Real Threat or Mere Optics? Fallout of Pakistan's Suspension of Simla Agreement

Analysts fear the direct hotline between New Delhi and Islamabad may become a casualty of Pakistan's move.

Days after India's decision to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) over the horrific Pahalgam terror attack, the Shehbaz Sharif government claimed the right to hold all bilateral agreements with India in abeyance, most prominently but not limited to the 1972 Simla Agreement.

But, several experts that The Quint spoke with, labelled Pakistan's move as 'symbolic'. For one, the agreement is a bygone contract, the significance of which has paled over the years.

"The Pakistani government threatening to break the Simla Agreement and saying that it will have nothing to do with India is not a possibility—it's just a gimmick," a veteran Pakistani journalist, who did not wish to be named, said.

It could also be Advantage India as far as India's efforts at building a global narrative go, as was exemplied in Prime Minister Narendra Modi's recent speech in English, claiming the right to "punish the terrorists" behind the attack.

"India already has a strong handle on the situation—given that Pakistan's reputation is such that it is largely considered an epicentre of terrorism in the international community," says Harsh V Pant, professor of international relations, told The Quint.

"Pakistan, by withdrawing from the Simla Agreement, will also give space to India to make the case globally that it, too, is free not to abide by the norms of the LoC."

Harsh V Pant

Is the Simla Agreement Practically Still in Existence? 

The Simla Agreement was inked on 2 July 1972 following negotiations between the then Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and Pakistan's then Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto following India's victory in the Bangladesh Liberation War of 1971.

The agreement can be boiled down to three important decisions:

1. In Jammu and Kashmir, the Line of Control (LoC) resulting from the ceasefire announced after the 1971 war will be respected by both sides. Neither side will seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences and legal interpretations. Further, both sides will refrain from the threat or use of force in violation of the LoC.

2. Both countries will withdraw their troops to their side of the border and pledge to "respect each other’s national unity, territorial integrity, political independence and sovereign equality".

3. Both sides will resolve their disputes mutually and without resorting to the United Nations or any other third-party mediator.

However, the reason why some analysts feel that the Simla Agreement has become a relic of the past is that Pakistan has allegedly violated a number of the terms of the agreement – thus casting aspersions on the practical existence of the accord.

For example, Pakistan and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) have allegedly been funding and training terrorists in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (PoK) for decades and facilitating their infiltration to carry out proxy wars in India.

The pinnacle of these proxy wars was reached in 1999, when Pakistan sent its soldiers disguised as militants into India's side of the LoC to take control of strategic areas. The infiltration resulted in the Kargil conflict.

While the Pakistan government and army have consistently denied their role in the Kargil dispute, the country's Army General Asim Munir acknowledged in a speech in September last year that the Pakistani Army played a direct role in the war.

Furthermore, Pakistan has on several occasions approached the UN over the Kashmir dispute – a clear violation of the terms of the agreement, which disallows any third-party mediation.

Further, cross-border terrorism in the form of the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks, the 2016 Uri attack, and the 2019 Pulwama suicide bombing – which were allegedly backed by Pakistani intelligence establishment – are violations of the agreement.

India on its part has also disregarded the Simla Agreement, indicated through Parliament's decision in 1994, to claim the whole of PoK as an integral part of India. Finally, the Modi government's decision to abrogate Article 370 in August 2019 was the final blow.

"The Simla Agreement has been violated by Pakistan constantly, but India always reminded them that they were signatories to the accord. When India abrogated Article 370, it hurt the spirit of the accord. It’s a matter of surprise that Islamabad chose to ignore the option to get out of the agreement then," foreign policy specialist Sanjay Kapoor said.

However, despite the perceived symbolism of Pakistan's 'threat' to withdraw from the Simla Agreement, experts suggest that risks are still very much alive, given the fact that the Shehbaz Sharif government is not an independent authority and takes orders from the army, as opposed to the Indian government which is an independent authority and gives orders to the army.

