c



  c   cc

 c    
c 

Ê





 

   




  




 !  !"#$#

 
 c"c 
#


"$c%"
 
 


c
c  
 $

c%&
'
c " c c



'
c
(
$ 

)!  *! ! ! + ! is defined by the violent partition of British India in
1947, the Kashmir dispute and the numerous military conflicts fought between the two nations.
Consequently, even though the two South Asian nations share historic, cultural, geographic, and
economic links, their relationship has been overwhelmed by hostility and suspicion.

After the dissolution of the British Raj in 1947, two new sovereign nations were formed ² the
Union of India and the Dominion of Pakistan. The subsequent partition of the former British
India displaced up to 12.5 million people, with estimates of loss of life varying from several
hundred thousand to a million. India emerged as a secular nation with a Hindu majority
population and a large Muslim minority while Pakistan was established as an Islamic republic
with an overwhelming Muslim majority population.

Soon after their independence, India and Pakistan established diplomatic relations but the violent
partition and numerous territorial disputes would overshadow their relationship. Since their
independence, the two countries have fought three major wars, one undeclared war and have
been involved in numerous armed battles and military confrontations. The Kashmir dispute is the
main center-point of all of these conflicts with the exception of the Indo-Pakistan War of 1971
which resulted in the secession of East Pakistan (now called Bangladesh).

There have been numerous attempts to improve the relationship ² notably, the Simla summit,
the Agra summit and the Lahore summit. Since the early 1980s, relations between the two
nations bitterer particularly after the Siachen conflict, the intensification of Kashmir insurgency
in 1989, Indian and Pakistani nuclear tests in 1998 and the 1999 Kargil war. Certain confidence-
building measures ² such as the 2003 ceasefire agreement and the Delhi±Lahore Bus service ²
were successful in deescalating tensions. However, these efforts have been held up by Pakistan's
alleged involvement in various terrorist activities in India. The 2001 Indian Parliament attack
almost brought the two nations on the brink of a nuclear war. Additionally, the 2008 Mumbai
attacks (which was carried out by Islamic terrorists from Pakistan) resulted in a severe blow to
the ongoing India-Pakistan peace talks
CONCEPT OF PEOPLE TO PEOPLE DIPLOMACY:

In the aftermath of Second World War, the realm of conflict resolution underwent radical
transformation with the evolution of new concepts and mechanisms. Regarding the concept of
peace, we observe new meanings and interpretations provided by the theorists of conflict
resolution. Generally peace is termed as an absence of any violence. Opposed to it is the notion
of ³positive peace´ which emphasizes the removal of all forms of injustice including structural
and cultural violence. It envisages creation of societies free of all forms of discrimination and
oppression. This focus on the attainment of comprehensive peace and transformation of societies
has led to the rise of new approaches towards management and settlement of various conflicts. It
is in the background of these theoretical developments that we encounter the rise of new
approaches to peace building such as citizen diplomacy. The traditional approaches to conflict
resolution have come under great criticism owing to their failure to eliminate the deep-rooted
acrimony and hostility between the rival groups. This has divided the conflict resolution
literature into two major strands of research: the structural and psychosocial perspectives. The
former approach highlights the neglect of rights, denial of justice and political issues in the
emergence of a dispute and attempts to settle a conflict by providing structural remedies. In
contrast, the psychosocial paradigm focuses on building reconciliation by seeking to remove the
underlying hostility and prejudice between groups and parties. The citizen peace initiatives
endeavor to improve the general context of relations between the two rivals while the dispute
settlement process continues at the official level. The major objective of citizen peace activities
is to minimize the impact of conventional enemy images between the adversaries, which only
strengthen with the ripening of dispute. Therefore, citizen diplomacy emerges as a necessary
complement to official dialogues in pursuit of a durable comprehensive positive peace. One of
the first and most well-known proponents of citizen peace activism is the former US ambassador
John McDonald. McDonald and Diamond expanded their preliminary conceptualization of Track
One-Track Two diplomacy to create a systemic approach, i.e. multi-track diplomacy. They argue
that the ability to make useful contribution to dynamics of peace-making lie beyond the
boundaries of governmental officials and processes. In their assessment, private individuals
belonging to various walks of life can facilitate understanding between adversaries by bridging
the perceptual divide. Thus, their conceptualization of multi-track diplomacy includes nine
separate but corresponding tracks of citizen peace building. These include business, private
individuals, educational institutions, faith-based organizations (FBOs) and media. The nine
tracks explained by McDonald and others can be confusing and ambiguous in conceptual terms.

