Category: South Asia

Days After Being Barred From Flying, Baloch Activists’ Name Added to Pakistan’s ‘Anti-Terrorism List’

While a person is supposed to be formally notified of their inclusion in the list within three days, Dr Mahrang Baloch said that she only found out about it through social media.

Karachi: The Pakistan government has added the names of Baloch Yakjehti Committee (BYC) leaders, Dr. Mahrang Baloch and Sibagatullah Shah, to the Fourth Schedule list – a list of proscribed people under Pakistani anti-terror law.

In the first week of October, 2024, Mahrang, a political activist and leader of BYC, was prevented from attending a Time magazine event in New York. She was nominated in the Time100 Next list. The Wire had reported on the reasons behind the travel restrictions imposed on her.

Mahrang told The Wire that legally, a person is required to be informed of their inclusion in the Fourth Schedule list within three days. This allows the person to challenge the decision in court. However, Mahrang said that she only found out about her and Shah’s inclusion in it through social media.

“I was not allowed to travel on October 7 and after [challenging this in court], the government added my name [to the no-fly list] on October 18,” Mahrang said, adding that the state not only stopped her illegally, but also confiscated her passport and phone, which have still not been returned. 

“The state does not want me to travel abroad, nor does it want me to move freely within the country,” she said.

‘Countless Balochs included in the anti-terrorism list’

The Pakistani government has been imposing restrictions on political activists in Balochistan and abducting political workers and students for years. More than 50 Baloch citizens were reportedly abducted this month alone.

In addition to this, through the Fourth Schedule, countless Baloch people from various walks of life have been included in the anti-terrorism list. Critics often point out that the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA), promulgated on August 13, 1997 to prevent terrorism in Pakistan, is now being used to silence peaceful and democratic voices seeking justice in line with the constitution and international human rights.

Sibagatullah stated that Balochistan has endured state violence for a long time, yet such measures cannot deter the Baloch people from pursuing a peaceful movement. He pointed out that had Mahrang or he been guilty of any crime, the state would have notified them. 

Shah argued that the state seeks to stifle Baloch people and their movement through such tactics, thereby revealing its own culpability. He said that the state targets the Baloch through killings, abductions, and draconian laws. “However, from its inception, the BYC has been a peaceful movement and will remain so, emphasising that such measures cannot extinguish their cause,” he added.

Disproportionate attention to Quetta

Imran Baloch, an advocate familiar with Fourth Schedule cases in Balochistan, said that senior politicians Dr. Malik Baloch and Akhtar Mengal Baloch have reported that over 3,000 names were added to the Fourth Schedule list this year. However, the Balochistan government claimed that only 311 people from Quetta city were added to the list. This implies that every city in the province has its own list; nevertheless, the government insisted that only people from Quetta were included, when in fact, people from Gwadar and Panjgur are also on the list, he said. “The state simply has a form to fill it out with the name of Baloch, yet, it does not understand what each person actually does,” Imran added.

Sibagatullah ridiculed the state, pointing out that the Anti-Terrorism Act form carries questions related to the Taliban, despite politics in Balochistan differing from that in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, where this form was originally used. He criticised the state for its failure to update the questionnaire, saying that it shows a lack of understanding on their part and proves its intent to harass the Baloch.

When questioned about the role of political parties, Mahrang said that many political parties today are merely wings of the military establishment. She mentioned the recent 26th constitutional amendment, which has extinguished hopes for justice within the system. 

The amendment has resulted in significant changes in the structure and functioning of Pakistan’s judicial system, particularly with respect to the Supreme Court and High Courts. Many believe that move ‘seriously undermines’ the independence of Pakistan judiciary.

Mahrang expressed her lack of faith in the judiciary, even though the BYC has approached the court to challenge the Fourth Schedule. However, she is resolute that no list can prevent her from meeting her people, nor strip the Baloch of their right to political activism.

With Yunus at the Helm, Bangladesh Reaching its Potential is in India’s Best Interest

Yunus’s early successes augur well for the future of Bangladesh, and a successful Bangladesh is more likely to be a strong ally of India than a failing one.

As a proud American and son of India, I look with hope at the exciting possibilities surrounding professor Muhammad Yunus’s leadership of Bangladesh.  Three days after Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina fled the country on August 5, Yunus was sworn in as Bangladesh’s interim government head.

Yunus, whom I consider a friend and have known for decades, accepted that post at the insistence of the student leaders who were at the forefront of the student-led struggle.

I am an entrepreneurship zealot, a believer in the power of ideas, and passionate about sustainability and impact.  I am in awe of what Yunus has accomplished in his life.  I work to bring life-enhancing technology to the world through my investments. Yunus, through endless experimentation and tinkering, has developed a series of institutional success models for reducing poverty, improving health care and education outcomes, and combating climate change.

For example, in 1996, Yunus succeeded in putting cell phones in the hands of hundreds of thousands of poor women in rural villages in Bangladesh, allowing them to generate income as village cell phone ladies.  I am passionate about protecting our environment.  Yunus founded a company that, beginning in 1995, has installed 1.8 million solar home systems and 1 million clean cook stoves, again almost exclusively in rural Bangladesh.

That doesn’t even include the creation of Grameen Bank that has cumulatively made US$39 billion in small, mostly income-generating loans to more than 10 million poor women that became a model for similar efforts in India and many other countries.

