Indira Gandhi Shimla Agreement

While the two heads of state and government clarified the general agreement at the summit, lengthy negotiations took place over 19 meetings in nearly two months, before the details were whipped. It is said that Prime Minister Indira Gandhi intervened several times to keep the talks going, and the final draft was approved by his cabinet. The Bangladeshi government also expressed full satisfaction with the agreement and endorsed it. This is how the aforementioned agreement of August 29, 1972 was born. The agreement is the result of the two countries` determination to “end the conflict and confrontation that have so far weighed on their relations.” He designed the steps to be taken to further normalize mutual relations and also defined the principles that should govern their future relations. [4] [5] [3] Finally, during Shimla`s finale, Gandhi became a swing factor between strength and accommodating postures. The alternative of calling Bhutto`s bluff and leaving without agreement, Gandhi and Haksar were deemed too expensive after India`s dramatic triumph in 1971. The self-limitation that underpinned India`s attitude was all too noticeable to the Pakistanis. Ahmed, their negotiator, later noted that “India`s excessive fear of avoiding the failure of the talks at all costs has become its great handicap,” while it held “all the negotiating tokens.” Haksar later noted that “force negotiations” are part of the diplomatic currency. But negotiating with someone weak is even more difficult. The agreement did not prevent relations between the two countries from deteriorating until the armed conflict, the last time during the 1999 Kargil war. In Operation Meghdoot of 1984, India seized the entire inhospitable region of the Siachens Glacier, where the border was clearly not defined in the agreement (perhaps because the area was considered too arid to be controversial); This was considered by Pakistan to be a violation of the Simla agreement.

Most of the subsequent deaths in the Siachen conflict were caused by natural disasters. B, like the avalanches of 2010, 2012 and 2016. What the Simla agreement did not achieve for India could have been achieved through the 1973 Delhi Agreement, signed by India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. The international and regional context after 1971 had made the realization of some kind of agreement an important political objective for Gandhi and his national security team. After a successful war that liberated Bangladesh, politicians tried to continue to submit India`s status by showing a credible attempt at peace. Of course, India`s image had to be balanced by concrete results. The most desirable outcome would have been a final resolution in Kashmir, which bypasses the de facto position administered by both sides. The evidence is that policymakers have attempted to address some of the deep roots of the Indo-Pakistani conflict in Kashmir, seen as a direct manifestation of Pakistan`s national identity and not as a normal territorial impasse between states. P.N. Haksar, Gandhi`s senior foreign policy adviser, later wrote that India`s approach was based on “the realization that Pakistan continues to have an unresolved crisis of its national identity.” 1971 paved the way for an alternative future for Pakistan. The Simla agreement reads as a communiqué rather than a peace agreement with a country that had waged war on India.

Nothing in the agreement has put Pakistan in a state of good behaviour in the future. It also contained some ridiculous expectations, such as the clause that required both governments to “take all measures within their power to prevent hostile propaganda against each other.”