This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/25/world/asia/in-possible-thaw-pakistani-premier-to-attend-modis-swearing-in.html

The article has changed 11 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 7 Version 8
In Possible Thaw, Pakistani Leader Agrees to Attend Modi’s Swearing-In Ceremony In Possible Thaw, Pakistani Leader Agrees to Attend Swearing-In Ceremony in India
(about 5 hours later)
NEW DELHI — India said on Saturday that Pakistan’s prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, had accepted an invitation to attend the swearing-in of India’s new prime minister, Narendra Modi, a mutual gesture that could indicate the beginning of a rapprochement between the two countries, whose relations have been particularly frosty since early 2013. NEW DELHI — Ending days of hesitation, Pakistan’s prime minister, Nawaz Sharif, on Saturday accepted an Indian invitation to attend the swearing-in of the new prime minister, Narendra Modi, offering a fresh opportunity to revitalize the moribund peace process between the two countries, which have had particularly frosty relations since early 2013. 
Mr. Modi, a Hindu nationalist who promised in his campaign to make India a more muscular presence on the world stage, has broken new ground by inviting top officials from all members of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation to Monday’s swearing-in ceremony, which has traditionally not included any foreign leaders. Mr. Modi, a Hindu nationalist who promised in his campaign to make India a more assertive presence in South Asia, broke with historic precedent by inviting top officials from all members of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation to Monday’s swearing-in ceremony, which has traditionally not included any foreign leaders.
The invitation of Mr. Sharif also sent a jolt through Indian domestic politics, indicating that Mr. Modi would act independently on foreign policy, not allowing his decisions to be swayed by the interests of the country’s regional heavyweights. Leaders in the southern state of Tamil Nadu, who have long defended the rights of the Tamil minority in neighboring Sri Lanka, harshly criticized the decision to invite President Mahinda Rajapaksa of Sri Lanka.
Leaders of Afghanistan, Bhutan, the Maldives, Nepal and Sri Lanka confirmed their attendance on Thursday, and Bangladesh promised to send the speaker of its Parliament, because its prime minister will be on a long-planned visit to Japan.Leaders of Afghanistan, Bhutan, the Maldives, Nepal and Sri Lanka confirmed their attendance on Thursday, and Bangladesh promised to send the speaker of its Parliament, because its prime minister will be on a long-planned visit to Japan.
But the greatest suspense surrounded the response of Mr. Sharif, who risks irritating military leaders and hard-liners in his own country by making his first official visit to India. In early 2013, fighting along the disputed border in Kashmir derailed a tentative attempt to build economic and diplomatic ties between India and Pakistan. Mr. Sharif, however, delayed his answer as he consulted with political and military leaders. A decisive factor was the Indian offer of a bilateral meeting, Pakistani officials and analysts said, because it allowed him to give the visit a more substantive gloss.
Syed Akbaruddin, a spokesman for the Indian Ministry of External Affairs, said that Mr. Modi and Mr. Sharif would hold a short bilateral meeting on Tuesday morning, and that similar meetings would be held with each of the visiting leaders. “The Pakistanis wanted to go, not just for a coronation but to meet the new leader of India,” said Maleeha Lodhi, a former Pakistani ambassador to the United States. “But it’s also important to tailor our expectations because this is a first meeting between two leaders who have never met. It will be mostly about sizing each other up.”
A spokeswoman for the Pakistani Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Tasneem Aslam, had said officials would make a decision on Thursday, but the announcement was delayed, pointing to tensions among Pakistani leaders. A tentative attempt to rebuild economic and diplomatic ties between India and Pakistan was derailed early in 2013, after fighting along the disputed border in Kashmir. Mr. Modi has a reputation as a hard-liner, and during the campaign he sharply criticized the governing Indian National Congress party for maintaining high-level contact with Pakistan despite unresolved disputes about security. At one point, he told a crowd, “the heads of our soldiers are cut, but then their prime minister is fed chicken biryani.”