But now, Yunus has turned his attention to a new challenge, leading the eighth largest country in the world by population, a nation of more than 170 million people. This is a country with about half the population of the United States all in a land mass equal to the U.S. state of Illinois.

There are people throughout Bangladesh and around the world who are batting for Yunus’s success.  I am one of them. But there are others who want him and the interim government he leads to fail and are spreading false narratives about what is going on under his leadership. So I would like to share my perspectives about his values, his approach, and his early results.

In his first two months in office, he got the police to return to work, which improved the law and order situation, took tangible steps to protect minorities such as Hindus, worked to improve relations with India, suggested that the regional powers reinvigorate SAARC, and made progress on bringing stability to the banking and financial sectors in Bangladesh (which were in disarray when he took office).

He also represented Bangladesh effectively at the U.N. General Assembly, and had more than 50 productive meetings with global leaders while he was in New York.

In his work in this role, I have seen him applying the same values and approach that I have seen him use throughout his career: building a national consensus on key issues, experimenting to determine what works best, inspiring fellow citizens (especially youth) to get involved in practical and constructive ways, treating all people with respect regardless of their religion, gender, or ethnicity, and being pragmatic as well as energetic (despite being 84 years old).

But there are many challenges. Leading a government can be many times more difficult than running a suite of social businesses and nonprofits. People aligned with the prior government that lost power wants his efforts to fail. The party that has been out of power for years wants a quick return. But I believe Yunus is up to the job.

In September, I joined 198 global leaders including 92 Nobel laureates in a letter to the people of Bangladesh and people of goodwill around the world.

“We are excited to see Professor Yunus finally free to work for the uplift of the entire country, especially the most marginalisd, a calling he has pursued with great vigor and success across six decades (sic).”

His early successes in this role augur well for the future of Bangladesh, and a successful Bangladesh is more likely to be a strong ally of India than a failing one. We should all be rooting for Yunus to continuing making progress in this important interim role, because Bangladesh reaching its potential is in India’s best interest.

Vinod Khosla is a businessman and venture capitalist.

India, Pakistan Extend Kartarpur Corridor Agreement for 5 More Years

The agreement was first signed on October 24, 2019, to facilitate the visit of pilgrims from India to Gurdwara Darbar Sahib Kartarpur.

New Delhi: India and Pakistan have extended their agreement on the Sri Kartarpur Sahib Corridor for a further period of five years.

The agreement, first signed on October 24, 2019, to facilitate the visit of pilgrims from India to Gurdwara Darbar Sahib Kartarpur, at Narowal in Pakistan through the Kartarpur Sahib Corridor, was valid for a period of five years.

The Ministry of External Affairs said that India and Pakistan have agreed through diplomatic channels to extend the validity of the agreement.

This extension, the MEA said, will “ensure uninterrupted operation of the Corridor for use by the pilgrims from India to visit the holy Gurdwara in Pakistan.”

The MEA also said that India has “once again urged Pakistan” not to levy any charges or fees on pilgrims. This, New Delhi says, comes after “continued requests of pilgrims” regarding the removal of US $ 20 service charge levied by Pakistan per pilgrim per visit.

Indian external affairs minister S. Jaishankar and Pakistan’s deputy prime minister and foreign minister Ishaq Dar have both posted on X on the decision.

Dar wrote: “The Government of Pakistan has renewed the “Agreement between the Republic of India and the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan for the facilitation of pilgrims to visit Gurudwara Darbar Sahib Kartarpur, Narowal, Pakistan” for an additional period of five years!”

Jaishankar wrote: “India and Pakistan have renewed the agreement on Sri Kartarpur Sahib Corridor for the next five years. PM [Narendra Modi]’s government will continue to facilitate our Sikh community’s access to their holy sites.”

China Says New Delhi and Beijing Have ‘Reached a Solution on Relevant Matters’

‘China and India have maintained close communication through diplomatic and military channels regarding border-related issues.’

New Delhi: A day after India said it has reached an agreement with China on the Line of Actual Control in eastern Ladakh, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson has been reported to have confirmed that talks have progressed.

The Global Times, a Chinese Communist Party-run tabloid, reported spokesperson Lin Jian as having said that India and China have “reached a solution on relevant matters.”

China is going to work with India to implement the solution plan, Lin also said.

The newspaper has his full response when asked to react to India’s announcement as such:

“China and India have maintained close communication through diplomatic and military channels regarding border-related issues. Currently, the two sides have reached a solution on the relevant matters, which China views positively. In the next phase, China will work with India to effectively implement the solution plan.”

A day ago, foreign secretary Vikram Misri announced that an agreement had been reached on patrolling arrangements along the Line of Actual Control in the India-China border.

Later in the day, Union external affairs minister S. Jaishankar stated that “the disengagement process has been completed” for the four-year-long military stand-off.

On the heels of these announcements, there is strong speculation of a bilateral meeting between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the BRICS summit at Kazan in Russia. The summit starts today and will end tomorrow.

To PTI’s question on whether this meeting will take place, Lin said, “We will keep you posted if anything comes up.”

‘Disengagement Process Complete’: India, China Reach Agreement on Patrolling Along Ladakh Border

The announcement came ahead of the BRICS summit where Prime Minister Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping are expected to have their first bilateral meeting since 2019.

