The Washington Post has quoted a Pakistani diplomat in India as having said: “There seem to be second thoughts on the Indian side about normalizing relations. Maybe they think Zia-ul-Haq is going to be forced out and there is no point in talking to him now”. The statement is inaccurate on a number of counts. The relations between India and Pakistan are fairly normal; they do not need to be “normalized”; the two countries maintain full diplomatic relations. Pakistan imposes certain limitations on these relations – in respect of trade and posting of newspaper correspondents, for instance. But it has its own reasons for doing so and India is willing to live with these restrictions and can do so without too much inconvenience. Islamabad has been keen on a no-war pact. It cannot claim that New Delhi was enthusiastic about it at any stage. Though India has proposed a treaty of friendship and co-operation instead, it has done so mainly in order to avoid the charge of intransigence. As for the latter and more substantial part of the statement attributed to an unnamed Pakistani diplomat, it is difficult to say whether New Delhi has in fact concluded that General Zia is going to be forced out. But surely even if it took the opposite view, it would be ill-advised to seek his friendship. This would cost it dear – the goodwill of the people of Pakistan who have demonstrated in a most convincing manner their abhorrence of the regime and their determination to get rid of it. No Indian government in its sense would wish to pay such a heavy price for the dubious honour of shaking the General by the hand.
India, it is hardly necessary to say, has not appointed itself as the guardian of democracy and human rights in the region. It is not another America or Russia which feels entitled to send its forces into neighboring countries to protect “democracy” or “socialism”. It has no choice but to deal with dictatorships of different hues. There are too many of them in the world and this country happens to be surrounded by them on all sides. As a democracy, it is naturally interested in the liberties of other peoples, especially those who were not long ago part of united India. But that has not prevented it from dealing with generals in office either in Pakistan or Bangladesh. But it cannot possibly side with them against their people at least when the latter are engaged in a bitter fight for their rights as the people in Pakistan are right now. General Zia is understandably interested in creating the impression of business as usual both at home and abroad. But his interests and ours cannot be said to coincide. That much should be obvious even to those who are so opposed to Mrs. Gandhi that they regard her expression of concern for human rights in Pakistan as a form of intervention. It is possible that General Zia will survive. But that possibility should not persuade New Delhi to act in a manner that will tilt the balance within Pakistan in his favour.