Apna Business PK

Course: Foreign Policy of Pakistan-I (4661) Semester: Autumn, 2021

Level: M.Sc.

Assignment No.2

Q.1 Critically evaluate Pakistan’s perception of BILLATERALISM. What were the factors that forced Pakistani foreign policy makers to adopt the policy of bilateralism? Ans

As a concept the guiding principle of Pakistan’s foreign policy which we call Bilateralism suffers from no confusion or complexity. The idea of conducting and developing our relations with each of the great powers on a bilateral basis, identifying areas of cooperation with one without repudiating an alliance with another and thus evolving an internally consistent and integrated policy requires no justification and implies no moral pretence The normal mode of maintaining relations between any two countries great or small, is to base them on their joint perception of their mutual interest. Abstracted from the realities and pressures of our turbulent age, Bilateralism is not a newfangled notion. The experience, however of injecting this principle into the body of a country’s external relations reveals a certain organic growth. It unfolds important implications and corollaries of the idea which are not always clearly perceived. Having been associated with this experience in government from 1958, I feel that these implications are of more than ephemeral interest. When an idea is sloganized, its original rationale or its concomitants tend to become nebulous. Its edges are blurred, its nuances eclipsed. To put the concept of Bilateralism in perspective, therefore it is necessary that we recall the changes in the global environment of Pakistan’s nascency, early development and maturity, and review the adjustments that Pakistan and other Third World countries made to them.

This review has to be preceded by the statement of an obvious fact. Even a silhouette of Bilateralism will remain indistinct if it is thought to cover the entire spectrum of a country’s external relations. The formation of collective loyalties by sovereign slates and their willing acceptance, in whatever degree, of consequent obligations is one of the characteristics of the contemporary world order. A state’s membership of the United Nations and its declared adherence to the United Nations Charter, which is now a mark of national independence, engages it constructively in a multilateral relationship. Likewise, on a lower juridical plane and with a relatively limited scope, there exist other associations of states which are formed without any duress or diktat. These are generally based on historical background, spiritual or cultural affiliation, geographical contiguity or community of economic interest. For Pakistan, its membership of the Islamic Conference, its bonds with Iran and Turkey and its links with Saudi Arabia as thecradle of Islam govern a considerable segment of its external relations. Then, there are causes of the emancipation of states from alien subjugation, the ending of usurpation or dominance and hegemony to which Pakistan cannot ideologically forswear its allegiance. The cause of the Arab World, Africa’s struggle against racism or residual colonialism and the general interest of the Third World in the establishment of an equitable economic order cannot but decisively influence our attitudes towards international issues and, to that extent, mould our external relationships. Honoring these obligations is axiomatic and outside the scope of Bilateralism. Indeed, insofar as all these orientations derive from objectively commendable principles, there is nothing in the concept of Bilateralism which postulates a chance in them. Bilateralism would degenerate into sheer opportunism if it meant a deviation from principles, not to speak of their renunciation. What I envision as a correct stance for states with a quantum of power similar to ours is a dignified posture. Not a vestige of dignity can be retained if a state were to lose its foothold on principle and let itself be buffeted by changing expediencies. I have enjoined it as an element of policy on the practitioners of our diplomacy that a developing nation’s bulwark against the pressures of the great powers is its unwavering adherence to principles and its capacity to articulate them in a given contingency. The notion is demonstrably false that a great power, qua a great power, remains beyond conversion to a principle which it might not itself have espoused. In the contemporary ago, when international issues arise that bear upon human destiny, the policy untenable, for a nation is one of alienation from principles.

Pakistan’s Foreign Policy

Having given the background and overall geopolitical environment, I shall now discuss the five stages through which Pakistan’s foreign policy has moved forward to confront multiple challenges.

Quaid-e-Azam MA Jinnah had spelt out Pakistan’s foreign policy soon after the birth of Pakistan in these words:

Pakistan opened diplomatic relations with all the countries of the world except Israel owing to Palestinian dispute.  Successive regimes made concerted efforts to normalize relations with India but failed because of unresolved Kashmir dispute and India not reconciling to the existence of Pakistan. In its desire to become the unchallenged big power of South Asia, India whipped up frenzy against all its neighbors. It applied multiple pressures on Pakistan and went to war thrice so as to force Pakistan to accept its hegemony and become its vassal state.

Pakistan in search of security and recognition

Pakistan started its journey as a nonaligned nation and remained the member of Non-Aligned Movement from 1947 till 1954. In the first 15 years of Pakistan’s life, the founding leaders remained deeply engrossed in establishing credentials of Pakistan’s statehood in the face of massive propaganda of India that Pakistan was a monstrosity.

It was described as a transient phenomenon and Indian economic wizards had given six months life to Pakistan. International recognition was sought and obtained in those agonizing years.

In its formative years, Pakistan attached importance to relations with Muslim countries and championed Muslim causes. Its efforts to build Muslim unity couldn’t make any headway. It cultivated special ties with Iran, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia.

