Being neutral not the best policy

Being neutral not the best policy

Apropos of ‘Global lessons in realpolitik’ (The Great Game); international relations are governed by the self-interest of countries. The US President cosying up to Pakistan’s Field Marshal Asim Munir is testimony to the fact that Trump is prioritising his own country’s interests. PM Modi has made Trump realise that the India-Pak ceasefire was reached by the two neighbours themselves, not by his mediation. Forging relations with friends is important. Equally significant is to keep enemies in good humour too. This does not, however, mean lowering the guard. Diplomatic relations must rest on mutual respect and concerns. Being neutral is not the deemed best policy in today’s geopolitical landscape.

Ravi Sharma, Dhariwal

Trump overriding Pak government

Refer to ‘Global lessons in realpolitik’; it is intriguing that Donald Trump chose to host the army chief of Pakistan, while ignoring its political leadership. The luncheon meeting between Trump and Field Marshal Asim Munir is an attempt to weaken democracy in Pakistan. By inviting Modi to Washington at the same time as Munir meant equating India with the aggressor. Modi did well to decline the invite. Trump needs Pakistan in view of the Israel-Iran war. It takes two to tango.

Wg Cdr CL Sehgal (retd), Jalandhar

Pakistan’s history of deception

Referring to Pakistan, Hillary Clinton once famously said, “You can’t keep snakes in your backyard and expect them only to bite your neighbours”. Her keen observation resonates deeply in the context of Pakistan’s relations with the US today. Donald Trump, who is feeling ‘honoured’ to meet the Pakistan army chief, will repent his country’s close relations with the perpetrators of terrorism. How can he forget that Pakistan had harboured the 9/11 mastermind, Osama bin Laden? Pakistan has a long history of deception. Trump needs to understand that his friendship with Pakistan is a double-edged sword. If Pakistan is friendly with the US now, it doesn’t mean that it has stopped being close to China.

Bir Devinder Singh Bedi, Sangrur

Lot at stake for India, Canada

Apropos of ‘India-Canada divide’; the Indian diaspora, particularly Sikhs, have contributed significantly to the development of Canada, which is a liberal, democratic, secular and sovereign nation, with liberty as its hallmark. In the 1980s, the Khalistan movement got support from countries like Canada and the UK. The Canadian Government gave a long rope to Khalistani activists operating from Canadian soil, while the Indian authorities treated the issue casually. Now, both nations have high stakes diplomatically and economically.

BM Singh, Amritsar

Domestic politics vs diplomacy

Refer to ‘India-Canada divide’; the Canadian Government under PM Carney would need to do much more to address India’s concerns about the Canadian attitude towards Khalistani separatists. There is a need to separate domestic politics from diplomacy, something Justin Trudeau had failed to do. By doing so, Canada can expedite the process of repairing bilateral ties. After Trudeau publicly accused India of involvement in the killing of Khalistani activist Hardeep Singh Nijjar, the breakthrough meeting at the G7 summit is a welcome development between the two democracies. The Modi-Carney meeting has improved relations that had deteriorated during Trudeau’s tenure.

PL Singh, by mail

True strength lies in restraint

The US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities raise questions about the American strategy and global stability. President Trump may believe that this show of force strengthens his position at the negotiating table, but true strength lies in restraint, foresight and diplomacy. One must ask whether these strikes were a means to peace or the beginning of another endless conflict. While Trump hailed the bombing as a “very successful” operation, the abrupt abandonment of the supposed two-week deadline for negotiations suggests either a major diplomatic failure or a calculated deception. If this step was indeed a feint to catch Iran off guard, it risks eroding what little trust remains in international diplomacy.

Sanjay Chopra, Mohali