If Kulbhushan Jadhav's death sentence is commuted and he is allowed to return home safe, a crisis can be averted. And if he is executed, the disruption in bilateral relation, or whatever is left of it, will be enormous
There are two aspects to a Pakistani military court’s death sentence to Indian national Kulbhushan Jadhav. The first is the sham trial and the charges brought to the court by the Pakistani state. The second has to do with the impact the capital punishment will have — assuming Pakistan goes ahead with what the Indian Government has termed as “premeditated murder” — on the already fragile India-Pakistan relations. Apparently, Pakistan is unfazed on both counts.
It is clear that the trial was farcical. The Indian High Commission in Islamabad was not given access to the accused and was not kept informed about the trial. The proceedings themselves took place in great secrecy, so nobody quite knows how the arguments went back and forth, whether Jadhav was given the appropriate legal aid he deserved, if his ‘confession’ was genuine, and whether the prosecution provided substantial and fool-proof evidence of Jadhav being an Indian spy out to cause unrest in Balochistan. Within a few months of his arrest and court proceedings, he has been sentenced to death.
Islamabad and its Army want the world to believe that Jadhav was in Pakistan to create trouble on behalf of Research & Analysis Wing (R&AW). Here too, the picture is not clear. There have been reports, and from sources outside India, that the Indian was picked up from Iran and carted to Pakistan where fictitious charges were framed against him and he was incarcerated. Days later, Pakistan circulated a video of confession. Experts had picked holes in that too, saying that Jadhav was clearly speaking under coercion. Overall, there were too many speculations and too few tangible evidence to convict a man to death.
Contrast this alacrity with the sloppiness that the Pakistani state and its courts have demonstrated in bringing terrorists such as Hafiz Saeed to book for the 26/11 Mumbai attacks. Eight years have gone by, voluminous evidence has been submitted by India that fixes the blame on Saeed and his terror outfit, lashkar-e-Tayyeba — since then renamed to help the obliging authorities protect it after the outfit was condemned the world over as a terror organisation. In faraway US, David Coleman Headley was tried and convicted to a life term in jail for his complicity in the matter. He too has provided ample proof of Pakistani complicity in the Mumbai strike. But Pakistan will not act, because Saeed is a ‘strategic asset’ to create unrest in Jammu & Kashmir.
He has many Pakistani admirers, one among being former President Pervez Musharraf. Saeed is a ‘freedom fighter’ who is engaged in patronising and encouraging those ‘freedom fighters’ based in Kashmir valley. Of course, General Musharraf does not have similar affection for the other ‘freedom fighter’, Masood Azhar, whose Jaish-e-Mohammed reportedly once made a bid on his life in 2003. The General has no hesitation in calling Azhar a “terrorist” on account of that, but the unrest and killings of hundreds of innocents in Kashmir and elsewhere in India, often backed or at least lauded by Saeed, are not acts of terror!
Pakistan’s duplicity is astounding and taken to such brazen extent that the country has lost all sense of remorse. It has been named and shamed on various global platforms, by friends (with the exception of China) and foes alike. It has turned friends into foes (Afghanistan and Bangladesh) and allies into sceptics (the US, the UK etc) due to its Janus-like conduct on terrorism.
Pakistan’s Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif days has said that his country wants friendly relations with all nations, especially its neighbours. He has queer ways of seeking friendship with India, though — the one neighbour Pakistan has had the biggest problems, fought two full-fledged wars and two smaller intensity ones (and lost them all). Pakistani non-state actors with complete support of the state apparatus, particularly the Army and the Inter-Services Intelligence, have for decades engaged in acts of terror, particularly in Jammu & Kashmir. They know they cannot separate Kashmir from India even after co-opting the separatists in the valley and providing funds to stone-pelters, and yet they continue because inflicting harm on India, not winning against it, has become their goal.
If Jadhav is executed, the disruption in bilateral relation, or whatever is left of it, will be enormous. Minister for External Affairs Sushma Swaraj has said the consequences could be grave. What is Pakistan seeking to achieve by such brinkmanshipIJ The first is that it wants to use Jadhav as a bargaining tool to get India to acknowledge New Delhi’s hand in the disappearance of one of its Army officers from Nepal-India borders. Pakistan suspects the Indian intelligence agencies’ hand in the incident. This accusation is far from proved. The second, and the more long-term one, is that Islamabad wants India to go slow on its aggressive policy of isolating Pakistan globally.
That Pakistan has been rattled by the Modi Government’s success is beyond argument. last year’s South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (Saarc) summit to be held in Pakistan, was cancelled because India, Bangladesh and Afghanistan refused to participate in the wake of the Uri terror attack. Others such as Nepal and Sri lanka remained aloof, sensing the general mood against Islamabad. And, while the Trump Administration is expected to deal with caution with Pakistan, it will most likely warm up to India.
Islamabad has kept all its eggs in one basket: China. Beijing has continued to block India’s effort to get Masood Azhar on a United Nations terrorist designated list. It refuses to condemn terror acts emanating from Pakistan and impacting neighbouring regions. Pakistan believes that with China by its side, it will be able to win support from Russia and Iran. It’s true that Russia has been warming up to Islamabad in recent times, but the relationship is one of utility, not unity. Russia is unlikely to take Pakistan’s side against India if it comes to the crunch. Iran, on its part, remains outwardly warm at best and non-committal generally.
If Kulbhushan Jadhav’s death sentence is commuted and he is allowed to return home safe, a crisis can be averted. It’s difficult to predict the shape the bilateral will take in case he is executed, or what the “consequences”, which Sushma Swaraj spoke of, will be. But they cannot be something Pakistan should look forward to.
(The writer is Opinion Editor, The Pioneer)