Pakistan joined Western pacts

Aggressive posturing of India, its expansionist designs and intentions to absorb Kashmir, together with Afghanistan’s enmity, former USSR’s heavy tilt towards India, deepening economic crisis in early 1950s, sense of isolation, and the UN and Commonwealth failing to resolve the Kashmir dispute were some of the reasons which impelled Pakistan to join the US created SEATO and Baghdad Pact/CENTO in 1954/55. Thereon, its foreign policy was governed by the US interests.

Pakistan became part of the US defensive arc stretching to Iran and Turkey to contain the spread of communism in South Asia and the Middle East. Pakistan did so despite the fact that it had no direct clash with USSR, and had to pay a heavy price for it. When Pakistan acted as a conduit in 1971 to bring China closer to the USA, it further antagonized Moscow and it decided to teach Pakistan a lesson.

Alignment with the USA however, helped Pakistan in improving its economy and defense capability phenomenally during the 10-year Ayub’s golden era.

Tilt towards China

After the Indo-Sino border clash in 1962, in the wake of Moscow, Washington and the West providing arms to India at the cost of disturbing the regional military balance, Ayub Khan started tilting towards China and Russia. This move was seen as an act of defiance by the USA and it decided to penalize him. The US discriminatory attitude was discernible in the 1965 War with India when it stopped extending economic and military assistance including the supply of spare parts, whereas Russia kept supplying arms to India.

It is believed that both ZA Bhutto and Sheikh Mujib were cultivated to trigger agitations in both the wings to bring down Ayub regime and then pave the way for dismemberment of Pakistan in 1971.

Southwestern Asian Identity and policy of Bilateralism

After the 1971 tragedy, ZA Bhutto scrapped SEATO pact and membership of Commonwealth stating that those had proved worthless. He then tried to carve out Southwest Asian identity so as to draw economic strength and security from oil rich Arab States. This tilt towards the Gulf States brought in financial bonanza and job opportunities for Pakistan in the 1970s and also gave an opportunity to Pak military to make inroads into the GCC States. Saudi Arabia never hesitated to extend financial support to Pakistan in its testing times.

Another change in Pakistan’s foreign policy was affected by the Simla agreement in 1972 which led to the policy of bilateralism and non-alignment. Ceasefire line in Kashmir was renamed as LoC and Kashmir issue put on the back burner. India however, maintained its belligerent policy and carried out the nuclear test at Pokhran in August 1974, which impelled ZA Bhutto to go nuclear.

Afghan war (1980-1989)

Pakistan-US relations nosedived when Pakistan under Gen Ziaul Haq was put under sanctions in April 1979 by Carter regime on account of suspicion that it was pursuing nuclear program covertly. However, the Afghan war in 1980s once again made Pakistan a close ally of USA and was bestowed with $3.5 billion assistance and F-16 jets.

Pakistan had to face Russo-Afghan-India nexus and Al-Zulfiqar terrorism (militant wing of PPP). The Afghan war brought Pakistan coolness in Pak-Iran relations but brought Afghanistan under Mujahideen very close to Pakistan. Both talked of providing strategic depth to each other.

Pakistan’s challenges in Post-cold war era

After the breakup of USSR in 1991 and end of Cold War era, Pakistan was faced with multiple foreign policy issues. The US abandoned Pakistan, imposed sanctions on it under Pressler Amendment and befriended India.

Pakistan was up against Indo-US-Israeli nexus geared toward destroying Kahuta plant.


Q.2 Examine Pakistan’s relations with Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan I the aftermath of Pakistan’s joining of the western security Pacts-SEATO and CENTO. Ans

Egypt–Pakistan relations refers to the bilateral relations between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Modern relations traced back to 1947 when founder of Pakistan Muhammad Ali Jinnah paid a farewell visit to Egypt on the special invitation sent by King Fuad II.[citation needed] Egypt has an embassy in Islamabad and Pakistan has an embassy in Cairo. Both countries are members of the OIC (Organisation of Islamic Cooperation) and the “D8“.[1] Pakistan and Egypt are both designated Major Non-NATO allies, giving them access to certain levels of hardware and surplus military equipment from the United States.

Both Egypt and Pakistan have a close nationalist bond, the two nations were founded as modern nation-states in an era of nationalism, with a pre-dominant Muslim population. Modern Egypt regards its founder as Muhammad Ali of Egypt while Muhammad Ali Jinnah is regarded as Pakistan’s founder.

Egypt and Pakistan have had political, commercial and cultural relations since antiquity, including long-lasting trade through the Red Sea-Indian Ocean maritime routes and conquest by the PersiansAlexander the Great and Arabs. The ancient Greeks commented that the people living along the Indus River were most similar to ancient Egyptians in appearance, with Arrian’s Indica stating:

“The southern Indians resemble the Ethiopians a good deal, and, are black of countenance, and their hair black also, only they are not as snub-nosed or so woolly-haired as the Ethiopians; but the northern Indians are most like the Egyptians in appearance.”