Gawerc argues that the involvement of civil society in peace-building at various stages of
conflict resolution plays a critical role in the success of peace making process at different stages
of the conflict. Before the onset of militarized hostilities, civil society activism can help to
provide an early warning of escalating tensions. Moreover, grass-roots organizations can work to
answer grievances between communities before they explode into violent conflict. Thus, conflict
prevention can take place with the mobilization and active involvement of civil society. Once
militarized conflict develop between groups, civil society can perform several functions such as
relief work, keeping a check on war atrocities and preparing the ground for future dialogue by
establishing links with grassroots peace organizations. Similarly, after the conclusion of peace
negotiations, the civil society organizations can be engaged in reconstruction work, laying the
foundations of a durable peace by eradicating roots of conflict and connecting with other citizen
organizations across the former conflict lines to establish a network of communications. Thus
Gawerc provides a detailed map of pre- and post conflict activities of civil society organizations
at the local level.

The people-to-people dialogues are increasingly gaining significance in theory and practice of
peace building. They are defined as activities of ordinary citizens across the divide, with an aim
to develop linkage, communication and understanding. While difficult negotiations ensue
between the leaders of the communities or states at the official level, the citizen dialogues can
create a sense of shared existence and a vision of co-operative future between members of the
conflicting groups. Located in various domains of social life, these dialogues carry a functional
and informational significance. Apart from working to enhance co-operation in a particular field,
Saunders believes that people-to-people contact leads to ³getting to know the other side.´ This
informational aspect of citizen dialogues echoes in the activities of Track Two dialogues too with
the difference being the nature of participants. Since the Track Two engages former or current
government officials in their private capacity, the citizen diplomacy thrives on the networking
and communication of ordinary citizens. But the single most important utility of citizen
dialogues lies in generating a constituency of peace and developing a sense of commonality and
humanity across the conflict divide.

)!,*! !!+ !-.,/,,0


The civil society in India and Pakistan has only recently begun to come to its own and engage in
peace-building activities. Since the Partition of the Indian sub-continent in 1947, the regional
environment has been dominated by one of the most enduring rivalries of the modern times. The
two countries engaged in several wars and numerous unresolved controversial disputes. In this
extremely inhospitable atmosphere, the growth of networks of citizen interaction between the
peoples of India and Pakistan has been extremely limited. The nature of Indo-Pakistan relations
has determined the fate, direction and effectiveness of citizen linkages in the region. Several
psychological, administrative and legislative factors are deemed to be responsible for limited
civil society engagements in South Asia. On the eve of independence, the leaders of India and
Pakistan expressed desire to establish friendly relations between the two. At that time, several
proposals were discussed to create conditions for open travel between the two countries. But
these optimistic proposals were soon overtaken by the rising tide of hostility between the two
sides. Thus, in the first decade after partition, the citizens of India and Pakistan were considered
as illegal aliens in each other¶s territories. This unfriendly state of affairs has existed for six
decades after partition. The biggest factor behind this situation is the climate of hostility, mistrust
and bitterness between India and Pakistan. The demonization of the ³other,´ with the transfer of
historical grievances to future generations through history books and media has been the corner
stone of official policy on both sides. Beyond these psychological factors, there exist several
legislative hurdles in the way of open travel between India and Pakistan. The 1974 bilateral visa
agreement (as amended in 1984 and 1985) led to imposition of strict conditions for travel
between the two countries. In Pakistan, issuing a visa to an Indian citizen falls under the
jurisdiction of the Interior Ministry instead of the Foreign Ministry, as the Indian nationals are
presumed to be a threat to national security. The visitors from the two sides are generally
required to visit a police station upon arrival in the country. In recent years, the situation has
improved in terms of relaxation of some of these conditions. However, travel usually remains
enormously difficult between the two sides. In addition, there are several infrastructural issues
which make the contact between citizens of India and Pakistan extremely hard. Inadequate
infrastructure and poor services for travel between the two countries also add to the sadness of
these peoples. Air travel is an expensive as well as limited medium of travel in South Asia. With
the continuation of official diplomacy between the two countries, the governments have lately
eased the travel restrictions. New linkages such as by train and bus services are being operated
between the two. This is only a recent development which needs to be adopted on a permanent
basis in order to facilitate greater citizen contacts between India and Pakistan, which can
subsequently engage in ³bottom-up´ peace-building. We can observe how several factors
hindered the travel and interaction between the citizens of the two countries. These have a direct
bearing on the impact of networking and communication between these citizens. We have seen
how citizen diplomacy and civil society have attempted to build a vision of cooperation,
understanding and peaceful coexistence in various conflict areas across the world. In South Asia,
the citizens of India and Pakistan have only recently begun to participate in activities in order to
form a web of networks in the region. It is in the background of this ground reality that we need
to examine the peace building activities by the ordinary citizens and civil society to settle the
Indo-Pakistan dispute. One of the most prominent examples of citizen contacts is provided by its
engagement in rebuilding trust in the aftermath of attack on Indian parliament in December
2001. Events like the limited war on Kargil in 1999 and the Indo-Pakistan military stand-off of
2001-02 had serious consequences for the inter-state relations. In this atmosphere of extreme
hostility and tension, it was only the civil society groups who were able to keep channels of
communication open and urge the two governments to begin negotiations with each other. The
efforts of citizen diplomats found an echo when in early 2004 the Composite Dialogue process
started between the two countries. Generally the citizen¶s peace movement between India and
Pakistan comprises of individuals from all walks of life. The peace movement enjoys
representation from social and human rights activists, women¶s groups, journalists, lawyers,
youth, writers, artists, academics, scientists and labor groups among others. In the following
pages, we will briefly discuss some of the major citizen peace initiatives between India and
Pakistan, their goals, movement and performance during the last decade.
PEACE INITIATIVES BETWEEN INDIA AND PAKISTAN:

ë One of the pioneering peace initiatives between India and Pakistan is the India-Pakistan
Friendship Society established by Kewal Singh in 1987, a former Indian foreign
secretary. This was one of the first citizen dialogues between the two countries which
strove to increase popular exchanges between the two peoples in order to generate more
understanding for the ³other´ amongst the people. Prominent citizens like Khushwant
Singh, Bhai Mohan Singh and Inder Kumar Gujral were its members.

ë Another example of citizen negotiations is the South Asian Dialogue which was held in
different cities of the region. These meetings were arranged to discuss issues like
economic and political growth, human rights and cultural reforms.21 Thus, we observe
that early dialogues between India and Pakistan were more on the lines of Track Two
with very limited membership and outreach. The real spurt of popular participation came
in the 1990s.

ë The largest citizen peace dialogue between India and Pakistan is the Pakistan India
People¶s Forum for Peace and Democracy (PIPFPD), established in September 1994 in
Lahore by prominent citizens of the two countries. The key objectives of this dialogue are
to work towards resolution of all disputes and bring an end to nuclear and conventional
arms races between the two sides. On the eve of its creation, it was decided that PIPFPD
will never accept foreign funding and will allow a limited number of individuals to travel
across the border. Also it vowed to form linkages with other grassroots citizen
organizations in the region. The PIPFPD argues in favor of peaceful resolution of all
disputes between India and Pakistan. Amongst the activities of PIPFPD are developing
linkages with other like-minded organizations, producing publications, organizing talks
and meetings and reaching out to all sections of society on both sides to convert them to
the cause of peace.

ë Following the rising hostility between the two nuclear-armed states, several feminist
activist groups merged together to form Women¶s Initiative for Peace in South Asia
 (WIPSA). This group led by Asma Jehangir and late Nirmala Deshpande, made bus trips
across the border ensuing charges of treachery against them from the rightwing groups in
both the countries. Beyond WIPSA, there has emerged a network of women¶s NGOs in
India and Pakistan which connect with their counterparts across the border to establish
relations of trust and confidence. The female writers of South Asia have revisited the
history of Partition and conflict and provided an alternative account of the plight of
ordinary people. Thus, even when the official dialogues between the two countries broke
down, the women¶s forums provided a venue for continuation of communication and
understanding between the two countries.

ë The Delhi-Lahore Bus is a passenger bus service connecting the Indian capital of Delhi
with the city of Lahore, Pakistan via the border transit post at Wagah, which is the only
border crossing point between India and Pakistan opened for international travelers. The
bus was of symbolic importance to the efforts of the governments of both nations to
foster peaceful and friendly relations. In its inaugural run on February 19, 1999, the bus
carried the then-Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, who was to attend a summit
in Lahore and was received by his Pakistani counterpart, Nawaz Sharif at Wagah. Its
official name is the „
„ 
(Urdu for  
 ). While the bus service
had continued to run during the Kargil War of 1999, it was suspended in the aftermath of
the 2001 Indian Parliament attack on December 13, 2001, which the Indian government
accused Pakistan of instigating. The bus service was resumed on July 16, 2003 when
bilateral relations had improved.

