read More »