In December 1946, Muhammad Ali Jinnah proclaimed that “if Pakistan were not created, ‘the whole of the Middle East and Egypt in particular would be subject to Hindu imperialism.'”[2]

Egypt and Pakistan established diplomatic relations in 1951.[1] In the 1950s, Pakistan strove for a leading role in the Islamic World which led to harsh frictions with Egypt.[3]

During the 1967 and 1973 wars, Pakistan and sent Egypt military aide, technicians, and personnel to aid the Egyptian military at war with Israel.[citation needed]

During war Egypt war with Israel, Pakistan Army sent weapons and fighter planes to Egypt.

In 1974, President of Egypt Anwar Sadat visited Pakistan to attend the second OIC meeting held in LahorePunjab, and generally supported Pakistan’s plans to become a nuclear power. But, however, the relations with Pakistan went sour when Pakistan began ties with the former Soviet Union.[4] The worsening of relations of Pakistan with the United States further played a key role.[4]

Nonetheless, the relations were normal with Egypt after the removal of Prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. In 1980s, President Hosni Mubarak and President Zia-ul-Haq further enhanced the relations; Egypt also played a vital role in Soviet–Afghan War where Egypt widely provided manpower (see Afghan Arabs) and military equipment to Afghan mujahideen in their fight against the Soviets. In 1988–1990 and 1993–1996, Egypt’s relations were soured with Pakistan Peoples Party formerly led by Benazir Bhutto who was generally close with the Soviet Union.

Pakistan–Saudi Arabia relations, or Pakistani-Saudi Arabian relations, refers to the bilateral relations between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Relations have been historically close and friendly, frequently described by analysts as constituting a special relationship.[1][2][3] Despite Pakistan’s close relationship with Iran (see Iran-Saudi Arabia proxy conflict) and Saudi Arabia’s growing relationship with India (see Indo-Pakistani wars and conflicts), Pakistan has sometimes been dubbed as “Saudi Arabia’s closest Muslim ally.”[4] Pakistan has, in line with its pan-Islamic ideology, assumed the role of a guardian of Saudi Arabia against any external or internal threat.

Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have sought to develop extensive commercial, cultural, religious, political, and strategic relations since the establishment of Pakistan in 1947. Pakistan affirms its relationship with Saudi Arabia as their most “important and bilateral partnership” in the current foreign policy of Pakistan, working and seeking to develop closer bilateral ties with Saudi Arabia, the largest country on the Arabian peninsula and host to the two holiest cities of IslamMecca and Medina and the destination of Muslim pilgrims from across the world.

According to a Pew Research Center survey, Pakistanis hold the most favourable perception of Saudi Arabians in the world, with 9 of 10 respondents viewing Saudi Arabia favorably.[6] The kingdom has often tried to further enhance its relations with Pakistan by giving it gifts and loans. Often these are gifts with symbolic religious value. For example, in 2014 Saudi Arabia gave Pakistan 200 tonnes of dates as a gesture of friendship.[7]

On 2 April 2014, Pakistan Today reported that Pakistan would sell JF-17 Thunder jets to Saudi Arabia, after the kingdom gave a grant of $1.5 billion to Pakistan in early 2014.

Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are leading members of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). Saudi Arabia is one of the strongest supporters of Pakistan during Pakistan’s wars with India, especially in the creation of Bangladesh from Pakistan’s eastern wing in 1971.

With Pakistan, it provided extensive financial and political support to the Taliban and the Afghan mujahideen fighting in the Soviet–Afghan War in the 1980s.[10][11][12] During the 1990–1991 Persian Gulf War, Pakistan sent troops to protect the Islamic holy sites in Saudi Arabia, but strains developed when some Pakistani politicians and Gen. Mirza Aslam Beg, the then-chief of staff of the Pakistani army openly expressed support for Saddam Hussein‘s regime in Iraq and its invasion of Kuwait.[13] Along with the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan were the only states to recognise Taliban rule in Afghanistan. In May 1998, Saudi Arabia was the only country that was taken in complete confidence by Prime minister Nawaz Sharif on Pakistan’s decision on performing atomic test in weapon-testing laboratories-III (WTL-III) in the region of the Chagai Hills. After he ordered the atomic tests (see codenames: Chagai-I and Chagai-II), Saudi Arabia, along with United Arab Emirates, were the only countries to backed Pakistan and congratulated the country for making the “bold decision”. Furthermore, Saudi Arabia promised to supply 50,000 barrels per day of free oil to help Pakistan cope with likely economic sanctions in the aftermath

Afghanistan and Pakistan border with one another; both have become members of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation. Relations between the two countries have been strained since 1947, when Pakistan gained independence and Afghanistan was the sole country to vote against Pakistan’s admission into the UN. Afghanistan immediately armed separatist movements in the nascent Pakistan and made irredentist claims to large swathes of Pakistani territory—which prevented the emergence of normalised ties between the two countries.[1] Further tensions have arisen with various issues related to the War in Afghanistan (1978–present), and with the millions of Afghan refugees who have sought shelter in Pakistan since the start of that war, water rights, the growing relations of India and Afghanistan.[2][3]

