Respected Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modiji,
I write this open letter to you with humility and great respect. If you care to read it, I would be deeply grateful. My purpose is simple: to understand from you what our Pakistan policy is, and to know whether in your view it is serving the goal of protecting and enhancing our national interest. Let me begin by congratulating you on your resolve, soon after becoming Prime Minister in May 2014, to modify your abrasive campaign rhetoric with regard to Pakistan. During the parliamentary election campaign you had aggressively lambasted the United Progressive Alliance government for being “soft” on Pakistan. You had said that if you came to power you would reverse such a policy. Terrorism and talks can never go together. For every one head that the Pakistan Army had beheaded you would bring back 10.
In the light of such incendiary comments made publicly and repeatedly, it was indeed brave of you to invite Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, along with other Saarc leaders, for your oath taking ceremony. You rightly understood that what is said during an election campaign should not be taken seriously afterwards. Showing admirable amnesia, you decided that you too, like the UPA government, would endeavour to engage with Pakistan, irrespective of the bombs and bullets coming from across the border, and without thought of first bringing the perpetrators of the Mumbai attacks to book.
Your jhappi with Sharif saheb in the forecourt of the Rashtrapati Bhavan was full of warmth. Perhaps you thought that the closeness of this embrace would be a game changer. Alas, soon enough you realised that in the real world things happen differently. Terror attacks sponsored by Pakistan continued unabated and ceasefire violations increased in frequency. Your response to these provocations was frankly surprising. Suddenly your government announced that the stalled foreign secretary-level talks would resume even though you were aware that these talks had been put in abeyance two years ago precisely because of the continued ceasefire violations by Pakistan.
Pakistan must have been surprised too by this level of magnanimity, especially from a man who in his electoral speeches had sworn to do just the opposite. Even as the nation struggled to understand the thinking behind this move, the script, if any, went awry again. On the eve of beginning of the announced talks, a great issue was made about the meeting of Hurriyat leaders with the Pakistani high commissioner. But even during the Vajpayee years such meetings had taken place; many people thought — not unreasonably — that if they had been countenanced in the past, why not now, especially since what was at stake was the recommencement of the long-stalled foreign secretary-level talks. The talks were cancelled and we were back to square one.
Subsequently, our strategy towards Pakistan has lurched between a series of “jhappies” and “kattis”. Pakistan’s policy towards us has shown a remarkable consistency: explosive aggression followed by tactical appeasement. Only we have remained confused about how to respond to either. The nation has watched keenly these series of flip-flops. In June 2015, our respected external affairs minister Sushma Swarajji said boldly that there was no question of talks with Pakistan until Mumbai attack mastermind Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi was brought to book. The very next month, however, you were meeting with Mr Sharif on the sidelines of the Ufa summit.
The Ufa declaration had some ambiguous commitment from Pakistan to take action against the Mumbai accused, but there was no visible follow-up, even as the national security adviser-level talks were cancelled in August, only to be resumed in secrecy in the scenic surroundings of Bangkok without the nation coming to know either the agenda or the outcome.
Your decision to air dash from Kabul to Lahore in December 2015 to greet Mr Sharif on his birthday was a dramatic move. Nitish Kumar broke from most Opposition parties by welcoming the move. But it was our expectation that this bold overture was part of a carefully planned strategic framework. If there was one, it remained a mystery. Soon after your renewed embrace with Mr Sharif, Pathankot was attacked. Seven of our brave soldiers lost their lives. Such a counter-attack by the deep state in Pakistan was expected, but our security preparedness was found wanting.
What happened next has left us completely confounded. A team from Pakistan, including a high-level Inter-Services Intelligence representative, was invited by us as part of a so-called joint investigation team (JIT) to inspect the sensitive Pathankot airbase to find proof of Pakistan’s culpability in the terrorist attack! Really,
Mr Modi? Did we not know who was behind the attack? Did we expect the Pakistani team to go back and announce their country’s culpability in the attack? Were we not aware of the complete lack of cooperation by Pakistan in taking action against the culprits of the Mumbai attacks, in spite of the voluminous dossiers of hard evidence submitted by us?
Why, Sir, then this pathetic strategic innocence in dealing with Pakistan? As expected, the Pakistani JIT went back to Islamabad and absolved Pakistan of any culpability. Maulana Masood Azhar, the perpetrator of the attack, has neither been interrogated nor arrested. In spite of the cordial swing on a jhoola you had with President Xi Jinping along the banks of the Sabarmati, China has stymied our attempts to put Azhar on the United Nations list of proscribed terrorists. Nor has your good friend Barack Obama exercised any pressure on Pakistan to desist from its terrorist activities.
Meanwhile, Pakistan is telling the world that it is fully cooperating with India on terrorism and India itself will vouch for it! Notwithstanding some feeble noises to the contrary, the Pakistan high commissioner in Delhi has bluntly said that the comprehensive bilateral dialogue has been “suspended”, and that the JIT exercise is not reciprocal. With great respect Sir, the nation wants to know what exactly is going on. I am sure you have the answers and I look forward to hearing from you.
With deep regards as always, Yours Sincerely, Pavan K. Varma
