First off, let’s be clear that Bilawal Bhutto did not formally visit India last week. Although he traveled to India, his main objective was to attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organization’s foreign ministers’ summit in the Indian city of Goa. The gathering took place in India because the country organized the conference is also the president of SCO this year. It cannot be referred to as a routine visit to India because it was necessary to travel to India in order to participate.
Shanghai Cooperation Organization
The Shanghai Cooperation Organization was primarily an initiative of Russia and China. Earlier it had five member countries (Russia, China, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan) and it was called Shanghai Five. Uzbekistan became a part of it in 2001. Pakistan and India were simultaneously made members a few years ago. Thus, it has eight members, now Iran has been included as the ninth (9th) member. Afghanistan, Belarus and Mongolia are observer countries, while Turkey, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Cambodia are included as dialogue partners.
The Shanghai Cooperation Organization includes India, but is strongly influenced by China and Russia, with Chinese and Russian as official languages. America tried to become its member, but it was refused. It is China’s interest to promote this organization of regional cooperation. Every year its president changes and meetings are held there accordingly. On Pakistan’s turn, its annual meetings will also be held in Pakistan.
Should Bilawal have gone to India?
There may be various viewpoints on this significant subject. Imran Khan, the leader of Tehreek-e-Insaf, has criticised Bilawal Bhutto’s visit. While Shah Mehmood Qureshi, the chairman of Tehreek-e-Insaf and a former foreign minister, was in favour of the visit, Fawad Chaudhary, Asad Umar, and Shireen Mazari were all detractors. I’ve listened to the opinions and talks of retired ambassadors and seasoned Pakistani diplomats. Nearly everyone agreed that Bilawal Bhutto, the foreign minister of Pakistan, ought to have travelled there. This is due to two or three factors.
Three reasons
1: Pakistan’s involvement was mandatory because of China. China and Russia want this forum to be promoted and it is on their interest and desire that Pakistan decided to go. If Bilawal had been replaced by another foreign minister, he would have gone too.
2: Pakistan’s establishment and diplomatic specialists in general have the opinion that we shouldn’t allow India a freehand on this forum. Aggressive Indian diplomats (Hawks) would undoubtedly like Pakistan not to attend so that nothing from the Pakistani point of view may be expressed in this forum or afterwards in the media. We were probably going to acquire some of the coverage by coming there.
3: There was also the idea that it is possible to make a breakthrough, to melt the ice. It was being said that India would maintain friendly relations with Pakistan as other member countries while playing host. It should be noted that sending an invitation was a compulsion to invite every member country as a host. It was mandatory according to the rules of the organization.
Bilawal’s performance?
The performance during Bilawal’s visit was decent. Young Bilawal spoke well. The Pakistani Embassy altered Bilawal’s address and inserted a rejoinder to the Indians following the conference speech by the Indian Foreign Minister. It was suitable.
But Bilawal should not have greeted people with his hands folded in the manner that he did. According to Bilawal’s supporters, it is Sindhi culture to stand with those who are treated with respect. Although this is a part of Sindhi culture, but Bilawal was the representative of Pakistan rather than Sindh. He ought to have behaved in the same ways that Pakistan is known for in order to uphold his position as Foreign Minister of Pakistan.
No one has ever done “Namaste” in the century-long history of Pakistan. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, Mohammad Khan Junejo, Ms. Benazir Bhutto, Asif Zardari etc. have been the leaders of Sindh, they made numerous foreign visits, never did it. Namaste is a part of Hindu culture. Perhaps no one explained this to Bilawal properly. Well, this is not a big issue.
Kashmir was not covered at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit, which is logical given that mutual issues and conflicts cannot be brought up there. However, Bilawal convened a press conference later on that a PTV representative and accompanying Pakistani media attended but boycotted by Indian journalists. I believe that the aggressive language from the Indian Foreign Minister prompted this action.