Bilateral relations between the countries have been poor, beginning immediately after Pakistan became independent in August 1947. Afghanistan’s sole vote against Pakistan’s admission to the United Nations in 1947,[4] due to Afghan discontent with the permanency of the Durand Line. Afghanistan immediately laid irredentist claims over Pashtun-dominated territories within Pakistan,[5][6] and demanded renegotiation of the border with the aim of shifting it eastwards to the Indus River,[7] deep within Pakistani territory. Shortly after Pakistani independence, Afghanistan materially supported the failed armed secessionist movement headed by Mirzali Khan against Pakistan.[8][9] Afghanistan’s immediate support of secessionist movements within Pakistan prevented normalised ties from emerging between the two states.[4]

In 1952 the government of Afghanistan published a tract in which it laid claim not only to Pashtun territory within Pakistan, but also to the Pakistani province of Balochistan.[10] Diplomatic relations were cut off between 1961 and 1963 after Afghanistan supported more armed separatists in Pakistan, leading to skirmishes between the two states earlier in 1960, and Pakistan’s subsequent closure of the port of Karachi to Afghan transit trade.[7] Mohammed Daoud Khan became President of Afghanistan in 1973, Afghanistan—with Soviet support—again pursued a policy of arming Pashtun separatists within Pakistan.[11]

In 2017, the Pakistani military have accused Afghanistan of sheltering various terrorist groups which launch attacks into Pakistan,[12] while Afghan authorities have blamed Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the ISI, for funding warlords and the Taliban, and for basing terrorist camps within Pakistani territory to target Afghanistan.[13][14][15] There is considerable anti-Pakistan sentiment in Afghanistan,[16] while negative sentiment towards the Afghan refugees is widespread in Pakistan,[17][18][19] even in Pashtun-dominated regions.[20]

However, former Afghan President Hamid Karzai (in office 2004–2014) has described Pakistan and Afghanistan as “inseparable brothers” while also alleging that Pakistan uses terrorism against Afghanistan,[21] which is due to the historical, religious, and ethnolinguistic connections between the Pashtun people and other ethnic groups of both countries, as well as to trade and other ties.[22] Each of the two countries features amongst the other’s largest trading partners,[citation needed] and Pakistan serves as a major conduit for transit trade involving landlocked Afghanistan.


Q.3 Critically evaluate Pakistan-Soviet Union relations as sequel to Pakistan’s decision of joining anti-Soviet military pacts.


The Soviet Union–Pakistan relations ( Russian: СоюзСоветскихСоциалистическихРеспублик -Пакистан; or USSR-Pakistan relations) refers to historical, political, international, and cultural relationships between the state of Pakistan and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR).

The Soviet Union–Pakistan relations (Russian: СоюзСоветскихСоциалистическихРеспублик -Пакистан; or USSR-Pakistan relations) refers to historical, political, international, and cultural relationships between the state of Pakistan and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). Establishing cultural and bilateral connections between Moscow and Karachi on May 1, 1948, the relations were succeed and predate the post-Soviet Russo-Pakistan relations (1991–present).

In 1965, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto first paid a state visit to Moscow and brought a great achievement to resolve territorial and political difference between the two countries.[1] On April 3, 1965, President Ayub Khan paid a first ever state visit to Moscow in a view to established a strong cultural relations with the people of the USSR. Publicly, President Ayub Khan thanked Soviet Premier Alexei Kosygin, and quoted:”Soviet Union is our next door neighbor with which Pakistan had close friendly connections in the past.”[1] During this visit, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Andrei Gromyko signed the agreements in the field of trade, economic cooperation and cultural exchange.[1]

As the result of President Khan’s visit to the Soviet Union, both countries concluded another agreement for cultural exchanges that was signed on 5 June 1965.[1] This agreement was on the basis of exchange the academicians, scholars, scientists, artists, sportsmen, and also the exchange of music records, radio and television programs.[1] During the signing ceremony of this cultural agreement, S.K. Romonovsky, the Soviet Cultural Minister quoted that “many pacts between two countries would help towards better understanding among the people of Pakistan and the USSR.”[1] Finally, on 17 April 1968, Premier Kosygin paid a visit to Pakistan and was welcomed by President Ayub and the Pakistan’s civil society members with cordial manner. During his visit Alexi Kosygin said: “that relations between Pakistan and the Soviet Union are very good indeed and we should want more and more to strengthen and better them.”[1]

The Soviet Premier’s visit in April 1968 was the first of its kind state visit and was of outstanding significance.[1] Kosygin agreed to the granting of aid for a steel mill, a nuclear power plant and also economic aid on a broad range of development projects. Quiet importantly, the first Soviet-Pakistan arms deal was made in 1968, which caused protests from India.[3] During the time of Kosygin’s reception, renowned poet HafeezJullundhri, sang out a poem, comparing Kosygin’s visit to the coming of the dawn, which would bring self-determination and justice to the Kashmiri people.[1] Kosygin enjoyed the amusing poetry, but remained silent on this issue.[1] Alexei Kosygin said:

There were many forces in the world which did not want to see friendship growing between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) and Pakistan. Pakistan would achieve great success in all spheres under the leadership of President Muhammad Ayub Khan

Trade and Economic relations

The Soviet Union had been long associated with Pakistan to help built its technical industries and consortium since late 1950s.[4] In 1950, Soviet Union and Pakistan established the multibillion-dollar worth Pakistan Oilfields (it was known as Pakistan-Soviet Oil Fields).[4] In 1969, the Pakistan Government employed “V/o TyazPromexport”, a USSR technical consortium, for vertically integrated steel mills in Karachi, Sindh Province.[5] In 1971, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto succeeded to bring full-scale Soviet investment in this project, and laid the foundations of the steel mills in 1972 with the help of Soviet Union.[5]

In 1980–85, the Soviet direct investment increased from 10% to 15% after officially signing an economic cooperation agreement in 1985.[6] The overall 1.6% of all Pakistan’s exports were accounted in 1981, which increased to 2.5% in 1985.[6] Particularly, the Soviet material exports exceeded the imports in three-fold method in early 1980.[6] Unlike, India, the USSR and Pakistan were able to continue the trade of their preferable machinery and technical goods, whilst also cooperated in agricultural products.[6] However, the Soviet Union maintained its restriction to exploit its military equipment and technology to Pakistan, instead offering an economic package (restrictively based on civilian basis) to Pakistan in 1981.[6] Instead, Pakistan went to secure the arms deal with the United States in 1981, including the acquisition of F-16 fighter jets.[6]

In April 1981, Pakistan and Soviet Union formed a joint private company to start the manufacture of the agriculture tractors, for which Soviet Union offered $20 million US dollars.[6] In November 1981, the Soviet Ambassador to Pakistan, V.S. Smirnov, publicly announced that the USSR was ready to provide the financial and technical assistance to set up the export-oriented industries.[6] In 1983, the USSR agreeably sold components of oil-drilled equipment for the construction of the Multan Heavy Water Reactor (Multan-I).[6] In 1985, with Soviet presence, President Zia-ul-Haq inaugurated the vertically integrated and the largest Steel Mill in the South Asia, the Pakistan Steel Mills in Karachi, on 15 January 1985.[5] This project was completed at a capital cost of Rs.24,700 million; and even as today, the Steel Mills maintains a respected history and great symbol for the relations of USSR and Pakistan.[5]

Cooperation in Energy sector

In November 1981, the USSR financially funded and solely establishing the Guddo Thermal Power Station, and surprise Pakistan by offering to build a second nuclear power plant in May 1981.[6] On 1 March 1990, the USSR again offered its nuclear deal with Pakistan and officially stated that the Pakistan has to increase its power generation needs and the USSR Ambassador to Pakistan, V.P. Yakunin, quoted that “once the required guarantees are provided, there is no harm in supplying a nuclear power plant to Pakistan.”[7] The Pakistan Production Minister, ShahidZafar immediately traveled to Moscow for such offer and discussed the issue on a visit; this was followed by Foreign Secretary of Pakistan, Tanveer Ahmad, shortly visiting the country.[8] However, after analyzing the technology, Benazir Bhutto of Pakistan (Prime minister at that time) rebuffed the plan and a made move to secure French deal which also went into cold storage.[7]

Political relations with Left-wing sphere of Pakistan

As late in 1960s, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto had been determined to oust the United States and the Central Intelligence Agency, and subsequently paid visit to Soviet Union as early in 1974.[9] Since then, Pakistan Peoples Party had been sympathetic to the Soviet Union, although it never allied with the Soviet Union nor the United States. The Soviet Union had extremely close relations with the Awami National Party (ANP) and the Communist Party of Pakistan.[10] The Awami National Party, since its inception, has been a staunch and loyal supporter of the Soviet Union.[10] In 1980s, the ANP had strong link that traced back to the Soviet Union and its entire leadership escaped to the Soviet Union and the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, whilst the third and second leadership took refuge in Afghanistan, the first and top level leadership was given asylum in Moscow and parts of the Soviet Union by the Soviet government.[10]

During the period of 1977–91, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) started its covert political activities through the Awami National Party, many of its senior leadership served Soviets intermediary and advisers.[10] The ANP and the PPP and other leftist entities formed the Movement for the Restoration of Democracy (MRD) that began to resisted Zia’s right-wing alliance, who had been supporting the Afghan mujaheddin factions in Soviet Afghanistan.[10] During the most of 1980s, the ANP demanded the end of backing of Afghan mujaheddin and acceptance of Kabul’s terms for speedy repatriation.[10] In 1987, calculations completed by Pakistan Institute of Public Opinions (PIPO), around ~66% of party’s respondents expressed themselves against Pakistan’s continuing support of Afghan mujahideen.[10]

