Newtonian physics has an analogue in international diplomacy. The English physicist never envisioned his Third Law ("For every Action on a Body, there is an Equal and Opposite Reaction by that Body") applying to South Asian politics; but it does.
- The visit to the White House last month by Pakistan PM Imran Khan, and the press speculation surrounding that visit of a potential diplomatic agreement with the Afghanistan Taliban, were the Newtonian "Actions."
- Consistent with the Third law, and pumped by a Trump declaration that he was willing to mediate the Kashmir dispute, the predictable "Equal and Opposite Reaction" was a move by Indian PM Narendra Modi. Shortly after the Khan visit, Modi abrogated a 70-year old constitutional provision that granted the India-controlled region of Kashmir its special autonomy status - a move in effect giving New Delhi direct political control of this Muslim-dominated region.
Why? Why did the Indian PM take this provocative step? First and most obviously, South-Asian politics remains a zero-sum game. Years of bipartisan U.S. diplomatic efforts dating to President Bill Clinton have tried to foster a U.S. India-Pakistan policy that "removed the hyphen" - that acknowledged each country's unique interests, where the gain by one didn't mean a loss to the other. Unfortunately, Modi's action regarding Kashmir shows that "zero sum" still dominates south Asian relationships.
- To be clear, Modi's motivation to cancel the special autonomy granted to Kashmir had other motivations besides the Imran Khan visit, negotiations with the Taliban, and a Trump-inspired mediation role. A principal driver is the Hindu-nationalist nature of Modi's ruling BJP party, recently victorious in spring national elections; since 1947, Kashmir has always been the litmus test to demonstrate nationalist bona fides.
- But what's the link between peace prospects in Afghanistan and Indian neuralgia? A BJP spokesman last week explained by saying, "militants in Afghanistan will turn their attention to Kashmir if peace talks are concluded." And of course, any visit to the White House by a Pakistan PM raises the political temperature in New Delhi. Action, reaction.
One additional casualty may well be the emergence of India as a U.S. strategic partner. Few Trump geo-political initiatives have made more sense than his continuation of the Clinton, Bush43, and Obama policy to draw India closer to the U.S. as a strategic counter-weight to China. But as with many of Trump's national security initiatives, this worthy goal is being undermined by disconnected Trump actions, like imposing steel tariffs on India, stopping India from buying Iranian oil, and removing India's tariff preferences as a developing country. NO surprise that "partnership" with New Delhi is, for the time being, no longer in the lexicon.
A month ago, few national security pundits put the seemingly perpetual India-Pakistan stand-off near the top of any list of geo-strategic business risks. Narendra Modi, in a quick stroke of his executive pen, changed that.
- Even though President Trump called both Modi and Khan last week, urging rhetorical restraint, he will certainly not be "mediating" the seven-decade long Kashmir dispute. If India and Pakistan once again stand on the brink of war, however, the U.S. can potentially help to defuse tensions - as it did in 2002, when Bush43 engaged Secretary of State Colin Powell and dispatched Powell's deputy, Rich Armitage, to the region.
- The credibility of all U.S. actors in that crucial year, especially Powell and Armitage, was central to Washington's South Asian negotiating success; the two sides backed off a seriously escalating crisis, once again focused on Kashmir.
- The recent visit by the Pakistan PM to the White House, the looming possibility of a deal with the Taliban, and the Trump offer to mediate on Kashmir, all add to the deepening regional dismay, particularly by India, regarding any useful U.S. diplomatic role. Isaac Newton would not have been surprised.
