The first fallout of the Pathankot attack by Pakistani terrorists on January 2 is that the foreign secretary talks, to have been held in Islamabad today as part of the diplomatic process unfurled through Prime Minister Narendra Modi only a few weeks ago, will not be taking place. Islamabad announced this officially on Thursday. There was much suspense on whether the diplomatic bus would roll on. This depended crucially on Pakistan taking significant action against those responsible for the attacks.
This was to have been the start of the resumption of the comprehensive bilateral talks between the two countries. Prime Minister Sharif’s government gave the impression that it seriously wished to comply with the Indian demand and keep the dialogue process on track, and the Modi government appeared to badly want that too. Prime Minister Modi has invested much political capital in seeking to re-engage Pakistan. Eventually this did not happen as Pakistan’s security establishment wasn’t on board.
A prominent Pakistan TV station gave out on Wednesday that Jaish-e-Mohammed chief Maulana Masood Azhar had been taken into preventive custody since India was pointing fingers at JeM and had offered Pakistan evidence by way of telephone numbers and conversation intercepts.
But Pakistan said these numbers were not registered in Pakistan. It was apparent that this was an indirect way of saying Pakistanis were not involved in the Pathankot outrage. Eventually, while announcing that the foreign secretary talks wouldn’t be running on course, the Pakistan foreign ministry officially scotched the impression that the Jaish leader had been detained. Indeed, Masood Azhar issued an anti-India diatribe on Thursday, which may well have been at the behest of the ISI.
The vitriolic statement also appeared to target Mr Sharif for trying to be friendly to India. The Pakistan foreign office said the two governments were in touch about re-scheduling the foreign secretary talks and the Indian side appeared to confirm this. India on Thursday also welcomed Pakistan’s proposal to send an investigation team to India.
Domestically, Mr Modi’s Hindutva constituency was turning restive after Pathankot, and national security adviser A.K. Doval, who reports to the Prime Minister, came under hardly concealed criticism from this section. Nevertheless, the Prime Minister wanting that Pakistan move earnestly against those responsible for the Pathankot attack is valid and should not be seen as a precondition for the diplomatic chapter to re-open.