However, the MRD suffered many set backs because of its pro-Leninist stance which was not the “line”[11] of Kremlin at that time.[11] The events that led the collapse of the Soviet Union shattered Pakistan’s left.[11] It almost disappeared, until Benazir Bhutto succeeded to unite the scattered leftists mass, which integrated into the PPP, and turned the radical and pro-Soviet leftists into more Social democracy with the principles of democratic socialism and after the death of Bhutto’s daughter it is the PTI chairman imran Khan who is nowadays a leftist social democratic leader and closely allied with pro-China line.[11]

Soviet-Afghan war

Relations between Pakistan and the Soviet Union fell to a low point following the Soviet Union’s military involvement in Afghanistan. Pakistan supported the anti-communist and religious extremist Mujahedeen forces who fought to overthrow the communist Afghan Government, which had usurped power in the Saur revolution in 1978, whereas the Soviets, ostensibly to support the communist People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan, entered Afghanistan, staged a coup, killed Hafizullah Amin, and installed Soviet loyalist BabrakKarmal as leader.

Pakistani support for the Mujahideen later brought in the involvement of the United Kingdom, the United States, Saudi Arabia and China’s support for the same anti-Soviet cause. Pakistan would receive aid from other Muslim nations, China, and the US in the advent of war by the USSR according to General Zia.[12] American presence in Pakistan as well as anti-Soviet/communist Mujahideen havens resulted in Soviet attempts to bombard targets in Pakistan by air that were seen as a threat to the security of Soviet forces in Afghanistan. Some of these resulted in air to air skirmishes between the Soviet Air Force and the Pakistan Air Force (PAF).


Q.4 Kashmir dispute is the main cause of Indo-Pakistan enmity. Analyze the statement focusing on Kashmir dispute between the two nations.


Kashmir is the oldest and the most serious dispute between Pakistan and India. Various efforts at the bilateral and multilateral levels could not resolve this problem. The two countries have fought hot and cold wars which undermined their bilateral relations. India’s efforts to strengthen its control of Kashmir by use of force have always been questioned by Pakistan that supports Kashmiri demand for right self-determination under the UN Resolution of 1948-49. This paper analysis the origins of the Kashmir dispute, its influence on Indo-Pakistan relations, and the prospects for its resolution.

According to the India’s official position, Kashmir is an “integral part” of India. Pakistan’s official position is that Kashmir is a disputed territory whose final status must be determined by the people of Kashmir. Certain Kashmiri independence groups believe that Kashmir should be independent of both India and Pakistan.There are many questions that need  to be answered when we talk about this sensitive issue.

We  collected some information from BBC News and Wikipedia regading Kashmir conflit.These are  arranged here in Q and A or step-by-step guide to the dispute

Why is Kashmir disputed?

The territory of Kashmir was hotly contested even before India and Pakistan won their independence from Britain in August 1947.

Under the partition plan provided by the Indian Independence Act of 1947, Kashmir was free to accede to India or Pakistan.

The Maharaja, Hari Singh, wanted to stay independent but eventually decided to accede to India, signing over key powers to the Indian government – in return for military aid and a promised referendum.

Since then, the territory has been the flashpoint for two of the three India-Pakistan wars: the first in 1947-8, the second in 1965.

In 1999, India fought a brief but bitter conflict with Pakistani-backed forces who had infiltrated Indian-controlled territory in the Kargil area.

In addition to the rival claims of Delhi and Islamabad to the territory, there has been a growing and often violent separatist movement against Indian rule in Kashmir since 1989.

What are the rival claims?

Islamabad says Kashmir should have become part of Pakistan in 1947, because Muslims are in the majority in the region.

Pakistan also argues that Kashmiris should be allowed to vote in a referendum on their future, following numerous UN resolutions on the issue.

Delhi, however, does not want international debate on the issue, arguing that the Simla
Agreement of 1972 provided for a resolution through bilateral talks.

India points to the Instrument of Accession signed in October 1947 by the Maharaja, Hari Singh.

Both India and Pakistan reject the option of Kashmir becoming an independent state.

How dangerous is the Kashmir dispute?

It is potentially one of the most dangerous disputes in the world and in the worst-case scenario could trigger a nuclear conflict.

In 1998 India and Pakistan both declared themselves to be nuclear powers with a string of nuclear tests.

In 2002 there was a huge deployment of troops on both sides of the border as India reacted to an armed attack on the national parliament in Delhi the previous December. Tension between the two countries has rarely been so high.

India said the attack was carried out by Pakistani-based militants assisted by the Pakistan government – a charge always denied by Pakistan.

For much of the last two decades, separatist militancy and cross-border firing between the Indian and Pakistani armies has left a death toll running into tens of thousands and a population traumatised by fighting and fear.

Are there grounds to hope the Kashmir dispute can be resolved?

Recent years have seen a big thaw in relations between India and Pakistan.

