South Asian leaders urged to choose ‘talks over hostility’

Lead

More than 100 civil society representatives from Pakistan and India have jointly appealed to the two prime ministers to take “meaningful and sustained” steps to restore peace, dialogue and cooperation in South Asia, warning that unrelenting hostility is depriving millions of young people of “opportunities, prosperity and a secure future.”

The appeal, coordinated by O. P. Shah, who heads the New Delhi-based think tank Centre for Peace and Progress, was addressed to Prime Ministers Shehbaz Sharif and Narendra Modi on Tuesday. The signatories said that India and Pakistan combined are home to nearly one-fifth of humanity and that the people of both countries deserve a future defined by peace, development, connectivity and cooperation, rather than perpetual mistrust and confrontation.

Coverage comparison

The appeal has been reported by Dawn, Pakistan’s English-language daily, which covered the story from two angles. One report focused on the substance of the appeal itself, detailing the signatories and the specific requests made to the two governments. Another report, appearing as an editorial commentary, framed the appeal as well-intentioned but expressed skepticism about its prospects, pointing to what it described as India’s lack of enthusiasm for dialogue and its actions that have heightened tensions.

Key claims

The appeal, signed by 116 individuals, calls for confidence-building measures across diplomatic, economic, cultural and people-to-people tracks. Specifically, it urges both governments to restore full diplomatic relations, reinstate the High Commissioners in Islamabad and New Delhi, and resume visa services. The signatories also suggest reopening bilateral talks on all outstanding issues, including the Jammu and Kashmir dispute, and consider measures for demilitarisation and de-escalation.

The signatories include former diplomats, academics, politicians and peace activists from both countries. On the Pakistani side, they include former foreign minister Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri, former ambassador to New Delhi Ashraf Jehangir Qazi, academic Pervez Hoodbhoy, former senator Farhatullah Babar, and civil society figures Beena Sarwar, Salima Hashmi, Mohammad Mehdi and educationist A.H. Nayyar. On the Indian side, signatories include Dr Farooq Abdullah, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, Mehbooba Mufti, Mani Shankar Aiyar, Prof Manoj Jha, former RAW chief A.S. Dulat, Jawhar Sircar, Prof Saifuddin Soz and Prof Apoorvanand.

Dawn’s reporting also notes that Pakistan has on numerous occasions tried to restart the dialogue process in recent years, but India has shown little enthusiasm for talks. The publication adds that diplomatic relations were downgraded by Pakistan after India’s 2019 revocation of Kashmir’s special constitutional status, and that ties worsened after India blamed Pakistan for last year’s Pahalgam episode without providing evidence. A brief armed conflict last May, which Dawn says was initiated by India, further chilled bilateral ties.

In its commentary, Dawn argues that while some well-meaning quarters in India appear genuine in their desire for peace, the BJP-led government seems intent on rejecting all dialogue that could lead to normalisation. It points to India’s stance on the Indus Waters Treaty, which it describes as stubborn, and quotes Indian ministers as having stated their intention to stop all water to Pakistan. The commentary also cites Pakistan’s Indus commissioner, who said at a seminar in Islamabad that his communications with Indian officials have not received a response. At the same event, the deputy prime minister said India was “sowing the seeds of war.” Dawn also reports that the Foreign Office said India is “actively aiding” terrorist groups “operating from Afghan soil against Pakistan.”

Perspectives

The appeal itself represents a unified civil society perspective from both countries, calling for peace and cooperation. The signatories’ statement expresses the view that the people of both nations deserve a future of peace, development and connectivity.

Dawn’s editorial commentary offers a more skeptical perspective, arguing that despite Pakistan’s repeated efforts to restart dialogue, India has shown little enthusiasm, and that the Indian government’s actions—including the revocation of Kashmir’s special status, the handling of the Pahalgam episode, and its stance on the Indus Waters Treaty—undermine prospects for peace. This perspective holds that peace will remain a distant dream unless India changes its approach.