Regional cooperation is no zero-sum game: Dr Ishrat Hussain

BR Research: What is the objective of the Foreign Ministers' Forum?
Dr Ishrat Husain: To commemorate the 60th Anniversary of the Institute of Business Administration (IBA), we have planned a number of events and public forums to engage our students, alumni and also the community at large. These days, the country's foreign policy; particularly relations with India and with Afghanistan; is a burning issue.
People who have served as foreign ministers under various regimes have been a part of policymaking on this front and we want them to present their own perspectives and inform our younger generations about how foreign policy is formulated and executed in the country; who are the key decision makers and the key considerations that drive the country's foreign policies. The first-hand account by the policy makers is a powerful tool to get a factual and accurate picture of the events as they evolved and unfolded.
These students are leaders of tomorrow, so it is an attempt to educate them so they may be able to make informed and intelligent decisions. It is also a forum for an enlightened public discourse on a topic which is seldom touched upon in conferences.
BRR: The discourse over Pakistan-India relations has historically been conducted in a security paradigm while economic implications take a back seat. How meaningful may we expect any discussion on regional co-operation to be, given this context?
IH: People have to realise that the primacy of political and security considerations have dominated the debate in both India and Pakistan for the last 65 years. Resultantly, we have made little progress. Some of us argue that we should now shift the gears - give priority to economic relations and people-to-people linkages, instead. We need to create constituencies in each other's countries for peace and collaboration. Trade and investments are the most important metrics that should drive the debate. People in both countries must realize that improved bilateral relations will benefit people on both sides of the border. Normalisation of relations and liberalisation of trade will bring bounties for the whole region.
It must be remembered that before 1947, this was a unified market which was connected by rail and road links; there were irrigation canals and other infrastructure to support economic co-operation in the Indian sub-continent and the rest of South Asia. Any other region, would have taken advantage of these facilitators to promote trade further. Unfortunately, South Asia is the least integrated region in the world.
This is contrary to economic theory and to the practices in the rest of the world. In North America; Canada, Mexico and the United States of America; the European Union and the bloc in south-east Asia; have all taken advantage of regional trade to support and boost their economies. All these countries have different political, cultural and legal backgrounds; yet they have managed to cooperate for trade and investments. The foreign policies in our region should also be centered around economic co-operation.
BRR: Relations between Pakistan and India take one step forward and two steps back. How do you view the current state of affairs between the two countries?
IH: It takes both sides to improve bilateral relations. I wrote a piece for Foreign Policy magazine after the last general elections. In that article, I had highlighted that all major political parties of Pakistan had committed to the normalisation of relations with India, in their respective election manifestos. That to me, was a political consensus which had not existed earlier.
What was needed, was a reciprocal stance from India's political landscape. Mr Manmohan Singh and the Congress Party had also been keen to improve relations between the two countries. They were also willing to work in accelerating the South Asia Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA).
However, the elections in India brought the Bharatiya Janata Party and Mr NarendraModi. Their attitude is not conducive for improvement in bilateral relations. The two steps back in relations between the two countries are only because of stance assumed by the Indian government which is being egged on by that country's media.
Pakistan was on the verge of granting non-discriminatory access to India in February 2014 but conditions have worsened in recent times. There are repeated violations of the cease fire on the Line of Control; the rhetoric and statements from Indian government officials are not helpful. The Indian media is playing a very unhelpful role. Leaders of both countries have to behave in a statesman-like manner.
The coming generations of both countries will benefit if we stop this rabble rousing and incitement of the people against each other. Better economic relations will lead to poverty alleviation and better living standards for the people of this region. After all, South Asia has the highest number of the poor people in the world.
BRR: The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor has led some to contend that better relations with India are not all important; and that progress is possible without them. How do you view these assertions?
IH: We are very fortunate as far as our geo-strategic position is concerned. We are neighbours to two economic giants. There are 2.5 billion people in these two markets. Any other country located in similar region would take advantage of these markets. Improvement in relations with both countries can take place at the same time.
The assumption that relations must always be bipolar; better with one country at the expense of another, is faulty. Regional co-operation is not a zero-sum game. All three countries stand to benefit from improved relations with regional countries. This is what diplomacy and effective foreign policy making is all about.
The need is to think beyond the five-year electoral cycle and in terms of long-term investments into peace which will yield immense dividends down the road. One may not remain the Prime Minister by that time, but the benefit that will eventually accrue to the country would be immense and that Prime Minister would be remembered for all times to come. Our leaders should look for a place in history rather than winning the next elections.