In Pakistan, the news of Mr. Sharif’s trip met with a mixed reaction. Shamshad Ahmad, a retired diplomat who once headed the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said Mr. Sharif should not have agreed to the visit. “He should have waited, let Modi step into office and lay out his Pakistan policy, and then make decisions,” he said. But Pakistani officials expressed hope that Mr. Modi would have the political freedom to resume building ties precisely because he, unlike his predecessor, is not vulnerable to attacks from the right — just as in the United States, President Richard M. Nixon, a staunch anti-Communist, was able to reach out to China in the early 1970s.
But Mr. Sharif’s decision enjoys support from across the political spectrum and has met with no public resistance from the army. Pakistani officials said Mr. Sharif had stalled on agreeing to attend only because he was pushing for the bilateral meeting on Tuesday, to give the visit a more substantive appearance. In Islamabad, the Pakistani capital, the reaction to Mr. Sharif’s decision was mixed. Shamshad Ahmad, a retired diplomat who once headed the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said Mr. Sharif should not have agreed to the visit. “He should have waited, let Modi step into office and lay out his Pakistan policy, and then make decisions,” he said.
“The Pakistanis wanted to go not just for a coronation but to meet the new leader of India,” said Maleeha Lodhi, a former ambassador of Pakistan to the United States. “But it’s also important to tailor our expectations, because this is a first meeting between two leaders who have never met. It will be mostly about sizing each other up.” Still, Mr. Sharif’s decision enjoys support across the political spectrum, and met with no public resistance from the army.
Mr. Sharif’s ability to deliver on any peace initiative depends largely on his relationship with the military, which recently came under strain because of the continuing treason trial of Pervez Musharraf, the former military leader.Mr. Sharif’s ability to deliver on any peace initiative depends largely on his relationship with the military, which recently came under strain because of the continuing treason trial of Pervez Musharraf, the former military leader.
While many Pakistanis are apprehensive about Mr. Modi because of his poor reputation among Indian liberals and Muslims, some say that right-wing governments in both Pakistan and India can be conducive to peace efforts, as they were in the late 1990s, the last time that Mr. Sharif and an Indian government led by Mr. Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party held power concurrently. Mr. Modi has a poor reputation among Indian liberals and Muslims, who blame him for not acting quickly enough to stop religious riots that broke out in 2002 in Gujarat, the state he then governed. Last week, some Congress officials accused Mr. Modi of hypocrisy, but many of his critics cheered his decision to invite Mr. Sharif, and more approving messages came on Saturday after Mr. Sharif accepted.
Many of Mr. Modi’s critics in India had welcomed the invitation, and more approving messages came on Saturday after Mr. Sharif accepted it. “Very glad to hear Pak PM has accepted invite, shows that he can prevail over forces inimical to good relations with India,” Omar Abdullah, the chief minister of the Indian-administered state of Jammu and Kashmir, said in a Twitter post on Saturday. “I hope this will mark a new beginning in ties between our two countries.”
“Very glad to hear Pak PM has accepted invite, shows that he can prevail over forces inimical to good relations with India,” Omar Abdullah, the chief minister of Indian-administered Kashmir, said in a Twitter post on Saturday. “I hope this will mark a new beginning in ties between our two countries.” The planned meeting between Mr. Modi and Mr. Sharif on Tuesday is unlikely to result in any major decisions, and should be viewed as an “icebreaker” between the two leaders, who both run a risk by taking part, said Ashley J. Tellis, a senior associate with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a research center based in Washington.
There is a paradox in the notion that Mr. Modi could introduce a thaw, given that he has a reputation as a hard-liner and that during the campaign, he sharply criticized the governing Indian National Congress party for maintaining high-level contact with Pakistan despite unresolved disputes about security. At one point, he told a crowd, “The heads of our soldiers are cut, but then their prime minister is fed chicken biryani.” Mr. Modi’s regional foreign policy vision has economics at its core, Mr. Tellis said, and there would be a clear economic payoff to normalizing relations with Pakistan. But the new Indian leader “will not have the luxury of doing what is comfortable in his gut,” because the relationship is so strongly defined by national security issues, he said. Meanwhile, many within the political establishment may view any attempt at rapprochement with skepticism.