New Delhi: Indian and Chinese negotiators have reached an agreement on “patrolling arrangements” along the eastern Ladakh border, India said on Monday (October 21), with Union external affairs minister S. Jaishankar stating that “the disengagement process has been completed” for the four-year-long military stand-off.

The time and place of Indian foreign secretary Vikram Misri’s announcement has fuelled speculation on a thaw between the two countries, as it will pave the way for a likely meeting between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping in Russia.

Misri noted the agreement at the MEA’s media briefing of the 16th BRICs summit which Prime Minister Narendra Modi is scheduled to attend from October 22 to 23 in Kazan, Russia.

It is understood that Modi and Xi will meet on October 23 in Kazan, marking their first bilateral meeting since 2019.

The Indian foreign secretary made the announcement of an agreement while responding to a question about whether the two leaders would meet. While he didn’t answer the question directly, Misri was ready to make an announcement.

Speaking to journalists, Misri said:

“Many of you have questions about bilateral meetings on the sidelines and, in particular, a possible bilateral meeting between the prime minister and the president of China. Some of these questions are particularly timely and also appropriate, as I now have the opportunity to share with you. I can share that, over the last several weeks, Indian and Chinese diplomatic and military negotiators have been in close contact with each other in a variety of forums. As a result of these discussions, an agreement has been reached on patrolling arrangements along the Line of Actual Control in the India-China border areas, leading to disengagement and a resolution of the issues that had arisen in these areas in 2020, and we will be taking the next steps on this.”

Misri did not reveal any other details of this agreement. Notably, there has been no announcement from the Chinese side till now.

Within an hour of the MEA briefing, Jaishankar, who was taking part in a private television channel’s event, stated that he couldn’t add much beyond what the foreign secretary had said but noted that “with the disengagement, we have returned to the situation as it was in 2020”.

“So, we can say the disengagement process with China has been completed,” he said, adding, “that’s as much as I can share with you. I’m sure, in due course, more details will emerge.”

Describing the agreement as a “positive development”, he said it was the result of “a patient and complicated process” since his meeting with Wang Yi at Moscow in September 2020. 

“But now that we have reached an understanding on patrolling and maintaining the sanctity of the LAC, it creates the basis for the peace and tranquility that existed in the border areas before 2020. Hopefully, we will return to that peace and tranquility,” Jaishankar said.

In May 2020, Chinese troops were discovered to be intruding into Indian territory in Eastern Ladakh, sparking several clashes with Indian soldiers, including a deadly hand-to-hand skirmish in June that claimed the lives of at least 20 Indian and four Chinese soldiers.

After multiple rounds of diplomatic and military talks, disengagement was achieved at about four friction points, which involved the creation of ‘buffer zones’.

But, the strategic areas of Depsang Plains and Demchok remain unresolved for the last three years. The deadlock persists as China claims that the Depsang Plains and Demchok are legacy issues, while India insists that they are part of the current stand-off.

At the MEA briefing, the foreign secretary was directly asked if the agreement had resolved the pending issues of Demchok and Depsang, but he simply reiterated the previous statement.

However, Jaishankar answered a similar question by claiming both sides had “blocked” patrolling at the start of the stand-off. “What has happened is that we have reached an understanding which will allow patrolling. For example, you mentioned Depsang, but that’s not the only place – there are other places too. To my knowledge, the understanding is that we will be able to patrol as we were doing in 2020,” he said.

Ties between India and China have been frozen for the last four years since the stand-off between the two armies began at the Line of Actual Control in eastern Ladakh.

Since the end of the pandemic, speculation about a Modi-Xi meeting has surfaced each year ahead of major multilateral events that both leaders are set to attend.

After the 2019 second Informal summit in Mamallapuram, there has been no formal bilateral meeting between the leaders of the Asian giants. Their interactions have mostly been limited to brief exchanges during summit dinners – at the G20 in Indonesia in 2022 and the SCO in South Africa in 2023.

Ahead of Delhi hosting the G-20 summit last year, speculations were rife about a thaw in ties to facilitate Xi’s visit. However, the momentum waned when the Chinese president chose to skip the event in the Indian capital.

A month after the Indian general elections ended, signs of fresh impetus emerged in the frequency of high-level meetings.

In the first week of July, Jaishankar met with Wang Yi at the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit in Astana. The Indian press release stated that the Indian and Chinese ministers “agreed that the prolongation of the current situation in the border areas is not in the interest of either side”.

Within three weeks, they met again, this time in Vientiane, the Laotian capital, where both attended the ASEAN foreign ministers’ meeting. 

The Indian minister had noted that given the current state of geopolitics and global economy, it was “in our mutual interest to stabilise our ties and focus on growth and development”. “This requires us to approach our immediate issues with a sense of purpose and urgency,” Jaishankar added. The Chinese foreign ministry stated that both sides had agreed to “promote new progress in border affairs consultations”.

The baton then passed to the foreign office-led Working Mechanism for Consultation & Coordination on India-China Border Affairs, which had back-to-back meetings on July 31 and August 30. At the last WMCC meeting, the two separate press releases had talked about “narrowing differences”.

On September 12, National Security Adviser (NSA) Ajit Doval also met with Wang Yi and emphasised “urgency” and the need to “redouble” efforts to resolve remaining areas. The Wire had noted how India’s readout had toned down its language on China compared to the last year’s meeting of the two officials.