ë As per the Shimla Agreement of 1972 and in a bid to restore peaceful ties after the Indo-
Pakistani War of 1971, both nations launched the Samjhauta Express connecting the
Pakistani city of Lahore with the Indian town of Attari, which is close proximity to the
city of Amritsar. The Thar Express was launched to connect the Pakistani city of Karachi
through the Munabao station and the Indian city of Jaipur through the Khokhrapar
station.Plans and negotiations are underway to launch a train service connecting the
Pakistani city of Sialkot with the Indian city of Jammu. The Thar Express is the other
passenger railway link between the two countries, running from Karachi, Pakistan to
 Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India. It was not discontinued after Partition but was after the Indo-
Pakistani War of 1965. On 18 February, 2006, it was revived after a period of 41 years.
ë !+ 0 is a campaign jointly started by the two leading media houses The Jang
Group in Pakistan and The Times of India in India. The campaign aims for mutual peace
and development of the diplomatic and cultural relations between the two nations in
South Asia. It started on the 1st of January 2010. The campaign has received warm
response from India and Pakistan. Aman ki Asha was inspired by the groundbreaking
work of Friends without Borders, an International NGO that launched bold, love-based
people-to-people campaigns between the children and people of both countries is from
2005 - 2007. The Times of India and the Jang group both partnered with Friends without
Borders and picked up the efforts after the Dil se Dil Border Concert was canceled in
August 2007. "Peace efforts between India and Pakistan are the real need of the hour and
only prudence, foresightedness and sincerity can do wonders for both countries. In this
people of India communicate with the people of Pakistan.
ë This was the vision that led Sanjan Nagar Public Education Trust Higher Secondary
School (SNPETHSS), Lahore, and The Millennium School (TMS), Amritsar and Delhi,
India, to collaborate and organize exchange visit with the confidence of a sustainable
project for the promotion of learning sharing and peace. As a part of the µIndo-Pak Peace
Project through Education¶, a 10-member delegation including six secondary and higher
secondary school students of SNPETHSS on 7th September, 2010, paid a four-day
exchange visit to The Millennium School in Amritsar and Noida, Delhi.

IMPLICATIONS:

ë The critical relations between India and Pakistan have been hurdle in achieving the
best possible result out of the peace process. India¶s differences with Pakistan on
many issues have never let the two countries to come closer.
ë Peoples of both the countries are less determined to change their views and opinions
regarding to each other especially the aged people who had witnessed the partition,
the 3 wars fought between both countries. As the Pakistanis say that Indian media
always depicts the Pakistanis as backward and shows that Pakistanis are desperate to
watch their movies and listen to their songs as they are much prone to adopt indian
 culture. And they always show Pakistani involved in violating the security measures
of both the countries.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Following are the recommendations to promote people to people contact between both countries
to enhance the peace process:

ë Government of both countries should focus on the common goals of people.

ë Positive approach must be adopted to resolve the outstanding issues which are spoiling
the relations between India and Pakistan since long.
ë Prejudiced and selective approach would not help resolve the issues rather it will cause a
deadlock. The serious matters must be resolved through negotiations.
ë The peaceful dialogues can give way to developing opportunities such as trade relations
and most significantly fighting terrorism and its causes.
ë There should be development of confidence and trust among the people of both countries.
There is a need to attend to the critical issues with a due honesty, sincerity and a genuine
recognition of the interests of the people of Indo- Pak will help solve the issues.
ë The visa issue should be resolved in order to allow the healthy people to people contact.
And visa restriction should be given the relaxation to enhance the travel and transport
between two countries.
ë Other vital issues like poverty, education, good, energy, trade and commerce, terrorism
should be addressed with open mindedness.
ë Doors for peace process and negotiation must be kept open. The war is no solution to
solve the conflicts.
ë The movies or dramas portraying ill will against religion should be banned. Similarly
there is a need to promote social and mutual cultural relation through our electronic and
press media. Scholars, writers, poets, artists and journalists can generate the goodwill.
Radicalism must be replaced by tolerance and friendship. There is a need to correct the
history books. And should bring awareness among the people regarding peace processes.
ë Both countries should have the ability to tolerate and accept each other¶s vies and must
cooperate with each other in mutual interests.
 ë Both countries must stay away from other states¶ indigenous ethnic issues and do not
intervene in their internal political affairs.