In addition to holding more talks, they have taken several Kashmir-specific confidence building measures. A bus service between the two parts of Kashmir was resumed in 2005.

In October 2008 an old trade road was reopened after 60 years across the Line of Control (LoC) that divides Indian and Pakistani-administered Kashmir. Earlier in the same month a rail service was introduced.

The two governments have huge international backing to continue the peace process and make their ongoing negotiations succeed.

An end to the violence and uncertainty in Kashmir would also be widely welcomed in India and Pakistan – and not only by those weary of the fighting or those who see it as a hindrance to the economic development of the South Asia region.

However, a diplomatic solution has escaped both sides for more than 60 years, and there are no signs of any new proposals yet.

Furthermore, both governments face powerful hard line groups within their own countries who will be carefully monitoring the talks to make sure concessions they deem to be unacceptable are not offered to the other side.

Who are the militants?

Since the insurgency began in 1989, the number of armed Muslim separatists grew from hundreds to thousands. However their numbers have dwindled over the past two years.

The most prominent militant group are the pro-Pakistani HizbulMujahideen. Islamabad denies providing them and others with logistical and material support.

The Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) was the largest pro-independence militant group but it gave up the armed struggle in 1994 and has since been active on the political front. Its influence is thought to have waned.

Other former militant groups have joined the umbrella of the All-Party Hurriyat (Freedom) Conference (APHC), which campaigns peacefully for an end to India’s presence in Kashmir.

However the hard line faction of the APHC – as well as several armed militant groups – are demanding a tripartite dialogue among Indian, Pakistan and Kashmiri representatives – but India has so far not agreed to this.

The moderate faction of the APHC, led by Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, opened bilateral talks with the Indian government in 2004.

But they have complained that Delhi has not taken steps it promised to create a conducive atmosphere for dialogue – such as the release of prisoners and the withdrawal of the laws that give sweeping powers to the armed forces.

Talks between the two sides last took place in early 2006.

Is religion an issue?

Religion is an important aspect of the dispute. Partition in 1947 gave India’s Muslims a state of their own: Pakistan. So a common faith underpins Pakistan’s claims to Kashmir, where many areas are Muslim-dominated.

The population of the Indian-administered state of Jammu and Kashmir is over 60% Muslim, making it the only state within India where Muslims are in the majority.

What is the Line of Control?

A demarcation line was originally established in January 1949 as a ceasefire line, following the end of the first Kashmir war.

In July 1972, after a second conflict, the Line of Control (LoC) was re-established under the terms of the Simla Agreement, with minor variations on the earlier boundary.

The LoC passes through a mountainous region about 5,000 metres above sea level.

The conditions there are so extreme that the bitter cold claims more lives than the sporadic military skirmishes.

Hardline protesters in Kashmir
Pakistan has said some militant groups are ‘terrorists’

North of the LoC, the rival forces have been entrenched on the Siachen glacier (more than 6,000 metres above sea level) since 1984 – the highest battlefield on earth.

The LoC divides Kashmir on an almost two-to-one basis: Indian-administered Kashmir to the east and south (population about nine million), which falls into the Indian-controlled state of Jammu and Kashmir; and Pakistani-administered Kashmir to the north and west (population about three million), which is labelled by Pakistan as “Azad” (Free) Kashmir. China also controls a small portion of Kashmir.

What’s the UN involvement?

The UN has maintained a presence in the disputed area since 1949.

Currently, the LoC is monitored by the UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (Unmogip).

So what of the future?

In Indian-administered Kashmir, many people are wary of confidence building measures (CBMs) which they fear may be used as a ploy to convert the LoC into a permanent border.

Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has reiterated that Kashmir’s borders cannot be redrawn, but they can be made “irrelevant”.

The Pakistani and Indian armies are for the most part observing a ceasefire along the LoC .

In what seemed like a major break from its position over the Kashmir question in 2008, Pakistan’s new President, Asif Ali Zardari, denounced separatist violence as “terrorism”. However, his spokesperson later clarified that the remark was about non-Kashmiri militants fighting in Kashmir.

Even so there has overall been a huge decline in violence in Indian-administered Kashmir over the past three years.

The main exception to that has been the events of the summer of 2008, when the government of Indian-administered Kashmir decided to transfer to a Hindu religious trust 100 acres of land on a mountain route leading to an important shrine.

This sparked widespread protests among Muslims in the valley throughout June, in which many civilians were killed. The decision was then rescinded in early July, which in turn triggered large-scale protests in the Hindu-majority districts around the city of Jammu.

The incident provided a good example of how volatile this beautiful part of the world can be – and how the capacity for violence is never far away.

The following is a timeline of the Kashmir conflict.