A week later, Chinese ambassador to India, Xu Feihong stated that India-China relations had reached a “crucial stage of improvement and development”, highlighting the increased frequency of high-level meetings in recent months.

The Chinese defence ministry also joined the steady drumbeat with the spokesperson stating on September 26 that the “discussions and communications have enabled the two sides to reduce differences and build consensus”.

By Revoking Some National Holidays, Bangladesh Signals Shift Away from Cult Worship of Sheikh Mujib

The revolution has shattered the social capital of Mujib, Hasina and the Awami League. They are now viewed through the lens of their authoritarian tendencies, with both father and daughter’s rule ending in violence and upheaval

Last week, Bangladesh’s interim government revoked eight national holidays, including two significant ones commemorating Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the country’s first president. These include the anniversary of his historic March 7, 1971 speech and August 15, the national day of mourning for his assassination alongside most of his family in 1975.

This decision by the administration led by Muhammad Yunus, the country’s only Nobel Peace Prize laureate, was largely received positively by many citizens. Over the past 15 years, they have endured the ostentatious observance of these days under the leadership of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina – Rahman’s eldest daughter – who held power for an unprecedented five terms, three of which were marked by allegations of rigged elections.

However, some individuals and media outlets criticised the Yunus government’s decision. They argue that Rahman’s legacy and his role in Bangladesh’s independence from Pakistan in 1971 should not be overshadowed by his daughter’s actions during a 15-year “fascist” regime that was overthrown on August 5 this year amid a student-led revolution in which over 1,000 people lost their lives.

Prominent among those voicing this perspective is veteran Bangladeshi journalist Mahfuz Anam, editor of the country’s largest English-language newspaper, the Daily Star.

In an article titled “Hasina’s Misrule Should Not Affect Our Judgment of Bangabandhu,” Anam contended that Rahman should not be judged solely on his daughter’s “authoritarian and corrupt” rule. He notably referred to Hasina’s regime as “fascist” in what is among the first instances of a Bangladeshi newspaper of record labelling her 15-year tenure in such terms. 

While Anam’s piece didn’t sugarcoat the misdeeds of either Rahman or his daughter Hasina, it did overlook Rahman’s ineffective leadership in the post-independence years, which contributed to the famine of 1974. Estimates of the death toll from starvation during this period vary, with some suggesting that as many as a million people may have died between 1974 and early 1975. Millions suffered from hunger, leading authorities to establish gruel kitchens across the country. Desperate beggars would knock on doors for rice water (bhater fan).

Discussions about Mujib’s declining popularity during those years often reference his abolition of multiparty democracy and the establishment of the one-party rule known as BAKSHAL, as well as the notorious extrajudicial killing of leftist leader Siraj Sikder. However, it was the famine – resulting from Mujib’s administrative mismanagement – that significantly eroded his support and generated resentment toward a leader who had once been celebrated as the face of Bangladesh’s liberation struggle.

Anam also failed to acknowledge that the tragic assassination of Mujib and his family did not provoke widespread public mourning at the time. The general populace was exhausted and frustrated following the famine and the oppressive one-party rule, during which he increasingly acted like a demi-god. Thus, the idea that Mujib’s legacy has been tarnished solely by his daughter’s actions is, at best, a half-truth and, at worst, entirely misleading. It was Mujib’s own actions that ultimately damaged his legacy.

Over the past 15 years, Hasina attempted to recover and solidify her father’s legacy but her approach proved counterproductive. She forcefully promoted a distorted version that solely credited Sheikh Mujib for Bangladesh’s liberation, while labelling any opposition as anti-liberation extremists. This created a suffocating political atmosphere and fuelled resentment.

Ironically, the recent student-led revolution that ousted Hasina stemmed from this very discontent. While the uprising was organic, the students possessed a keen understanding of Rahman’s flawed leadership and the historical distortions perpetuated by Hasina. They recognised the parallels between her authoritarian tendencies and her father’s post-independence rule.

Systematically dismantling the cult

Two prominent student leaders, now advisors to the interim government, have articulated nuanced perspectives on Mujib’s legacy. Nahid Islam asserted that Rahman is not a [universally] accepted “father of the nation,” across general Bangladeshis, rather a figure revered primarily by Awami League supporters. Asif Mahmud pointed to the swift destruction of Rahman’s symbols following Hasina’s removal as evidence of his contested legacy.

Vandalised bust of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman at the ground floor of demolished Bangabandhu Museum at Dhanmondi 32. Photo: Zahidul Salim

Even before the two advisors addressed the media, another prominent student leader, Mahfuj Alam – referred to as the “mastermind” behind the revolution – indicated a shift in narrative through his Facebook activity. On October 11, Alam updated his profile picture to include five notable Bangladeshi politicians: Sher-i-Bangla AK Fazlul Haque, Hossain Shahid Sohrawardy, Abul Hasim, Jogen Mandal, and Maulana Bhashani. Three days later, he posted a status declaring, “this time, there will be a counterattack against Mujibism.” His social media actions, promoting alternative political figures, suggested a strategy to counter any future attempts by the Awami League to exploit Rahman’s legacy for political advantage.

