India and Pakistan once had leaders who defied Washington. What changed? | News.az
news.az -- Friday, August 15, 2025, 12:59:03 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: U.S.–China Relations, Foreign Policy & International Relations

Editor's note: Lieutenant General Asad Ahmed Durrani is a retired three-star general from the Pakistan Army. He has held prominent positions, including serving as the Director General of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and the Director General of Military Intelligence for the Pakistan Army. Currently, Durrani is active as a commentator, speaker, and author. The article expresses the personal opinion of the author and may not coincide with the view of News.Az.
India was there before Modi - and had some remarkable prime ministers.
Morarji Desai was asked by the Great Satan to tighten a few screws on Pakistan to keep ZAB off the nuclear path. MD retorted that on behalf of a distant power he was not going to cause any discomfiture to a neighbour. I doubt if many of my compatriots have even heard of Chandrashekhar - looked more like a revolutionary than the chief executive of an elephantine country. No one talked more sense than him but what got stuck in my memory was his displeasure with any Paki-bashing. IK Gujral was probably the most visionary of them. The brain behind the Composite Dialogue - the best conflict resolution formulae I've ever known - his concept of sub-regionalisation, if ever India and Pakistan got lucky to be led by sane contemporary voices, would provide the best way forward. Communities straddling the frontiers if left to themselves could create the most robust basic brick to build a stable regional structure. Anyone familiar with the cross-border sentiments knows that the Bavarians have better empathy with the Austrians than with the rest of Germany.
Vajpayee was indeed in a class of his own. Ratted by Kargil he still gave peace a chance. Coming as close to the Plato's philosopher king as possible in the modern times, he warned that if the regions didn't hang together, the constituent countries would one day be hanged separately by the US. Manmohan Singh though a technocrat still took a giant leap by concluding a JATM agreement with Pakistan - if terrorism was India's bug bear, let's address it together.
Source: moneycontrol
Pakistan too had once leaders with an amazing ability to work for its interests - defying in the process the desires of its powerful patrons.
Ayyub Khan suffered from the illusion that the US had given up on India (any similarity with the current situation is not incidental). As soon as he found Washington again hobnobbing with its first love after the latter clashed with the Chinese in 1962 along the Himalayan borders, Khan reached out to China. Washington was not amused but soon thereafter beseeched us to connect it with the Middle Kingdom. God bless all our head honchoes who did not flinch when we were enriching Uranium (or was that Plutonium?) and daring the sole superpower riding rough shod in Afghanistan. Though we succeeded on both the accounts, I still have to keep reminding our scared rabbits that we also once did a Desai act -- refused to severe our relations with the post-revolution Iran, and thus rankling our friends in Washington. Representing Iranian interests in the US for the last fifty years is an ode to our statesmanship.
So, what happened that we're now celebrating the rupture in the region and falling head over heels in a paradise lost time and again?
Militaries do have a role in decision making; in Pakistan it's ordained. After the fate Musharraf faced, the successor generation of generals found a better recipe to continue ruling the roost. A pliable mufti façade served the purpose perfectly. Bajwa-Imran combine survived on the "one-page" mantra. Asim Munir had no stomach for such gimmicks and with Shehbaz Sharif ever ready to play the Khaki ball, decided to run the country like a battalion.
For Trump the situation was now cut out to make an offer the naive Pakistanis could not resist. It was a masterstroke.
Source: Xinhua
You only have to convince one man now that this time around the myth of the infidelity of the Yankee Paramour could be buried - notwithstanding Kissinger's warning that the American friendship was more lethal than its friendship, and that the free lunches cost a leg and a limb. And just in case we had a longstanding score to settle with India, the mighty US would pick up the tab by extracting some hidden minerals in the country's troubled hinterlands. There was no need to mention China because in Pakistan the J 10s were now more popular than the F16s. I took a long time looking for a better rationale for Washington's sudden infatuation with us but didn't find any.
