It is not unusual for retired civil servants to reflect on the past. However, in a recent interview to Indian journalist Karan Thapar, former diplomat Abdul Basit Khan twisted facts, engaged in innuendo and unleashed his prejudices in assessing the policy of Pakistan’s leadership, particularly in dealing with India.
Retired ambassador Khan’s denunciation of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif is both offensive and false, especially his allegation that in search for a peaceful and honourable resolution of our differences with India, Sharif was “pandering” in his interaction with the Indian leaders. The accusations against advisor on foreign affairs Sartaj Aziz and special assistant to prime minister Syed Tariq Fatemi – that they were “apologetic” to India – are also incorrect and unfounded.
The former ambassador disregarded that every single government in Pakistan, whether elected or military, has pursued the goal of achieving peaceful understanding with its eastern neighbour. This has been true of Pakistan’s successive governments as far back as that of Liaquat Ali Khan down to the current hybrid dispensation. Even General (retired) Pervez Musharraf, who launched the unauthorised Kargil military operation, became an advocate of dialogue with India after he had seized political power.
Nawaz Sharif believes in peace and has struggled for a peaceful, equitable, and honourable settlement of all issues – including the issue of Kashmir – that have bedevilled relations between Pakistan and India. This has been his publicly articulated policy ever since he entered politics. To characterise Sharif’s calm but serious negotiating style as “pandering” to any foreign leader is false, unfounded, and malicious.
‘Putting the record straight’
The record is self-evident and long-established. Was Sharif pandering to India when he declared Pakistan’s nuclear deterrent and, in response to five tests by India, conducted six nuclear tests on 28 May 1998?
During his three terms in office, Sharif endeavoured to engage in a sustained and result-oriented dialogue process with India. Under his guidance, Pakistan and India agreed on the mechanism known as the Composite Dialogue Process, which focused simultaneously on eight subjects: Siachen; Sir Creek; Tulbul navigation project; terrorism and drug trafficking; economic and commercial cooperation; promotion of friendly exchanges; peace and security including CBMs; and Jammu and Kashmir. It was the first time India had ever agreed to discuss formally “all outstanding issues including Jammu and Kashmir”.
Also read: Full Text: Abdul Basit on Nawaz Sharif ‘Pandering’ to India and Being Sidelined By Pak PM
After Sharif declared Pakistan as a nuclear power in 1998, Indian prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee undertook in February 1999 the first ever official visit by any Indian prime minister to Pakistan. The resultant Lahore Declaration contained the road map for the resolution of issues between the two countries, including the issue of Jammu and Kashmir. This promising initiative was sabotaged unfortunately a few weeks later by the unsanctioned Kargil misadventure.
Upon assuming office for the third time in June 2013, Sharif picked up the thread from where the India-Pakistan dialogue had unravelled. He communicated plainly with the Indian leadership, first with prime minister Manmohan Singh and later with Narendra Modi upon the latter’s election in May 2014. Prime minister Sharif’s visit to New Delhi to witness the oath-taking of Modi was undertaken with the objective of promoting peace and security in the region.
In the meeting between the two prime ministers, it was emphasised that with both leaders having received strong electoral mandates, they needed to engage in a sustained dialogue process. Sharif not only recalled the Lahore Declaration but called upon the Indian prime minister to join hands with him to intensify their efforts to resolve all bilateral issues, including the issue of Jammu and Kashmir.
PM Narendra Modi with Pakistan PM Nawaz Sharif in Ufa, Russia. Credit: PTI
In Sartaj Aziz’s engagements with his respective Indian counterparts, external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj, and in his capacity as the national security advisor with Ajit Doval, he made it clear that the issue of Jammu and Kashmir was at the root of Pakistan-India tensions and conflicts over the past seven decades. Aziz also made it clear that in any resolution of the Kashmir issue, the will of the people of Kashmir would be imperative.
Under directions from Sharif, the foreign office ensured that relations with India and the dispute over Jammu and Kashmir figured in all our meetings with foreign leaders and in our statements at multilateral forums, including at the United Nations, the Commonwealth and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (IOC). In this pursuit, Pakistan made a major diplomatic gain in the Joint US-Pakistan statement issued at the conclusion of prime minister Sharif’s visit to Washington in October 2015.
The Sharif-Obama joint statement contained an important reference to a “sustained and resilient dialogue process between the two South Asian neighbors, aimed at resolving all outstanding territorial and other disputes, including Kashmir, through peaceful means”. This reference to Kashmir in a Pak-US Joint Statement was unprecedented and remains a milestone six years later.
Nawaz Sharif led the diplomatic initiative to bring Kashmir in sharp focus at multilateral forums, which resulted in a comprehensive and strident espousal of Kashmir in the Istanbul Summit Declaration of the Organization of Islamic Conference in 2016.
Sharif’s trenchant advocacy of Kashmir at the United Nations General Assembly in September 2016 heralded the UN Human Rights High Commissioner’s landmark and hitherto unparalleled 2018 Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Kashmir.
Under Sharif’s direction, the foreign office arranged for our serving ambassadors, as well as retired diplomats, including former foreign secretaries, to be invited regularly for consultations and to benefit from their insight.
Also read: On Pakistan Day, Envoy Abdul Basit’s Support For ‘Freedom Struggle’ in Kashmir Sparks Outrage
While posted in New Delhi as high commissioner for three and a half years, ambassador Khan was often called to Islamabad to share his observations and assessments with the foreign office. Whether in person or through his dispatches from New Delhi, he did not express his discontent with the government’s India policy.
It is unethical for a diplomat to question publicly the instructions given to him by the elected government of the day. Nor should he ever inject his personal views on any aspect of government policy. If, however, a civil servant is unhappy or disagrees with the policy directives of the country’s leadership that holds the mandate of the people, he has the option to submit his resignation.
Ambassador Khan remained en poste and did not choose the honourable option to resign. He has instead chosen to vent out his anger and frustration post-retirement with his service seniors as well as political leaders in an interview given to sensationalise the forthcoming publication of his book.
Khurram Dastgir-Khan is a member of the National Assembly of Pakistan, and was previously Minister for Defence, Foreign Affairs, and Commerce.