Attempts to separate Rahman’s legacy from his daughter’s have faced criticism for their insensitivity to the current national mood. Many Bangladeshis are still grieving the thousands who died during the recent revolution, a tragedy directly linked to Hasina’s attempts to cling to power. The 1971 liberation war, while historically significant, feels distant and its narrative has been tarnished by the Awami League’s manipulative use of it. The pain of the 2024 revolution, however, is raw and immediate.

More importantly, the revolution has shattered the social capital of Mujib, Hasina and the Awami League. They are now viewed through the lens of their authoritarian tendencies, with both father and daughter’s rule ending in violence and upheaval. The public is unwilling to accept apologies or nuanced defences of their actions, especially in the immediate aftermath of the revolution. There is a strong desire for accountability and a rejection of the cult of personality that the Awami League cultivated around Rahman.

Faisal Mahmud is an award-winning journalist based in Bangladesh. He is a recipient of Jefferson Fellowship and Konrad-Adenur Stiftung Fellowship

 

‘Hope There is a Beginning and an Opening With Jaishankar’s Visit’: Nawaz Sharif

The former Pakistan prime minister said he thought Jaishankar’s visit to Islamabad for the SCO meet was a positive sign.

Lahore: Reaching out to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, former Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif said on Thursday (October 17) that Indian external affairs minister S. Jaishankar’s trip to Islamabad to take part in the meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) was a positive sign and hoped that this would be a stepping stone to better ties.

“This thread should be picked up,” said Sharif to a group of Indian journalists at the office of the chief minister of Pakistan’s Punjab province, Maryam Nawaz Sharif, on Thursday afternoon.

While Maryam is his daughter, Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif is his younger brother.

Sharif’s remarks came a day after Jaishankar concluded his two-day visit to Islamabad to attend the SCO council of heads of government summit.

Both India and Pakistan had strenuously stated that bilateral talks would not take place during Jaishankar’s visit.

“This is a start – we hope there is a beginning and an opening with the foreign minister’s visit. Meetings should go ahead, whether it is SAARC or any other occasion, these must not be missed,” Sharif said.

Jaishankar’s visit, which was the first by an Indian foreign minister to Pakistan in nine years, passed without the typical verbal volleys that have marked Indo-Pakistani ties in recent years.

Pakistani officials said Jaishankar met with his opposite number M. Ishaq Dar during a brief “pull-aside” at a dinner hosted by Shehbaz Sharif at his residence on Tuesday and that they had a longer conversation during a lunch the next day when seated together among other summit participants.

When asked if Jaishankar’s visit could create an opportunity for bilateral talks, external affairs ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal simply said on Thursday that beyond the SCO meet, Jaishankar’s only bilateral meeting was with Mongolia and that other than this “some pleasantries were exchanged on the sidelines of the meeting, especially during lunch and dinner”.

Nawaz Sharif also said that although Prime Minister Narendra Modi did not attend the SCO summit, it was a good thing that Jaishankar did.

“We would have liked Modi to come, but it was good that Jaishankar came. I have said before that we must pick up the threads of our conversation. We have spent 70 years in this way [fighting] and we should not let this go on for the next 70 years,” Sharif said.

He added: “We [the Pakistan Muslim League (N) (PMLN)] have tried too hard to work on this relationship to let it just go this way. Both sides should sit down and discuss how to go forward. We can’t change our neighbours – neither can Pakistan nor can India. We should live like good neighbours.”

Sharif noted that talks had been halted and resumed several times in the past, but that this should not deter attempts to aspire to better relations.

When asked if the reasons for the disruption had been resolved or were no longer relevant, he responded that this was not the time to dwell on the past.

“Don’t go into the past, both sides have complaints about each other. We should bury the past and look to the future and see the potential of our two nations,” the three-time prime minister also said.

Relations between the two countries are currently in a deep freeze, especially after India in August 2019 revoked the autonomous status of Jammu and Kashmir. An outraged Pakistan downgraded diplomatic ties and snapped trade links in response.

After Modi’s election victory, Sharif attended his swearing-in ceremony in May 2014, which his daughter Maryam reminded the Indian media was a special gesture.

In December 2015, Modi made a sudden, unannounced stop in Lahore, Sharif’s hometown, after departing from Kabul.

“When Modi called me from Kabul and said he wanted to wish me for my birthday, I told him he was very welcome. He came and met my mother. These are not small gestures; they mean something to us, especially in our countries. We should not overlook them,” said Sharif.

However, the brief period of goodwill quickly ended as a series of terror attacks followed, entrenching India’s policy that “terror and talks cannot go together”.

Criticising former Prime Minister Imran Khan, Sharif said that the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf leader “used words that destroyed the relationship – as leaders of two countries and neighbours we should not even think let alone utter such words”.

During his interaction, Sharif went back several times in the past to the bus journey of former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee to Lahore in 1999. He revealed that he still watches videos of the historic visit. “Purano ko yaad karke aacha lagta tha [It felt good to reminisce about the old days].”

He recalled that Vajpayee had sent him a message to inquire about whether Pakistan, which had a surplus of power at that time, could supply to India. “I had readily agreed. We have record of that.”

Sharif asserted that “India, Pakistan and the neighbourhood should deal as India’s own states do with each other – trade, industry, electricity”.

