Why ScAs tensions between India and Pakistan escalate in the wake of the recent Pahalgam terror attack, calls for the suspension or abandonment of the Simla Agreement have resurfaced in sections of the Pakistani political and military establishment. However, despite emotional appeals and nationalistic fervor, such a move could prove to be a strategic and diplomatic catastrophe for Pakistan. Here’s a deep dive into why suspending the Simla Agreement would be a suicidal miscalculation for Islamabad.rapping the Simla Agreement Would Be a Strategic Blunder for Pakistan.
What is the Simla Agreement?
The Simla Agreement was a landmark peace treaty signed on July 2, 1972, between Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and Pakistani President Zulfikar Ali Bhutto following the 1971 war and the creation of Bangladesh. Its key objectives were to:
- Establish peaceful bilateral relations: Both countries committed to ending conflict and confrontation and working towards durable peace.
- Resolve disputes bilaterally: All issues, including the Kashmir dispute, were to be settled through peaceful negotiations between the two nations, without third-party intervention.
- Respect the Line of Control (LoC): The ceasefire line in Jammu and Kashmir was converted into the LoC, and both sides agreed not to alter it unilaterally.
- Restore normal relations: Steps were to be taken to resume communication, travel, trade, and cultural exchanges.
Why Pakistan Is Threatening to Suspend It
The Pakistani government and military have increasingly expressed dissatisfaction with India’s posture on Kashmir, citing the revocation of Article 370 and alleged human rights violations in the region. The argument made is that India has already “broken” the agreement, thus freeing Pakistan from its obligations. But this is a dangerous line of thought
Why Suspending the Simla Agreement is a Strategic Blunder for Pakistan:
Despite the heightened emotions following the Pahalgam attack, Pakistan’s decision to suspend the Simla Agreement could lead to several detrimental outcomes:
1. Loss of Diplomatic Leverage
The Simla Agreement, while emphasizing bilateralism, has been a key instrument for Pakistan to advocate for dialogue on the Kashmir issue on international platforms. By suspending it, Pakistan may lose this leverage and inadvertently give India more room to maneuver diplomatically. India has consistently used the Simla Agreement to resist third-party mediation in the Kashmir dispute. Without the agreement, Pakistan might find it harder to garner international support for negotiations.
2. Undermining Legal Standing:
The Simla Agreement is the primary bilateral document that both countries recognize as the basis for their relationship and discussions on Kashmir. Abandoning it could weaken Pakistan’s legal and diplomatic arguments in international forums concerning Kashmir and broader bilateral issues. It essentially removes a mutually agreed framework that Pakistan has historically used to call for restraint and negotiation.
3. Increased Risk of Uncontrolled Escalation:
The Simla Agreement, with its emphasis on respecting the LoC and resolving issues peacefully, has served as a crucial mechanism for maintaining a fragile peace and preventing large-scale military conflict. Its suspension could lead to more frequent and intense border skirmishes and significantly increase the risk of a full-blown war between two nuclear-armed neighbors. The agreement’s commitment to no unilateral alteration of the LoC has been a cornerstone of the military status quo.
4. Global Isolation and Backlash:
The international community largely views the Simla Agreement as a vital framework for regional stability in a volatile part of the world. Unilaterally suspending it could portray Pakistan as an aggressor and a nation unwilling to adhere to peaceful conflict resolution. This could lead to diplomatic isolation and potential economic repercussions, as major global players are likely to urge both sides to adhere to established agreements.
5. Economic Consequences:
Geopolitical instability has a direct and negative impact on economic stability. Pakistan’s markets have already reacted negatively to the tensions following the Pahalgam attack. Suspending the Simla Agreement would likely further erode investor confidence, destabilize the Pakistani currency, and negatively affect ongoing trade negotiations and potential financial aid.
The International Community’s Stance:
Even countries that have historically supported Pakistan’s position on Kashmir have consistently urged both India and Pakistan to adhere to the Simla framework, recognizing its importance in preventing a larger conflict. The suspension could undermine Pakistan’s relationships with these nations as well.
Conclusion:
While the emotional response to the Pahalgam terror attack is understandable, suspending the Simla Agreement would likely be a strategic miscalculation for Pakistan. The agreement, despite its imperfections and the lack of significant progress on the Kashmir issue, provides a vital framework for maintaining peace, diplomatic engagement, and regional stability. Abandoning it unilaterally could lead to significant diplomatic losses, increased risks of conflict, and negative economic consequences for Pakistan. As analysts suggest, restraint and adherence to established diplomatic norms might be the stronger hand in such a crisis.
