There’s no place for the ‘Third’ in Indo-Pak Dispute

For some time now, the word ‘diplomacy’ is being used as ‘The’ buzz word. But this doesn’t mean the diplomacy as practiced by India in the past decades, was aimless. It was surely subdued. And for some real reasons.

Actually, the diplomacy as practiced by the Governments other than the BJP Governments, approached India’s disputes with its neighbors from a different vantage point (a place or position affording a good view of something).

Non-BJP Governments approached the Indo-Pak dispute as one which cannot have any intermediary or third-party. This was felt necessary, because allowing a third-party (any powerful country) as an intermediary to the dispute, meant opening ‘The Indian subcontinent’ to a powerful player. That’s why India kept itself non-aliened to any of the super powers.

Ever since the Modi Government came to power, the scenario has much changed. Only yesterday, it was being reported that US Secretary of State John Kerry dialed Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to talk on the Pathankot attack and conveyed the US view – that the Pathankot attack must not affect dialogue between India and Pakistan.

Comments on this entry are closed.