“Maybe my thinking is different from others, but I believe we are a potential market for each other. Why should Indian and Pakistani farmers and manufacturers go outside to sell their products? Goods now go from Amritsar to Lahore via Dubai – what are we doing, who is benefitting from this? What should take two hours now takes two weeks,” said the 74-year-old PMLN leader.

A well-known cricket enthusiast, he urged both countries to restore cricketing ties in each other’s soil. “What do we gain by not sending teams to each other’s countries? They play all over the world, but it is not allowed in our two countries.”

When asked if India should send a team for the Champions’ Trophy, he replied, “You’ve spoken what’s in my heart.”

When asked if he would visit India, Sharif replied, “If Pakistan reaches the Asia Cup final, I will definitely be there.”

Sharif’s father was born in Amritsar, India, while his late wife’s family hailed from Lucknow.

Maryam added that she had only visited India once as a young girl. “I received so much love and affection from Indian pilgrims during my visit to Kartarpur – I would love to visit India, especially Punjab.”

Her father chimed in, “Why stop at Punjab? You should visit Himachal, Haryana and other states too.”

In 24 Hours, Two Conversations Between Indian and Pakistani Foreign Ministers in Islamabad

External affairs minister S. Jaishankar’s visit passed without the typical verbal clashes that have marked bilateral relations in recent years.

Islamabad: In the last 24 hours, external affairs minister S. Jaishankar had at least two conversations with his Pakistani counterpart, foreign minister M. Ishaq Dar – once during dinner on Tuesday and again in a more detailed discussion over lunch on Wednesday afternoon, after the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit concluded, according to Pakistani officials.

Pakistani officials were visibly relieved, not only because their largest diplomatic event in 27 years – a meeting of the SCO council of heads of government – went smoothly, but also because Jaishankar’s visit passed without the typical verbal clashes that have marked bilateral relations in recent years.

It was the first visit by an Indian foreign minister to Pakistan in nine years.

Just as Jaishankar left Islamabad, he posted on his X account: “Departing from Islamabad. Thank PM @CMShehbaz, DPM & FM @MIshaqDar50 and the Government of Pakistan for the hospitality and courtesies”.

The post capped a visit that ended on an unusually positive note.

Jaishankar arrived in Islamabad aboard a special flight at 3:30 pm local time on Tuesday (October 15) and, as per the summit’s schedule, attended an informal dinner at Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s residence for SCO participants.

It had been reported that Jaishankar sat at the table with the heads of other delegations, including Sharif, though there was no conversation between them as other guests were seated in between.

Pakistani sources claimed that there was a brief “pull-aside” between Jaishankar and foreign minister Dar lasting around five or ten minutes during the dinner.

They were joined by Pakistan’s interior minister, Mohsin Naqvi, who also chairs the Pakistan Cricket Board, steering the conversation towards cricket – a mutual interest, as Jaishankar is known to be a keen cricket enthusiast.

According to Pakistani officials, it was suggested during the discussion that restoring cricketing ties could be a potential step toward improving relations.

The next morning, Sharif’s national statement remained strictly focused on the SCO’s agenda. While bilateral disputes are not typically addressed at the SCO, there were also no veiled or indirect references to India regarding unrest within Pakistan or the Kashmir issue in his remarks.

In his speech, Jaishankar emphasised the importance of implementing the SCO’s charter, which addresses combating terrorism, extremism and separatism. He stressed that peace and stability were essential to fostering regional economic integration across borders.

Pakistani sources told The Wire that they did not perceive Jaishankar’s speech as a rebuke, noting that the implementation of the SCO charter is non-controversial and not directed at any single country.

Jaishankar published a post that described the SCO meeting as “productive” and listed eight takeaways from it.

Similarly, Sharif’s speech was positively received across the border, with sources highlighting that both countries refrained from attacking each other, instead making “balanced” statements.

After the summit’s outcome documents were signed, participants were hosted for lunch. Jaishankar and Dar engaged in another extended conversation, initially in the waiting lounge and later during the luncheon.

Officials, however, did not describe this as a “pull-aside”, noting that they were not speaking privately but in the presence of other summit participants. Diplomatic sources indicated that they sat together during lunch, which was significant as this was a change from the original seating arrangement.

Observers noted that expectations are so low that any India-Pakistan encounter that avoids devolving into verbal sparring is viewed as a positive outcome.

Relations between the two countries are currently in a deep freeze, especially after India’s August 2019 constitutional amendment that revoked the autonomous status of Jammu and Kashmir. An outraged Pakistan downgraded diplomatic ties and snapped trade links in response.

However, ties were already deteriorating prior to that.

The relief over the absence of such clashes was a stark contrast to last year’s SCO foreign ministers’ meeting in Goa, where then-Pakistani foreign minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari’s visit was overshadowed by tensions.

At that event, Jaishankar raised the issue of “cross-border terrorism”, prompting Zardari to respond by calling for countries to move beyond “weaponising terrorism for diplomatic point-scoring”.

However, officials from both India and Pakistan have not characterised the visit as a thaw in ties, as relations have deteriorated to the extent that several more steps are needed for normalisation.

Pakistani officials said that the next multilateral event that the Indian and Pakistani leadership will attend together is the COP29 summit in Baku, Azerbaijan later this year.

At SCO Meet in Pakistan, Jaishankar Raises Borders and Terrorism

The Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, who inaugurated the session, made no implicit reference to India regarding terrorism in his speech.

