Demand for intervention in dialogue between India and Pak The Excelsior 09 Jun 2025 Maj Gen Harsha Kakar
https://www.dailyexcelsior.com/demand-for-intervention-in-dialogue-between-india-and-pak/
Demand for intervention in dialogue between India and Pak The Excelsior 09 Jun 2025
Recent allocation of funds from multiple global lending bodies, nomination to chair or vice-chair of major UNSC mandated committees as also its paid proxies pushing its planned narrative on Operation Sindoor successfully in global media has given Pakistan the belief that it can request global powers to facilitate dialogue with India. After all, their narrative mentions India as the aggressor who tried but failed.
UNSC designated committees comprise of all 15 members of the UNSC (permanent and non-permanent). All decisions are taken by consensus. There are no special gains or privilege earmarked for chair or vice-chair, other than the nation concerned bragging about the same. However, Pakistan’s presence in the UNSC alone can provide it with an opportunity to push India as a state sponsor of terrorism in Baluchistan. To this end, it has begun terming Baloch freedom fighters and the TTP (Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan) as ‘India sponsored proxies.’
For this to happen, Islamabad would need support of most members of the UNSC, which is unlikely. A single veto can end the process. A simultaneous drawback is that any action it takes in attempting to add members of the TTP or the Taliban leadership, will impact Pak-Afghan ties, which have just commenced stabilizing.
For global powers, Pakistan is a nuclear state which cannot be allowed to fail. For the west, it is the only country, controlled by financial institutions, which can be exploited to keep India from rising as an independent entity, which could, at some stage, challenge their global dominance. Hence, the need to ensure Pakistan’s survival by funding. Added is the fact that what flows from global financial institutions are loans, coming with strict conditions, which have to be repaid. None of them are grants which can be exploited.
Further, these loans cannot be used to repay China’s USD 22 Billion, growing by the day with added interest. Thus, while funds may provide temporary financial relief to the beleaguered country, their misuse by the political and military leadership, as is wont in Pakistan, would only push Pakistan deeper into a financial abyss.
Islamabad has also been buoyed by Trump’s self-announced claims of being behind the ceasefire. The announcement by Trump enabled Pak save internal face by hiding the truth regarding the call of its DGMO to his India counterpart requesting for it. The phone call would have been recorded. It is India’s magnanimity that it does not seek to embarrass Islamabad by releasing it. Since India’s public rejection of Trump’s claim, the US too has refused to mention negotiations under Trump.
Scrapping the Shima Agreement, as mentioned by the PM Shehbaz Sharief, post India holding the IWT (Indus Water Treaty) in abeyance and reiterated by their defence minister recently, is easier said than done. While this may convert the LoC into a ceasefire line, as it existed in 1948, more important is the subject of dialogue between the two states. Pakistan is desperate for global involvement, while India refuses to accede to their requests.
Pakistan had made a similar claim and threat in 2019, post abrogation of article 370, but had no takers. That valley then was far more turbulent and the Indian government compelled to deploy additional forces to push its act through. This time the scenario is vastly different. With terrorism losing ground by the day, numbers seeking merger with Pak are receding.
The UNMOGIP (United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan), deployed since 1948, no longer has a role on the Indian side. No movement is permitted and there is no contact with the government. Its rent-free accommodation no longer exists. It continues to function on the Pak side. Scrapping the UNMOGIP alone impacts Pakistan’s claim that the situation has reverted to 1948.
For third party involvement, both parties have to agree or one side pressured into accepting mediation. Alternatively, war drags on to levels where public as also global support begins to recede. This is the scenario between Russia-Ukraine and Israel-Hamas. The US withdrawing support from Ukraine as also reduced material backing from Europe alongside increased attacks by Russia are pushing Ukraine towards talks. The bravado of Zelensky is receding as the public appears tired of war.
Russia is in no hurry and hence delays demands for talks. Zelensky keeps seeking one-to-one dialogue with Putin, which is ignored. Putin has proved Trump’s threats of stopping the war in days as bluster. Operation Spider Web, launched by Ukraine has resulted in even the US pulling back from pressurizing Moscow.
Israel is facing internal fatigue with the public tired of war. Immense destruction caused in Gaza has yet not eradicated Hamas, nor have hostages been released. Talks, brokered by its main supporter, the US alongside others continue to falter. Israel plays the delay game avoiding rejecting peace conditions outright, aware it may anger the US.
India is neither in the position of Israel nor Ukraine. Operations concluded in four days with massive damage to Pak strategic assets, which will take years to replace. It is in no hurry to accept talks. On the contrary, Pakistan is concerned about the long-term impact of the IWT.
The longer the delay, the more time India gets for constructing water exploitation projects. Once completed, Pak can do little. However, ignoring Pak completely may not be the right strategy as it would only enhance the anti-India sentiment. Backdoor diplomacy must continue.
Both, India and Pakistan sent delegation to nations which matter to garner support. Indian delegation have laid down New Delhi’s terms for dialogue, insisting they will only be bilateral. Pakistan delegations are seeking pressure on India for talks and preferably intervention of the US. They are exploiting Trump’s claims that he brokered the ceasefire and playing to his inflated ego, hoping he takes the first step.
India is clear in its stance. It refuses third-party mediation and is unwilling for dialogue unless there are verifiable inputs of stoppage of support to terrorist groups. The Pak polity lacks this power, as terrorist groups are controlled by their army, hence talks are nowhere on the horizon, unless India decides to engage Rawalpindi, which it will not. Most importantly, for any government in New Delhi, acceding to third-party mediation is political suicide, which will be exploited by the opposition.
Hence, stalemate can be expected to continue.