Engineering Lasting Peace Between India and Pakistan: The Path Through Democracy
Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, a prominent Pakistani politician, recently stated that “Pakistan is one of the biggest victims of terrorism” while emphasizing the need for dialogue to resolve three critical issues—Kashmir, terrorism, and water—for sustainable peace in the region. While his call for dialogue is commendable, the root of the India-Pakistan conflict lies deeper than these issues alone. For lasting peace to take hold, Pakistan must transform into a full-fledged democracy where its military and Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) are unequivocally accountable to a democratically elected parliament, much like in India. Without this fundamental shift, discussions on Kashmir, water, or any other issue will remain superficial, unable to address the core obstacle: Pakistan’s state-sponsored terrorism.
The Crux of the Problem: Pakistan’s Military and ISI
At the heart of the India-Pakistan impasse is the uncomfortable reality that Pakistan’s military and ISI wield disproportionate power, often operating independently of—or even dictating to—the country’s elected government. Unlike India, where the armed forces and intelligence agencies function under civilian oversight, Pakistan’s democratic institutions are frequently undermined by its military establishment. The ISI’s documented history of aiding and abetting terrorist groups, particularly in the context of Kashmir, is a significant barrier to peace. From supporting militant outfits like Lashkar-e-Taiba to providing safe havens for insurgents, the Pakistani state’s complicity in terrorism is an open secret—one that democratically elected leaders are often powerless to confront.
This lack of accountability creates a vicious cycle. Terrorism, which Bilawal claims victimizes Pakistan, is in part a byproduct of the state’s own policies. The military and ISI’s unchecked influence prevents meaningful reforms, perpetuates regional instability, and fuels distrust with India. For dialogue to succeed, Pakistan must first establish a democratic framework where the military and ISI are answerable to elected representatives. Only then can the state credibly commit to dismantling terror networks and fostering peace.
Kashmir: A Divided Region, Not a Divided Destiny
Bilawal’s mention of Kashmir as a key issue is unsurprising, given its centrality to India-Pakistan tensions. However, the narrative around Kashmir often ignores a broader historical context: the partition of the Indian subcontinent created multiple divided regions, not just Kashmir. Punjab, Bengal, and even lesser-discussed regions like Mithila span both countries, yet they do not provoke the same level of conflict. The difference lies in the militarization of the Kashmir issue, driven largely by Pakistan’s support for cross-border insurgency.
A democratic Pakistan, with a military subordinate to civilian rule, could shift the paradigm. Instead of viewing Kashmir as a territorial dispute, both nations could prioritize robust trade and people-to-people connections across their shared borders. Punjab and Bengal demonstrate that divided regions can coexist peacefully when economic and cultural ties are strong. A democratic Pakistan would be better positioned to negotiate confidence-building measures, such as increased trade, visa relaxations, and cultural exchanges, which could de-escalate tensions in Kashmir. Without democratic accountability, however, Pakistan’s military establishment will continue to exploit Kashmir as a tool for domestic legitimacy and regional leverage, perpetuating the conflict.
Water: A Treaty in Place, Cooperation Needed
On the issue of water, Bilawal’s concerns are valid but overstated. The Indus Waters Treaty of 1960, brokered by the World Bank, remains one of the most successful bilateral agreements between India and Pakistan, governing the sharing of the Indus River system. Despite decades of hostility, the treaty has held firm, proving that cooperation is possible even in tense times. However, mistrust—fueled by Pakistan’s internal power dynamics—often leads to exaggerated fears about India’s upstream water management.
A democratic Pakistan, with transparent governance and a military accountable to civilian leadership, could engage in constructive dialogue to modernize the treaty’s implementation. Joint monitoring mechanisms, data-sharing agreements, and collaborative water conservation projects could address concerns while building trust. Such cooperation requires a Pakistani state that prioritizes diplomacy over posturing, which is only feasible under a robust democratic system.
The Path Forward: Democracy as the Foundation
Bilawal’s call for dialogue is a step in the right direction, but it cannot succeed without addressing the structural flaws in Pakistan’s governance. A full-fledged democracy, where the military and ISI are subordinate to elected officials, is the prerequisite for tackling terrorism, Kashmir, and water disputes. India’s own experience demonstrates the stabilizing power of democratic accountability: its military operates under civilian control, and its intelligence agencies do not dictate foreign policy. Pakistan must emulate this model to break the cycle of mistrust and violence.
To achieve this, Pakistan’s political leaders, including figures like Bilawal, must champion institutional reforms that curb the military’s influence. This includes strengthening parliamentary oversight, ensuring judicial independence, and fostering a free press to hold power accountable. International partners, including India, can support this process by engaging with Pakistan’s civilian leadership while maintaining pressure on its military to relinquish control over foreign and security policy.
Conclusion: Peace Through Democracy
Lasting peace between India and Pakistan is not a pipe dream, but it hinges on a fundamental transformation in Pakistan’s polity. A democratic Pakistan, where the military and ISI answer to elected representatives, can dismantle the infrastructure of terrorism, normalize relations over Kashmir through trade and dialogue, and strengthen cooperation on water management. Without this shift, talks on any issue will remain mired in suspicion and sabotage. Bilawal’s vision for peace is achievable, but it begins with Pakistan embracing true democracy—a step that would not only benefit the region but also liberate Pakistan from its own internal contradictions.
Engineering Lasting Peace Between India and Pakistan: The Path Through Democracy https://t.co/0wjmz7APJ1 @BBhuttoZardari @AseefaBZ @ImranKhanPTI @GovtofPakistan @PMOIndia @narendramodi @AmitShah @DrSJaishankar @MEAIndia
— Paramendra Kumar Bhagat (@paramendra) May 21, 2025
My speech today in the National Assembly of Pakistan on India’s threats to peace and stability in the region, its weaponization of water and betrayal of the Indus Valley Civilization. pic.twitter.com/RlFjKDs53T
— BilawalBhuttoZardari (@BBhuttoZardari) May 6, 2025
.jpg/960px-Neeulm_Valley_AJK_(Arang_Kel).jpg)
