PAKISTAN is a nation still in search of a vision that would lucidly describe its strategic, geo-economic and sociocultural aspirations. It also needs to develop a unique and strong nationalistic character. Sadly, though new ideas might inspire the country’s power elites, they lack the courage and self-belief to put those ideas into action.

Western scholars describe the behaviour of Pakistan’s power elites in many ways, ranging from revisionist to futuristic. But it has several inherent contradictions that one can see in the form of paradoxes the state is still struggling to resolve. Ever since China launched its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which promises enormous geo-economic and strategic benefits for Pakistan, the idea of regional connectivity is gaining more currency among its power elites.

Many see the idea of connectivity as a remedy for all the country’s economic and geopolitical issues. They suggest developing compatible national policies in a manner that maximises the benefits of emerging connectivity. However, while the idea of BRI is to prop up the global economy with China at its heart, Pakistan’s self-placement in BRI-linked connectivity — ie, in form of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) — is that of a transit state.

Many see regional connectivity as a remedy for all our economic and geopolitical issues.

A transit state has its own advantages and disadvantages. But can it change the nationalistic character of a society, transform it ideologically, and change its worldview? This question requires an in-depth inquiry; some Western analysts may see in BRI an opportunity for Pakistan to review its revisionist credentials. Seen in Pakistan’s context, it is difficult to plainly describe how it would look like as a regionally connected and transit country. The question touches upon the country’s core strategic design and its relation with its neighbours, especially with India and Afghanistan.

Pakistan’s former national security adviser (NSA), retired Lt Gen Nasser Janjua, who resigned from his office on Wednesday, contributed greatly in developing Pakistan’s vision of regional connectivity. He was assigned by the former prime minister to develop Pakistan’s first National Security Policy (NISP). Janjua’s interactions with the media and think tanks, and deliberations at strategic forums, suggest that he conceived Pakistan as a globally and regionally connected transit state. In his latest interaction with media and civil society in Islamabad, he underlined the significance of Pakistan’s geography, and the advantages of connecting with South and Central Asia, including through the Indian Ocean.

The NISP draft for 2018-2023 has also assigned regional connectivity as one of its main pillars. A change in the state’s strategic mindset can only be assessed after analysing the new government’s response to the former NSA’s national security policy as well as NISP. Optimists, though, see it differently, and consider the Afghanistan-Pakistan Action Plan for Peace and Solidarity as reflecting a change in Pakistan’s regional policy discourse.

The role of China in the establishment of a bilateral crisis management mechanism between the two countries cannot be ignored. China, in a rare diplomatic move, has developed the trilateral forum with both countries, with the obvious purpose of de-escalating tensions between the two countries for the sake of regional stability, necessary for the success of its BRI and CPEC initiatives. Can China facilitate a similar channel between India and Pakistan?

It may be beyond the diplomatic capacity of China to facilitate such an initiative; somehow, CPEC is doing this job. Pakistan’s security and political leaderships have already offered India the opportunity to join CPEC. Janjua had also highlighted that the potential of CPEC could not be fully exploited without better trade and transit relations with India. Whether or not India responds positively, a debate on CPEC’s prospects has already started in that country. India-held Kashmir leader Mehbooba Mufti has already stated that CPEC could make the region a hub of emerging economic opportunities. For Pakistan, connectivity with India through CPEC can also help make progress on contentious issues, including Kashmir.

Pakistan is largely perceived as a security state, and reimagining it as a transit state may see direct clash with this vision. The attitude and responses of the current Indian regime also matters in regional connectivity initiatives. So far, India has responded to Pakistani offers to connect with CPEC and resume bilateral talks with a cold shoulder. Though India’s diplomatic efforts to isolate Pakistan globally have not yielded the desired results — and have even increased its cost of connecting with Afghanistan and Central Asia — so far, it has not shown flexibility in its approach towards Pakistan.

It was an interesting revelation by the former Pakistani NSA, when he described the details of his interaction with his Indian counterpart, Ajit Doval. He said that they “did not try to win arguments against each other” — rather, they discussed how to reduce the trust deficit between their two countries. They agreed that they cannot win a war against each other, and it was better to realise this and act now before the next generation took over and held them responsible for their failures. However, this frank discussion has not resulted in a resumption of the peace process.

The BRI and CPEC initiatives have injected a new spirit in the ideas of regional connectivity, but the older connectivity initiatives cannot be ignored, especially the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation. The same factors that had made Saarc non-functional can hinder the way of new ideas of economic integration and connectivity of the region. For India, this is an issue of strategic, geo-economic and diplomatic calculus, but for Pakistan, it is one of consolidating its physical and non-physical resources.

The writer is a security analyst.

Published in Dawn, July 1st, 2018