Islamabad: At the SCO meeting chaired by Pakistan, India’s external affairs minister S. Jaishankar urged the group to intensify efforts against the ‘three evils’ of terrorism, extremism, and separatism, warning that these threats impede the peace and stability necessary for regional integration.

Jaishankar made these remarks in India’s national statement at the inaugural session of the SCO Council for Heads of Government in Islamabad, during the first visit by an Indian foreign minister to Pakistan in nine years. His comments, as with any reference to cross-border terrorism in Indian diplomatic statements, were unmistakably aimed at Pakistan.

“If activities across borders are characterised by terrorism, extremism and separatism, they are hardly likely to encourage trade, energy flows, connectivity and people-to-people exchanges in parallel,” said Jaishankar.

The Pakistan prime minister Shehbaz Sharif, who inaugurated the session, made no implicit reference to India regarding terrorism in his speech. He stated only that the international community must urge the Taliban government in Kabul to take concrete measures to prevent its soil from being used to launch terror attacks “against its neighbours, by any entity.”

In his prepared speech, Jaishankar said that the “answer” to meeting the complex economic and political challenges “lie in the Charter of our organisation.” He referred to Article 1 of the Charter, which emphasises strengthening mutual trust, friendship, and good neighbourliness while also addressing key challenges.

“The Charter was equally clear what the key challenges were. And these were primarily three, that the SCO was committed to combatting: one, terrorism; two, separatism; and three, extremism.”

Jaishankar noted that these goals and tasks are “even more crucial” now, more than two decades after the SCO Charter was adopted. “It is, therefore, essential that we have an honest conversation. If trust is lacking or cooperation inadequate, if friendship has fallen short and good neighbourliness is missing somewhere, there are surely reasons to introspect and causes to address.”

Also read: As a Decked up Islamabad Waits, Here’s Why Pakistan Is Putting So Much Store in the SCO Meet

Calling for a reaffirmation of commitment to the Charter, Jaishankar clarified that this was not merely a call that would benefit India. 

“Globalisation and rebalancing are realities that cannot be denied. Cumulatively, they have created many new opportunities in terms of trade, investment, connectivity, energy flows, and other forms of collaboration. There is no question that our region would benefit immensely if we take this forward,” he said.

However, Jaishankar noted that development and growth require peace and stability, which necessitates being firm and uncompromising in countering the ‘three evils.’

Reiterating India’s stance on China’s Belt and Road Initiative, Jaishankar stated that “cooperation must be based on mutual respect and sovereign equality” and “recognise territorial integrity and sovereignty.” He emphasised, “It must be built on genuine partnerships, not unilateral agendas. It cannot progress if we cherry-pick global practices, especially of trade and transit.”

India’s primary objection to the BRI stems from its opposition to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, which traverses territory also claimed by New Delhi.

Unsurprisingly, the Pakistani Prime Minister strongly advocated for “projects such as the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), and International North-South Corridor (INSC) to be expanded to improve connectivity, focusing on roads, railways, and digital infrastructure.” He asserted that these projects should not be viewed “through the narrow political prism.”

Jaishankar in Pakistan: A Handshake, Bharatanatyam at Dinner But No Prospects of Bilateral Thaw

Pakistan wants India to reverse its actions of August 5, 2019 and on the Indian side too, the space for diplomacy has shrunk says Sharat Sabharwal, a former Indian high commissioner to Islamabad.

Islamabad: External affairs minister S. Jaishankar arrived at Rawalpindi’s Nur Khan Air Base on Tuesday, October 15, to attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) meeting, marking the first visit by an Indian foreign minister to Pakistan in nine years.

His special flight landed at the air base at 3.30 pm local time. He was greeted by the senior Pakistani foreign ministry official in charge for South Asia, Ilyas Nizami, and the Indian high commission’s charge d’affaires, Geetika Srivastava.

The Indian minister is scheduled to be in Pakistan for 24 hours, but there is no sign of any bilateral meeting between the two sides.

After his arrival, Jaishankar’s first port of call was at Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s residence to attend an informal dinner for the participants of Wednesday’s SCO council of heads of government meet.

A screen at the SCO meeting venue displays visuals of Jaishankar landing in Pakistan today, October 15. Photo: Devirupa Mitra.

Jaishankar was seen briefly shaking hands with Sharif – who was waiting at his residence to greet attendees – and appeared to offer pleasantries to the Pakistan prime minister, who in turn seemed to nod in agreement. After the handshake, Jaishankar went inside, while Sharif awaited the next guest.

At the dinner, all the main guests – the top representatives of the SCO member states – were seated at the table with the Pakistan prime minister. But there was no opportunity for a tete-e-tete as Jaishankar, in line with his rank, was seated some distance away. Sharif was flanked immediately by Chinese premier Li Qiang on one side and Kazakh Prime Minister Oljas Bektenov on the other side.

The cultural event at the dinner featured distinctive performances from the member states. Representing India, two Pakistani dancers performed the south Indian classical dance, Bharatanatyam.

Ahead of the visit, both Indian and Pakistani ministers firmly denied any bilateral component to Jaishankar’s time in Islamabad. However, an exchange of courtesies during the dinner and arrival ceremony took place as expected.