"There is de-facto martial law in Pakistan. Shehbaz Sharif will be looking to the army chief and the ISI for any and every decision which will be taken regarding this conflict. The fact is that the army just cannot stay away from politics, and that has undermined democracy in Pakistan to a great extent," a senior Pakistani journalist told The Quint on the condition of anonymity.

The Few Remaining Advantages of the Simla Agreement

However, this is not to say that the Simla Agreement is without its utility.

Even when India and Pakistan were undergoing excessively acrimonious points in their relationship, the Simla Accord enabled lines of communication to remain open to ensure that the risk of escalation was minimised.

One of the spillovers of the Simla Agreement was the establishment of the New Delhi-Islamabad hotline, a direct phone line between senior leaders of the two countries which could be activated in times of fissures in ties.

The hotline was modelled after the Washington-Moscow Direct Communications Link, which came into being in 1963, shortly after the Cuban Missile Crisis brought the world to the closest point of a nuclear conflict following the Second World War.

Some analysts fear that with the prospective fall of the Simla Agreement, or whatever is left of it, the direct hotline between New Delhi and Islamabad may become a casualty as well.

"At a moment like this when we've seen aggressive diplomatic steps taken by both countries, it suggests a tone indicating that it could be difficult to have any type of dialogue, including informal, behind-the-scenes mechanisms like the hotline linkage between New Delhi and Islamabad," says Michael Kugelman, South Asia analyst and columnist for Foreign Policy magazine.

Yet another factor to be taken into consideration is that the Simla Agreement did solidify a de-facto boundary between India and Pakistan – which both countries pledged to respect.

With the Simla Agreement suspended, some may interpret its implications to be the complete disavowment of the LoC as we know it – something which could have dangerous consequences for regional stability.

Analysts suggest that if Pakistan crosses the LoC, India could also do the same and initiate operations to claim parts or the whole of PoK.

"If Pakistan withdraws from the Simla Agreement, it by default opens up the possibility for India to move into PoK at a time of their choosing," says Himanshu Roy, professor of international relations at Jawaharlal Nehru University.

However, this will be easier said than done as any such operation would likely lead to a full-fledged military response by Pakistan.

The China Question 

Furthermore, any escalation matrix with Pakistan will require taking into consideration the response from its 'all-weather ally' China, which has already expressed its staunch support for Islamabad in case a conflict breaks out between the two countries.

"China fully understands Pakistan’s reasonable security concerns and supports Pakistan in safeguarding its sovereignty and security interests," China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi was quoted as saying during a phone call with his Pakistani counterpart Ishaq Dar.

Moreover, China controls the disputed Aksai Chin region in the easternmost part of Kashmir since 1963, when Pakistan had ceded the Shaksgam Valley, in PoK, to Beijing. The region is disputed as India claims that Aksai Chin is part of its territory.

"The suspension of Simla Agreement could aggravates issue by opening up disputes that had been settled in the past."

Sanjay Kapoor, Foreign Policy Expert

Explaining how Beijing could complicate matters in case of a face-off, Kapoor says that since China is an upper riparian state to India, just as India is to Pakistan, it could disrupt water supply from the Brahmaputra if India prevents Indus water from flowing into Pakistan.

"What is not visible to many is what Pakistan is doing to draw China into the complex situation," Kapoor says. "If China flexes its muscle regarding the Indus River dispute, it could greatly upset India’s plans and cause a re-think of how the Modi government will respond to this crisis."

On the other hand, other experts say that whatever China's public position on the crisis might be, it actually has a lot to gain if a military conflict breaks out between India and Pakistan.

"Given that China is purely a market economy, it will not militarily intervene if conflict breaks out," says Himanshu Roy.

"China would benefit from a prolonged conflict as this would mean that India's economy will be greatly hampered. China won't get involved unless its own economy or territory is at risk."

Himanshu Roy

Roy further said that even if India launches strikes in PoK, it will only do so in areas strictly under the control of Pakistan.

"Only those parts which are being used by Pakistan to train terrorists will be targeted," he added.