But Pakistani officials expressed hope that Mr. Modi would have the political freedom to resume building diplomatic and economic ties precisely because he, unlike his predecessor, is not vulnerable to attacks from the right — just as in the United States, President Richard M. Nixon, a staunch anti-Communist, was able to reach out to China in the early 1970s. “There is no doubt that under the surface, there is grumbling,” Mr. Tellis said. “It tells you something about Modi, which is that if he is convinced that this is what he has to do, he really doesn’t care what the skeptics say.”
After leading the state of Gujarat for more than 12 years, Mr. Modi, an outsider to New Delhi, has little track record on matters of foreign policy at the national level. He was powerfully influenced by his years as a full-time activist for a Hindu right-wing organization, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, but as a state leader, he looked overseas — especially to East Asia — with a focus on economic development. Mr. Modi, an outsider to New Delhi, has little track record on matters of foreign policy at the national level. He was powerfully influenced by his years as a full-time activist for a Hindu right-wing ideological organization, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, but as a state leader, he looked overseas pragmatically, with a focus on economic development.
“There is that Nixon-in-China theory that he is the only one who can make that unilateral gesture which cannot be compromised by anyone, and there is also the idea that his DNA is so anti-Pakistan” that he could not engage with its leaders, said Amitabh Mattoo, director of the Australia India Institute at the University of Melbourne. “There is that Nixon-in-China theory, that he is the only one who can make that unilateral gesture which cannot be compromised by anyone, and there is also the idea that his DNA is so anti-Pakistan” that he could not engage with its leaders, said Amitabh Mattoo, the director of the Australia India Institute at the University of Melbourne in Australia.
“I believe he will go for the former,” Mr. Mattoo said. “Modi, contrary to all the assumptions of his detractors, really wants to go down in history — not necessarily compromising India’s positions, but he will reach out.”“I believe he will go for the former,” Mr. Mattoo said. “Modi, contrary to all the assumptions of his detractors, really wants to go down in history — not necessarily compromising India’s positions, but he will reach out.”
Within India, Mr. Modi’s invitation to Mr. Sharif was attacked by powerful regional leaders in Tamil Nadu, who have long pressured the government in New Delhi not to engage with neighboring Sri Lanka. Late last year, Tamil politicians demanded that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh boycott a meeting of regional leaders in the Sri Lankan capital, Colombo, to express India’s concern over the treatment of Tamils. Mr. Modi’s invitation to the Sri Lankan president, Mahinda Rajapaksa, created a stir in India’s domestic politics, since powerful regional leaders in the state of Tamil Nadu have long pressured the government in New Delhi not to engage with neighboring Sri Lanka. Late last year, Tamil politicians demanded that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh boycott a meeting of regional leaders in the Sri Lankan capital, Colombo, to express India’s concern over the treatment of Tamils.
On Thursday, Tamil Nadu’s chief minister, Jayalalithaa Jayaram, released a statement describing Mr. Modi’s invitation as “tantamount to rubbing salt into the wounds of an already deeply injured Tamil psyche.”On Thursday, Tamil Nadu’s chief minister, Jayalalithaa Jayaram, released a statement describing Mr. Modi’s invitation as “tantamount to rubbing salt into the wounds of an already deeply injured Tamil psyche.”
But national elections this month gave Mr. Modi’s party 282 seats in Parliament, meaning he can form a government without the help of Ms. Jayaram, and compared with his predecessors, he has far less to lose from alienating her. But national elections this month gave Mr. Modi’s party 282 seats in Parliament, meaning he can form a government without the help of Ms. Jayaram, and compared with his predecessors, he has far less to lose from alienating her. The invitation to Mr. Rajapaksa sends a powerful message to India’s regional heavyweights that Mr. Modi will make his decisions independently.
“What happened in the last few years is that they completely abandoned responsibility and leadership, and in one shot, he is signaling to all the states that this is going to be a different game,” said C. Raja Mohan, a foreign-policy analyst in New Delhi. “He is signaling that he is going to do his own thing, that he wants the freedom to do it his way.”“What happened in the last few years is that they completely abandoned responsibility and leadership, and in one shot, he is signaling to all the states that this is going to be a different game,” said C. Raja Mohan, a foreign-policy analyst in New Delhi. “He is signaling that he is going to do his own thing, that he wants the freedom to do it his way.”