A senior Pakistan government minister ruled out any bilateral meeting unless it was sought by India.

“We are the hosts, so we cannot propose it. We have to go by the guest. If the guest wants a bilateral meeting, we will be happy to oblige. But as hosts, we cannot press anyone to hold a bilateral meeting,” Pakistan’s Minister of Planning, Development, and Special Initiatives, Ahsan Iqbal Chaudhary, told a group of Indian journalists.

Jaishankar had stated prior to the visit that he was going to Islamabad solely to attend the SCO meet and not discuss India-Pakistan issues.

In answer to The Wire’s question on whether trade ties can be restored, Chaudhary said, “I think we need to go back to the spirit of the Lahore Declaration. That was a high point between the leaderships of both countries, achieved by Nawaz Sharif and Atal Bihari Vajpayee. That is the spirit for both countries to move forward. If we return to the Lahore Declaration, there is no problem we cannot solve together”.

He ruled out the restoration of road and rail links unilaterally by Pakistan. “There has to be reciprocity. If both Pakistan and India can talk and start a process of dialogue, as I said, in the spirit of the Lahore Declaration, it could move things forward. Unfortunately, events after the Lahore Declaration did not favour it, but we still need to return to that”.

The February 1999 Lahore Declaration is unlikely to find favour with Indian today as its first point — that the two sides “shall intensify their efforts to resolve all issues, including the issue of Jammu and Kashmir” – is considered by the Modi government to be no longer relevant.

Chaudhary reiterated that both India and Pakistan have “enough ammunition to blame each other”. “I think we need to move beyond that and consider the more than 1.5 billion people who live in this region. What is their future? Are they destined to live in conflicts and poverty, or can they also benefit from regional integration and cooperation?”

At Wednesday’s SCO meeting, both Pakistan and India are expected to raise their respective concerns over terrorism, though without direct accusations, as the SCO typically discourages the discussion of bilateral disputes.

Relations between the two countries are in deep freeze right now, especially after India’s August 2019 constitutional amendment that changed the autonomous status of Jammu and Kashmir. An outraged Pakistan had downgraded diplomatic ties and snapped trade links.

However, relations had already been deteriorating prior to that. The last visit by an Indian foreign minister to Pakistan was in December 2015, when Sushma Swaraj attended the Heart of Asia meeting. Three weeks later, four terrorists infiltrated India’s Pathankot air force base, a significant event that further deepened the decline in relations.

Besides Jaishankar, the leaders attending the SCO summit from member states include Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin, Chinese premier Li Qiang, Belarus Prime Minister Roman Golovchenko, Kazakhstan Prime Minister Olzhas Bektenov, Tajik Prime Minister Kohir Rasulzoda, Uzbek Prime Minister Abdulla Aripov, Kyrgyzstan’s Chairman of Ministers Cabinet Akylbek Zhaparov and Iran’s First Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref.

Speaking to The Wire, former caretaker prime minister of Pakistan Anwaar-ul-Haq Kakar said that Pakistan is happy to host the multilateral event, as it portrays the country as a “confident player with a stable political order”.

“Domestically, this boosts the government’s self-confidence,” he said.

Jaishankar’s visit has not raised expectations of any breakthrough, but Kakar said that the SCO meet does at least allow both India and Pakistan to have a chance for contact, which is rare in these strained times.

Last year, when Pakistani foreign minister Bilawal Bhutto was in Goa for the SCO foreign ministers’ meeting, it was the first visit by a Pakistani official in 12 years.

Asked by The Wire if there was interest in Pakistan for an improvement in ties with India, Kakar said, “I’ll be honest. I see a deep appetite on our part – in the military, security apparatus, political parties and even among the mullahs and liberals.”

Kakar, who had close relations with the Pakistan military, also said that the Pakistan government was not going to propose a bilateral meeting to India when Jaishankar was in town due to political reasons. “In this polarised environment, conceding could lead to massive protests by the PTI, who might lack the capacity to handle the outcome,” said Kakar, who was prime minister from August 2023 to March 2024.

India’s former high commissioner to Pakistan, Sharat Sabharwal, said that the atmospherics ahead of the Indian minister’s visit had not indicated any easing of strain.

“The juncture is not conducive for any major bilateral development because Pakistan is so engrossed internally, and then Sharif [made] cutting remarks at the UNGA. After that, the minister [Jaishankar] responded. This is not what you do if, in 15 to 20 days, you are planning to have something big or significant,” he told The Wire.

Pakistan has also not climbed down from its demand that India has to reverse its actions of August 5, 2019.

“On our side, the space for diplomacy has shrunk. The government’s core constituency may be driving this, this is political posturing as well as maintaining the narrative of terror and talks … So that narrows the options,” he said.

Kakar, a serving member of Pakistan’s Senate, the upper house of parliament, also felt there was not much of an appetite for India to engage with Pakistan. “I often hear from my Indian friends in the diaspora and multilateral forums that India has renewed its focus on the Indo-Pacific, leaving Pakistan behind, stuck in its economic and security crises.”

But ignoring Pakistan would not be wise, he asserted. “We supply energy through the Chinese corridors, but India remains deprived of this cheap energy, whether from Iran, the North Caucasus or Central Asia, all because of us. If we’re not facilitating, then we’re obstructing, and India must explore whether that’s in its economic interest or not,” said Kakar.