Since their independence in 1947, Bharat and Pakistan have signed numerous treaties aimed at peace, cooperation, and mutual coexistence. However, despite Bharat’s sincere and pacific intentions, Pakistan has consistently exploited these agreements to further its hostile and divisive agenda. Bharat’s diplomatic generosity, often misinterpreted as weakness, has emboldened repeated aggression from its neighbor. Now, the time has arrived to show Pakistan its reflection clearly and unequivocally.
Standstill Agreement (1947) was among the earliest agreements, intended to stabilize the administrative status quo post-independence. Pakistan disregarded it almost immediately, fueling conflict and instability, particularly in Jammu and Kashmir. Critics argue that Nehru’s hesitance and indecisiveness during this crucial period allowed Pakistan to exploit the situation, leading to long-term instability.
Next, the critical Instrument of Accession (1947) by Maharaja Hari Singh rightfully integrated Jammu and Kashmir into Bharat. Yet, Pakistan dishonored this sovereignty, initiating repeated invasions and promoting insurgency, which remain issues even today. Nehru’s decision to take the Kashmir issue to the United Nations has been widely criticized as a strategic blunder, unnecessarily internationalizing a domestic matter.
The Nehru-Liaquat Pact (1950) aimed at protecting minority rights, showcasing Bharat’s vision of inclusivity. Pakistan failed miserably here, subjecting its Hindu minorities to persecution and forced conversions, starkly violating the spirit and letter of the agreement. Nehru faced criticism for trusting Liaquat Ali Khan despite clear signs of Pakistan’s insincerity in safeguarding minority rights.
The historic Indus Waters Treaty (1960), facilitated by the World Bank, generously favored Pakistan by allocating substantial water resources. Bharat respected this treaty meticulously, despite provocations. Recently, after the horrifying Pahalgam attack in April 2025, Bharat finally suspended this treaty, signaling a necessary shift towards assertiveness. Predictably, Pakistan threatened retaliation, branding Bharat’s defensive posture an “act of war,” further exposing its aggressive intentions. Critics have argued that Indira Gandhi’s adherence to this treaty despite Pakistan’s aggression, especially post-1971, highlighted her misplaced diplomatic optimism.
After the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965, the Tashkent Agreement (1966) was another noble effort to reestablish peace. Pakistan used it merely as temporary relief before reigniting hostilities, most notably during the 1971 conflict. Critics argue Lal Bahadur Shastri’s sudden death at Tashkent and subsequent secrecy surrounding the agreement further raised doubts about the Congress leadership’s transparency.
The Simla Agreement (1972) was another landmark treaty, clearly outlining peaceful coexistence and mutual respect for territorial integrity. Despite assurances, Pakistan continually violated the agreement, fueling terrorism, notably in Kashmir and Punjab. Indira Gandhi faced criticism for not adequately securing definitive resolutions on Kashmir and prisoners of war, leaving loopholes for future exploitation by Pakistan.
Similarly, the Delhi Agreement (1973) was intended to humanely manage the repatriation of prisoners and civilians post-1971 war. Bharat implemented this with sincere intent, while Pakistan leveraged the issue politically, delaying repatriation and intensifying humanitarian crises.
Under the Protocol on Visits to Religious Shrines (1974), Bharat allowed countless Pakistani pilgrims safe passage and respect. Contrarily, Pakistan frequently denied similar access to Bharatiya pilgrims, politicizing even sacred traditions.
The Agreement on Prohibition of Attack Against Nuclear Installations (1988) was another demonstration of Bharat’s mature diplomacy, faithfully respected by Bharat annually. Although largely respected mutually, this treaty stands on shaky ground amidst continuous tensions.
The Lahore Declaration (1999) and Agra Summit (2001) were sincere initiatives by Bharat to stabilize relations and mitigate nuclear threats. Yet, Pakistan sabotaged these overtures, engaging in provocations like Kargil (1999), undermining the trust these diplomatic moves sought to build.
Repeatedly, Bharat extended its hand in trade, cultural exchanges, and dialogues. Yet Pakistan continually undermined trust through cross-border terrorism, infiltration, and propaganda wars, highlighting its manipulative diplomacy.
The recent tragic events in Pahalgam (2025), where terrorists killed innocent Bharatiya civilians, underline the urgent need for a recalibrated Bharat. Bharat’s suspension of key treaties like the Indus Waters Treaty indicates an overdue shift towards assertiveness and strength.
For decades, Bharat’s diplomatic magnanimity has been met with betrayal, hostility, and terrorism. The pattern is evident: Pakistan exploits Bharat’s peaceful intent to further its disruptive and aggressive goals. Bharat must now firmly assert its sovereignty, set clear boundaries, and deliver the unmistakable message that its patience and tolerance should never be mistaken for weakness.
The time is ripe for Bharat to reflect strength, resilience, and clear-eyed realism in its dealings. Pakistan must be made to understand that Bharat’s peaceful aspirations are not indefinite nor unconditional. It is indeed time to hold up a clear mirror, forcing Pakistan to confront the consequences of its decades-long deceit and hostility.