CONCLUSION:

India and Pakistan has been rivals since their independence and has fought wars and confronted
each other on different conflicts and disputes. After independence the government of both
countries tried to overcome their conflicts mutually to promote peace and harmony among the
region so they could carry on their relations on different aspects. But different factors remained
involved in creating differences among both countries. I would like to mention that both state¶s
education sector has not mentioned the true picture of both countries relations in detail. The text
books course has misguided the students and has created opinion differences among them
furthering the more hostile attitudes towards each other.

Another issue is the role of both states¶ media; the media of both states has shown wrong
depiction of each others¶ attitude towards regarding to each other. The electronic media and
press media both are responsible in making the situation more worst despite of using it in
positive way by giving respect to each others¶ culture and policies. Because media is consider as
the fourth pillar of state. And media is the source through which one gets the idea of one¶s social,
political and cultural structure.

Moreover the role of civil societies in this regard is very critical sometimes. As they try to
achieve political aims instead of aiming at bringing the both countries to other grounds for the
benefit of each other. This leads the relation to more critical and worrisome condition not giving
satisfactory results.

India and Pakistan are no doubt losing out on a lot by not cooperating with each other. The story
of their relationship with one another post 1947 seems like a circular never ending one, with
predictable outcomes. A terrorist attack seems to discourage leaders from coming up with
effective solutions to their relationship µdeadlock¶. But what can the two countries achieve if
they cooperate besides security for the region and rest of the world.

No doubt, cooperation is something that is beneficial to the entire region and in almost every
field; the trade, resources area of interests of both countries are losing out the most.
Before the Mumbai 2008 attacks, trade between the two countries stood at about US$2 billion
per year. This was not an impressive amount considering the cultural similarities between the
two. Experts believe that the possible trade between the countries after getting rid of the high
tariffs and other restrictions of trade could be about 10 times more than what it is. This means
that India and Pakistan are both losing out on a large amount of revenue and resources that they
potentially could obtain from trade- US$20 billion worth of revenue. Also free and open
channels of communication and better roads and bridges connecting the two countries along the
trade routes are bound to help to increase the trade revenue.

India spent over 2.4% of their GDP on their military while Pakistan spends 3.9% in 2007. They
both spend money on increasing the number of troops they have on their border, demolishing
finances for areas that will actually benefit both countries positively. These financial resources
should have spent on other areas of concern like education, development and on welfare
programs. India and Pakistan¶s ego-centric attitudes lead to a downward spiral in their potential
future relationship.

Arguments have been made for decades about who is incorrect and who is acting incorrectly.
However the realist view of the arguably anarchic world that we live in has a clear argument.
That each larger state gets influenced by the larger state and larger state wants to be a regional
power in its respective region. So is the case with India and Pakistan that India being a larger
state tries to overcome Pakistan to gain its regional power. Especially due to Pakistan¶s ability to
have nuclear power which is a greater threat to India. Applying a realistic approach, my criticism
is that it¶s very difficult to manage and improve the relation between both countries. There has
been always been the security issues between India and Pakistan based on the partition 1947 and
other grievances like water dispute, Kashmir dispute, terrorist attacks, the involvement of both
states¶ intelligence in raising the ethnic issues, political issues among the governments, cultural
influence of India on Pakistani nation, border issues, Hindu-Muslim riots in India and many
other like these. It is idealistic to think that to put the political and security issues apart and
promote the people to people contact or diplomacy. Because each state will prefer to promote its
national interests and will try to achieve them.
REFERENCES:

ë http://pakobserver.net/detailnews.asp?id=46970
ë http://www.amankiasha.com/detail_news.asp?id=19
ë http://www.defence.pk/forums/members-club/43263-aman-ki-asha-indo-pak-peace-
project.html
ë http://www.amankiasha.com/detail_news.asp?id=318
ë http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\01\12\story_12-1-2010_pg7_21
ë http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pakistani_relations
ë Book, The India Pakistan Reconciliation and Other Experiences in Post Conflct
Management, edited by Gilles Boqeurat and Richard Asbeck. Part 1, Citizen Diplomacy
and Civil Society Contacts, by Asma-ul-Hassana Faiz. Page 30 ± 43.