Indeed, this coup could not have worked without some willing or unwilling help from within the country. Having worked on threats to our homeland I was convinced that the external adversaries legitimately working against our interests were not so deadly as their native collaborators. They operate discreetly, create reasonable doubts, and promote the agenda of their foreign master in the name of national interest. Not too difficult to identify they remain under the cover of our equally deadly establishment. One only has to track their roots and the safe havens and if by a miracle succeed in this endeavour, get hold of them before they're eliminated by their handlers.
The tragedy of Gaza might provide us a few clues how they operate. There were times we reached out far and wide to support the communities under duress and in the process fought the evil with the help of our allies. Though never seriously charged with sponsoring terrorism we not only were persuaded to fall back within our frontiers but also blackmailed with stuff like the FETF. No surprise there because it's only the retreating armies that are subjected to death by a thousand cut. Withdrawal of the British Army from Kabul in 1841 if one cared to remember.
When Israel was pummelling Palestinians and others in the neighbourhood the foe within did its utmost to rein us in. Since the strategy worked well with many of our ilk, it was not too difficult for the great evil nexus to sequentially eliminate or neutralise the resistance - and some are now wondering who would be the next in line. No one thus needs to marvel when our fifth columnists advise us to embrace the executioners voluntarily - and nominate the man who saved Israel from the Persian wrath for a Nobel Peace Prize. Trump may have an unbroken record of going back on all his declared ventures but that's more than matched by our wish to be taken for a ride.
(If you possess specialized knowledge and wish to contribute, please reach out to us at opinions@news.az).
Sign Our PetitionThe article authored by Lieutenant General Asad Ahmed Durrani provides an intriguing perspective on the historical complexities of India-Pakistan relations, specifically focusing on the leaders from both nations who dared to defy the United States. Durrani’s reflections highlight a crucial period in South Asian politics, where leaders like Morarji Desai and IK Gujral sought to prioritize regional stability over subservience to foreign power dynamics. This commentary aims to delve deeper into the historical context of these leaders' actions while connecting their legacies to contemporary struggles in both nations and the broader geopolitical landscape.
Historically, both India and Pakistan emerged from the colonial shadows of British imperialism, and their post-colonial trajectories have often been influenced by the whims of external powers, particularly the United States. During the Cold War, both countries sought to navigate their sovereignty while facing the pressures of superpower rivalry. Leaders like Desai and Gujral recognized the importance of regional solidarity, opting for dialogues that promoted mutual understanding and cooperation rather than hostility. Their vision contrasts sharply with the contemporary political climate, where nationalistic fervor often overshadows pragmatic diplomacy. This shift can be attributed to the increasing influence of right-wing populism, which prioritizes national identity over international cooperation, resulting in a more fractured relationship between the two countries and a growing dependency on the United States.
Durrani’s mention of leaders like Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Manmohan Singh serves as a reminder of the potential for peace and collaboration that once existed. Vajpayee’s willingness to negotiate after the Kargil conflict exemplifies a rare moment when ideological divides were bridged for the sake of regional harmony. Singh’s Joint Anti-Terror Mechanism (JATM) agreement with Pakistan was another significant step towards addressing mutual concerns, yet it was met with skepticism due to the prevailing atmosphere of distrust. The failure to capitalize on these diplomatic overtures highlights ongoing social struggles in both countries, where militaristic narratives often overshadow peacebuilding efforts. The legacies of these leaders should be invoked to inspire current policymakers to reconsider the value of dialogue and cooperation over hostility and division.
The geopolitical landscape of South Asia has shifted dramatically, especially with the rise of China as a counterweight to U.S. hegemony. Durrani’s reference to Ayub Khan reaching out to China in response to U.S. favoritism towards India reflects a recurring theme in regional politics: the quest for autonomy in the face of external pressures. The current dynamic between the U.S., India, and Pakistan raises important questions about the future of regional stability. As the U.S. focuses on countering China’s influence, Pakistan finds itself navigating a complex web of alliances while grappling with internal challenges. The historical context provided by Durrani can serve as a cautionary tale about the dangers of allowing foreign interests to dictate domestic policy, urging contemporary leaders to prioritize the needs of their citizens over the expectations of powerful patrons.
