The recent talks between NSAs were called off by Pakistan at the penultimate moment due to India&’s firm terms and conditions and the cancellation has led to a blame game. These talks were much publicised media events and watched with interest across the globe. Ultimately they proved to be a damp squib. There were many reasons why this happened and we need to draw lessons from their failure for the future.

These lessons need to be considered because every time we have proposed talks, incidents have forced their cancellation, or in some cases even abandonment of the process for years. This time too, events leading up to the talks could have easily led to a complete breakdown had the Indian government not been strong and resilient till almost the end. Terror attacks in small measure and increased ceasefire violations are but natural in such cases and would need to be ignored till they cross an acceptable threshold.

The foremost issue for India is to take note of the true power behind the throne in Pakistan. There is absolutely no point in proposing talks with the civilian government of Pakistan, unless their army is on board. Every time we have attempted peace overtures with the elected government, the army and the ISI have ensured that they fail. In case we still want to do business with only the elected leadership, then we need to either create or await the automatic creation of adverse economic or security conditions or both in Pakistan.

In the meanwhile India needs to continue to prove to the world that Pakistan and its army and ISI in particular cannot be trusted nor be expected to deliver results. By continuing to increase pressure on the LOC by aggressive posturing and increased deployment, India would enhance pressure on Pakistan. This would adversely affect them as their army would be torn between the situation on the border with India and dealing with the increasing militancy in their eastern theatre. Conventional military pressure is the only way to push their army to desire peace.

Intense media scrutiny prior to the talks is always counter-productive. The hype drives public opinion and impedes decisions by the government in situations involving attempts at disruption. It tests the resolve of the government to go ahead in spite of provocations.

The next issue is location. Talks in India would always have Pakistan raising the need to interact with the Hurriyat. Talks anywhere else will not lead to similar demands. Preventing members of the Hurriyat from travelling abroad is always possible and can be done. India has the power to do so, and ignore any contrary public opinion. The Hurriyat meeting the Pakistan High Commissioner prior to such occasions should be largely ignored as a pinprick or a simple irritant. India also needs to be clear on what the trigger points would be for cancellation of talks. The trigger points should be agreed upon prior to discussing talks. If there can be no agreement on the trigger points, then there should be no reason for any talks.

This time we planned the talks from NSA downwards to Directors-Generals of the BSF and Rangers and finally the Directors- General of Military Operations. Ideally it should have been the BSF and Rangers first, followed by the DGMOs and finally the NSAs. That way, some progress on the ground could have been achieved; confidence built and tensions reduced between the two sides before serious bilateral issues were discussed by the NSAs. Even if the final NSA level talks are postponed or abandoned, some manner of peace has and would be established at the ground level, benefitting the local populace.

While these are some lessons, India as a nation needs to reconsider its desire to talk to Pakistan. Have we really achieved anything by talking to them in the last seven decades? Has there even been a semblance of improvement of relations? Most efforts at peace have been from the Indian end, yet as the results show nothing tangible has ever happened on ground. Every major effort towards peace has resulted in an incident which has set peace talks back by years. Every Indian Prime Minister has tried talking peace and ultimately let it go.

While logically and economically, it is essential that peace prevails on all our borders as we grow economically stronger and more powerful, we cannot be seen to be always asking for talks and in reality getting nowhere. Militant action in Pakistan&’s eastern theatre is causing physical casualties and also simultaneously bleeding them economically. The time is not far when Pakistan&’s eastern theatre would be on fire and also on the verge of splitting away from the country. As a nation, Pakistan is in an economic and political mess. The only way it has been able to bind people together is anti-India propaganda. Their only claim to fame today is being a nuclear power with a growing arsenal.

India now needs to create situations where the demand for talks comes from its neighbour. To do this India must hit back harder for every action which comes from the other side and refuse to talk or negotiate. There should not be any attempt for talks till Pakistan asks for it. They would before the next SAARC conference in Pakistan in 2016. That is the time when India should lay down her terms and conditions. Till then she must continue to exert as much pressure as she can.

The writer is a retired Major-General of the Indian Army.