In an interview with the Indian media house India Today, Bilawal spoke in a good manner and answered some sharp questions with patience. When Bilawal mentioned the Indian proxy war and Kulbhushan, the Indian journalist spoke loudly and taunted Ajmal Kasab. Bilawal then calmly said that I am telling you the facts, why are you getting hyper. This round was good.
Indian attitude
Indian attitude was very harsh, inappropriate and wrong. India blew the cards of hosting. It had probably decided from the beginning that a Pakistani foreign minister is coming to India after twelve years, and his visit had to be sabotaged. So that the world does not get the impression that relations have improved. The Indian Foreign Minister spoke very harsh words in the conversation with the journalists and tried to ridicule Bilawal and Pakistan. CPEC was also targeted. Even during the conference, the Indian attitude remained unpleasant. Perhaps India does not want the Pakistani Prime Minister to participate in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit. India has not given any indication of improving the relationship.
The snow did not melt
Some in the Pakistani foreign office and establishment thought that the visit may break the ice or that India might have a cordial attitude. Hopefully, they will have lost all of their complacency. India has demonstrated that it is unwilling to give Pakistan any concessions. The fact that the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit is taking place in Srinagar is an issue. The Pakistani Prime Minister needs to consider his decision whether he should go.
Was the visit successful?
This visit cannot be called a success nor can it be called a failure. It should just be said that Pakistan was forced to participate in this meeting because of China and Russia, so it did.
It was called successful when the Indian attitude was pleasant. The Indian foreign minister would have given a positive sign in his speech, a sign of melting ice. There is no hope of improvement in India-Pakistan relations in the near future. Indian foreign minister’s anti-Pakistan talks were made in a very harsh, inconsiderate and rude manner.
How can one be happy with this reaction and response? How can we call this our success?
According to Bilawal Bhutto, the trip was successful since he clarified Pakistan’s position. If they continue to refer to this as their accomplishment, then so be it. However, it doesn’t matter whether you spoke to journalists in Delhi or Islamabad in the modern period. News reaches everywhere.
The question is; did Bilawal Bhutto go to India to tell these things? Certainly not. They had gone with the hope of a good relationship, with a faint hope of a breakthrough. But this did not happen. From this point of view, it is not a success.
However, it cannot be termed as a complete failure. Because the Foreign Office would have expected this result in its analysis. Of the two or three results they expect, one of them will obviously be this. Therefore, we should not be unhappy or depressed about what happened. It’s part of the game.
Facts swaddled in a cloak of praise
Before PDM came to power, the PML-N and PPP leaders and its experts frequently claimed that Prime Minister Imran Khan was to blame for Pakistan’s isolation. He thought that Khan’s lack of expertise had led to issues, that friendly nations were upset, that India had turned ferociously hostile, and so on.
Pro-PDM journalists, anchors had created an image that everything would change if PPP, PML-N veterans became the rulers. Relations with India will become pleasant, trade will begin, friendly countries will also give generous aid, thus there will be a period of development and prosperity that is unprecedented in human history, etc.
All of this turned out to be slanderous, offensive, and unfounded propaganda. Within a year, everyone understood that friendly nations didn’t instantly alter their policies just because they saw another face, nor was their displeasure with certain name or face. They have grown weary of assisting due to Pakistan’s ongoing state fragility and constant requests for assistance.
It also became evident that Indian foreign policy does not shift quickly, regardless of who is in power, including Imran Khan, Shah Mahmood Qureshi, Shehbaz Sharif of the PDM, and Benazir Bhutto’s son Bilawal Bhutto. Personal ties, friendships, and conflicts are not taken into consideration while making or altering state regulations. No one in India, Indian circles, diplomatic circles, the Indian media, analysts, journalists, or the intelligence community supported Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto. They did not speak well of him or give him any praise. Those who were friendly with Benazir Bhutto weren’t considerate of her son either. These are the sad realities of the present. They cannot be covered up with a shawl of well wishes.
Be it PDM or Tehreek-e-Insaaf, their supporters must understand and learn these basics.