  • Spring, 1947: Protests against the Maharaja’s taxation policies turn into a rebellion against Dogra rule in the district of Poonch. The revolt spreads to Mirpur and Muzaffarabad districts.
  • July 19, 1947: The Muslim Conference, the majority party in the legislative assembly at the time, unanimously passes a resolution in favor of the accession of the state to Pakistan. Shortly thereafter, the “War Council” of the National Conference also meets; eight out of thirteen members vote in favor of accession to Pakistan.
  • August-October, 1947: Communal riots break out in the Jammu region of the state; an estimated 200,000 Muslims are killed and much of the remaining population flees to Pakistan to become part of the islamic state.
  • August 15, 1947: Independence and partition of British India into India and Pakistan. Jammu and Kashmir does not decide which dominion to join.
  • October 3, 1947: Pro-Pakistan chieftains from the districts of Poonch, Mirpur, and Muzaffarabad declare independence from Dogra rule, and announce the formation of a provisional “Azad” (free) Jammu and Kashmir government at Rawalpindi, Pakistan.
  • October 17, 1947: Patiala state forces enter Jammu & Kashmir to aid the Maharaja in his campaign against the separatists.
  • October 22, 1947: Pashtuns from Pakistan’s North West Frontier Province, backed by Pakistani army, occupied Kashmir in response to the Jammu massacres. Maharaja of Kashmir asks India for help.
  • October 26, 1947: Hari Singh signs an Instrument of Accession whereby Jammu and Kashmir accedes to India
  • 1947/1948: Indo-Pakistani War of 1947 commences. Indian troops enter Srinagar.
  • 1965: Pakistan launches Operation Gibralter which leads to Indo-Pakistani War of 1965.
  • December 6, 1971: Indo-Pakistani War of 1971; Secession of East Bangla
  • 1972: Republic of India and Islamic Republic of Pakistan agree to respect the cease-fire as Line of Control.
  • April 13, 1984: In Operation Meghdoot, the Indian Army captures the Siachen Glacier region of Kashmir, starting the Siachen conflict.
  • May, 1987: As a result of an agreement between Rajiv Gandhi and Farooq Abdullah, elections for the Jammu and Kashmir State Assembly are blatantly fixed in favor of the National Conference, resulting in widespread unrest in the state.
  • 1989: Armed militancy begins in Kashmir.
  • January 20, 1990: At least 50 Kashmiri protesters are shot to death by Indian paramilitary forces on the Gawakadal bridge in Srinagar in an incident that later becomes known as the Gawakadal massacre.
  • July 30, 1992:Balawaristan National Front founded with the aim of seeking independence of Balawaristan in Pakistan-administered Kashmir from Pakistan.
  • January 3, 1993: Indian paramilitary forces burn down the main market in the town of Sopore and open fire on bystanders, killing at least 55 in what becomes known as the Sopore massacre.
  • October 20, 1994: 1994 Kidnappings of Western tourists in India 3 Britons and 1 American kidnapped from New Delhi by Kashmir separatists. All 4 rescued successfully 2 weeks later.
  • July 4, 1995: 1995 Kidnapping of western tourists in Kashmir – six western tourists abducted from Pahalgam by militants demanding release of Pakistani cleric Maulana Masood Azhar. One later escapes, another is beheaded and four are still missing and presumed dead.
  • March 21, 1997: 1997 Sangrampora massacre Militants massacre 7 Kashmiri Pandit Hindus
  • January 25, 1998: 1998 Wandhama massacre – murder of 23 Hindu Kashmiri Pandits allegedly by Lashkar-e-Taiba
  • April 17, 1998: 1998 Prankote massacre – Islamic militants kill 26 Hindu villagers in Kashmir.
  • June 19, 1998: 1998 Chapnari massacre – massacre of 25 Hindu participants of marriage party in Doda district of Jammu & Kashmir by alleged Islamic militants.
  • August 3, 1998: 1998 Chamba massacre – murder of 35 Hindus in Chamba by alleged Kashmir militants.
  • May – July 1999: Kargil War fought between India and Pakistan.
  • December 24, 1999: Militants demanding release of imprisoned Kashmir separatists Hijack Indian Airlines Flight 814.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


علامہ اقبال اوپن یونیورسٹی  کی   حل شدہ اسائنمنٹس۔ پی ڈی ایف۔ ورڈ فائل۔ ہاتھ سے لکھی ہوئی، لیسن پلین، فائنل لیسن پلین، پریکٹس رپورٹ، ٹیچنگ پریکٹس، حل شدہ تھیسس، حل شدہ ریسرچ پراجیکٹس انتہائی مناسب ریٹ پر گھر بیٹھے منگوانے کے لیے  واٹس ایپ پر رابطہ کریں۔ اس کے علاوہ داخلہ بھجوانے ،فیس جمع کروانے ،بکس منگوانے ،آن لائن ورکشاپس،اسائنمنٹ ایل ایم ایس پر اپلوڈ کروانے کے لیے رابطہ کریں۔


Recent Posts

To Get All AIOU Assignments Contact Us On WhatsApp​

error: Content is protected ! click on any one google Ads to copy meterial
Open chat
How Can I Help You

Adblock Detected

Please Turn Off AD Bloker