Furthermore, the ideological shifts within both nations underscore a broader struggle for social justice. The rise of nationalism in India under Narendra Modi has led to an increasingly exclusionary political environment, particularly for marginalized communities. In Pakistan, the military's enduring influence continues to shape governance and curtail democratic processes. This intertwining of nationalism and social justice movements sheds light on the urgent need for coalitions that transcend borders. The concept of sub-regionalization proposed by Gujral, which fosters cooperation among local communities irrespective of national boundaries, remains relevant today. Grassroots movements that advocate for peace and justice in both India and Pakistan could leverage historical precedents to challenge the status quo and push for a more equitable regional order.
In conclusion, Lieutenant General Durrani’s reflections on historical leaders who defied U.S. pressures serve as a poignant reminder of the potentials that exist for diplomacy and cooperation between India and Pakistan. The political landscape today, marked by rising nationalism and geopolitical rivalry, necessitates a re-examination of past leaders’ legacies. Advocating for dialogue, mutual respect, and regional solidarity is essential not only for the stability of South Asia but also for addressing ongoing social struggles that impact the lives of millions in both countries. As contemporary leaders grapple with the complexities of their respective political landscapes, looking back at the wisdom of their predecessors can provide valuable insights into building a more peaceful and just future for the region.
The relationship between India and Pakistan has always been a complex tapestry woven with threads of history, politics, and identity, particularly in the context of their interactions with external powers such as the United States. In analyzing the reflections of Lieutenant General Asad Ahmed Durrani, we are reminded of a time when both nations were led by individuals who dared to prioritize regional stability over the whims of foreign influence. This historical perspective serves as a critical lens through which we can understand the evolving dynamics of South Asia today. The article evokes figures like Morarji Desai and Ayyub Khan, who demonstrated a profound understanding of their national interests, often at odds with U.S. dictates. Their legacies challenge the current leadership in both countries, which has increasingly aligned with external powers, leading to detrimental consequences for regional peace and cooperation.
Durrani's recollection of Indian leaders like Chandrashekhar and Atal Bihari Vajpayee highlights a lost era of diplomacy that emphasized dialogue and mutual respect. These leaders recognized the importance of addressing grievances rather than exacerbating them through militaristic rhetoric. For instance, the Composite Dialogue initiated by Gujral was a bold step toward conflict resolution, promoting cross-border cooperation and understanding. This historical context underscores the potential for a reimagined approach to India-Pakistan relations, one that prioritizes the voices of ordinary citizens and local communities over the geopolitical machinations of powerful states. The acknowledgment that the Bavarians relate more closely to Austrians than their fellow Germans is a poignant reminder of the importance of cultural and social ties in fostering peace.
As citizens of the United States, it is crucial to recognize our role in the global landscape, particularly in relation to our foreign policy and its repercussions on regions like South Asia. The pursuit of peace and stability in India and Pakistan cannot be achieved without addressing the influence of U.S. military and economic aid that often exacerbates tensions. Advocacy for a foreign policy that promotes diplomatic engagement rather than military alliances is essential. By pressuring our government to prioritize humanitarian aid and cooperative projects in South Asia, we can help create an environment conducive to peace. Grassroots movements that call for a reassessment of U.S. relations with both countries can play a significant role in shifting the narrative from one of confrontation to collaboration.
Moreover, education plays a pivotal role in shaping public perception and understanding of international issues. As Americans, we should seek to educate ourselves and others about the historical and cultural contexts of India and Pakistan. This can involve engaging with literature, films, and discussions that celebrate the rich tapestry of South Asian culture while also critically examining the political narratives that have dominated mainstream discourse. Understanding the nuances of these relationships can foster empathy and encourage a more informed and compassionate approach to foreign policy.
Lastly, the notion of solidarity cannot be overlooked. Engaging with diasporic communities and fostering dialogue between the Indian and Pakistani populations residing in the U.S. can create avenues for mutual understanding and support. Events that celebrate cultural diversity while addressing shared challenges can cultivate a sense of community that transcends national borders. By standing together against militarism and advocating for peace, we can contribute to a global movement that prioritizes human connection over geopolitical interests. The words of past leaders resonate with a timeless urgency: if we do not work together to address our common challenges, we risk a future defined by conflict and division. It is our responsibility to heed this call and actively engage in the pursuit of a more just and peaceful world.
The article you provided delves into the historical dynamics between India and Pakistan and their relationships with the United States, particularly reflecting on leaders who have prioritized regional interests over foreign influence. Here’s a detailed list of ideas focusing on actionable steps individuals can take to influence policies that support peaceful cooperation in South Asia and challenge external political pressures:
### What Can We Personally Do About This?
1. **Educate Ourselves and Others**: Familiarize yourself with the historical context and current geopolitical dynamics between India, Pakistan, and the U.S. Share articles, books, and documentaries that highlight the importance of sovereignty and regional cooperation.
2. **Engage in Dialogue**: Host or participate in community discussions to raise awareness about the importance of regional stability and the need for leaders who prioritize peaceful relations over external pressures.
### Exact Actions to Take
1. **Sign Petitions**: - **Petition for Peaceful Relations**: Sign and share petitions that advocate for diplomatic engagement between India and Pakistan. Websites like Change.org or Care2 often host relevant petitions. An example is a petition calling for a reduction in military spending in favor of diplomatic initiatives. - Example: [Change.org petition for peaceful dialogue between India and Pakistan](https://www.change.org).
2. **Contact Elected Officials**: - **Write to Your Representatives**: Reach out to your local and national representatives, urging them to support initiatives that foster peaceful relations between India and Pakistan, and to limit foreign intervention in these matters. - **Sample Contact Information**: - **U.S. House of Representatives** - Find your representative: [House.gov](https://www.house.gov) - **U.S. Senate** - Find your senators: [Senate.gov](https://www.senate.gov)
- **Sample Email Template**: ``` Subject: Support Peaceful Relations Between India and Pakistan
Dear [Representative/Senator Name],
I am writing to urge you to advocate for peaceful diplomatic relations between India and Pakistan. As we have seen throughout history, external pressures can lead to conflict and instability. I believe that fostering dialogue and cooperation is essential for regional security.
Please consider supporting initiatives that promote diplomacy over military solutions, and encourage both nations to engage in constructive dialogue.
Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
Sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Address] [Your Email] ```
3. **Support Relevant Organizations**: - **Contribute or Volunteer**: Engage with organizations dedicated to peacebuilding and conflict resolution in South Asia. Examples include: - **The South Asia Peace Alliance**: A network promoting peace in the region. - **The Citizens' Peace Committee**: Focuses on dialogue between communities in India and Pakistan. 4. **Raise Awareness on Social Media**: - Use platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram to raise awareness about the importance of self-determination in foreign policy. Share insights from the article and encourage discussions around the themes of sovereignty and regional cooperation.
5. **Attend Events and Workshops**: - Participate in lectures, workshops, or webinars focusing on South Asian politics and international relations. These events can provide a platform for deeper understanding and networking with like-minded individuals.
6. **Write to Media Outlets**: - Draft letters to the editor for local newspapers or online publications emphasizing the need for balanced reporting on India-Pakistan relations.
- **Sample Template**: ``` Subject: The Need for Balanced Coverage of India-Pakistan Relations
Dear Editor,
As the geopolitical landscape in South Asia continues to evolve, it's crucial that media outlets provide balanced coverage of India-Pakistan relations. Emphasizing peace initiatives and regional cooperation can pave the way for a more stable future for both nations.
Sincerely, [Your Name] ```
### Conclusion
By taking these actions, individuals can contribute to a broader movement advocating for peace, cooperation, and self-determination in South Asia. Collective efforts can help shift the narrative towards diplomatic solutions and encourage leaders to prioritize the interests of their nations over external pressures.