Confidence Building Options India And Pakistan

Confidence-Building Steps (CBMs) are those steps or agreements on which says agree with shared benefits at heart, and have beliefs that all concerned shall follow such agreements. These steps or agreements eventually develop trust between your signatory states and help in achieving peace and stability in your community. Limiting or minimizing the amount of fear among functions in conflict is vital for building self-assurance. CBMs try to lessen stress and anxiety and suspicion by causing the parties' behavior more predictable. While a single CBM is unlikely to prevent conflict or donate to peace building, a series of such agreements makes it possible for for an increased sense of security. In time, such measures could even lead to transformed understanding of a country's security needs.

Confidence-building has been around vogue and practice for several decades. Its origin can be traced back again to the years prior to World Conflict I, to the Western european practice of appealing observers from different states to witness military services exercises and manoeuvres. This practice continued and later surfaced within the Versailles Treaty for Demilitarisation of the Rhineland.

CBMs are an internationally phenomena and their development is more complex in some locations as compared to others. CBMs are really important in the context of the countries, which are suspicious of every other. The United Nations Comprehensive Analysis on CBMs says that "the final target of CBMs is to improve international peace and security and also to contribute to the introduction of confidence, better understanding and even more stable relationships between nations, therefore creating and enhancing the conditions for successful international cooperation".

Confidence-building is not really a new occurrence between India and Pakistan. Because the hurried departure of the British from South Asia and the partition, both India and Pakistan have signed many agreements looking to generate self confidence and reduce tensions. Possibly the most notable among them are, Liaquat-Nehru Pact (1951), Indus Drinking water Treaty (1960), Tashkent Contract (1966), Rann of Kutch Agreement (1969), Shimla Accord (1972), Salal Dam Contract (1978), and the establishment of the Joint Commission rate. With the exception of the Joint Commission, all the others were the merchandise of either a crisis or a warfare that necessitated a logical end to the preceding trends.


The aim of this paper is to analyse the performance of CBMs between India and Pakistan and suggest some workable and plausible CBMs that could be experimented by the two countries.


Traditional Concept. The traditional concept of CBMs is reflected in the oft-cited explanation by Holst and Melander, which says, "confidence-building will involve the communication of credible proof the absence of feared risks by reducing uncertainties and by constraining opportunities for exerting pressure through armed forces activities". In a subsequent refinement, Holst described CBMs as "arrangements designed to enhance such assurance of head and perception in the trust worthiness of state governments and the actual fact they create". Whilst the first description emphasised only on the necessity for clarifications of motives and avoidance of misperceptions, the latter ventures into the realm of the bigger gratitude of the constituent of CBMs and envisages them not merely as harm containment measures, but also as concepts of healthy relations between expresses.

Genesis. CBMs are essentially a american construct, which inserted the realm of international relations in the Meeting on Security and Co-operation in European countries (CSCE), at Helsinki. The Helsinki Last Function, 1975 ascribed three principles objectives to the CBMs :-

To eliminate the causes of tensions.

To promote assurance and contribute to balance and security.

To decrease the danger of armed conflict arising from misunderstanding or miscalculation.

Dictionary of CBMs. Browsing through literature on the development of the idea of CBM, one comes across numerous other related concepts. It is important to understand this is of several conditions that have come to be found in the diplomatic lexicon, all loosely referred to as CBMs. Their explanation and comparative examination are beyond the range of this paper. Some of these are enumerated below:-

Confidence-Building Methods.

Conflict-Avoidance Methods.

Trust-Building Steps.

Conflict-Resolution Measures

Confidence and Security Building Procedures and Confidence-Building and Security Steps.

(f) Tension-Reduction Measures.

Steps to Confidence-Building. Regardless of the upsurge in interest in these terms, there is a considerable bafflement about the confidence-building regime, as also, the steps necessary to achieve it. Each region has its unique peculiarities and, therefore, different CBMs. The borrowed connection with other locations is of only a restricted value. The steps to military confidence-building are based on two parameters; level of confidence and probability of issue. Diagrammatic representation of the same is positioned at Appendix P.

CBM Tools. They are settings and means, which help in better communication plans and transparency to the action of others or provide ways of offering satisfaction about the action of other says. Communication, constraint, transparency, and verification measures will be the key CBM tools. Few effective CBM tools, used around the world, are listed in Appendix A.


Paradoxes in Seeking the CBM Modality. Certain unresolved paradoxes, regarding the applicability and viability of CBMs, determined in South Asian region are the following:-

CBMs provide the atmospherics for increasing inter-state relations. They can create trust between adversarial claims; however the paradox remains 'that trust is necessary before CBMs can be negotiated'. The necessity for a few limited assurance between adversarial states is, therefore, essential before CBMs can be negotiated.

CBMs are difficult to determine, but easy to disrupt and forego. Continued adherence to them requires adversarial expresses to perceive the balance of edge to lie in not abrogating them, particularly during intervals of deep crises. CBMs can only be relevant in crises if trust is evident on both edges. They are known to work satisfactorily in times of peace. Hence, the paradox 'that state governments may follow CBMs in normal times, but dismiss them in emergency situations'.

Public declarations can serve as useful CBMs to alleviate tensions and promote stability. The historical record implies that national leaders in India and Pakistan regularly make conciliatory claims, however they are designed either for local consumption or even to make an impression international audiences or even to lower the other's officer. The paradox then emerges, 'alternatively than promote security and confidence-building, such declarations have often exacerbated existing local tensions'.

Origin of CBMs in Indo-Pak Relations. Meaningful military services CBMs in Indo-Pak relationships came three decades previously with the establishment of your hotline between the Director Standard of Military Functions (DGMOs) of both countries. Subsequently, there have been many military services CBMs between both countries. However, the tactical community and the military were frequently skeptical of both substance and the procedure of CBMs and did not support these originally. It was only when Operation Brasstacks in 1986-87 resulted in serious misunderstandings, and a likely probability of possible conflict again in 1990, that matters changed relatively.

Despite happenings precipitating increased tensions between the two countries, your time and effort on the part of both governments has gone to ensure that the CBMs continue to stay in place. However, the impressive range of CBMs, both of a military services and non-military nature, have been overtaken by incidents such as the Kargil issue, the mobilisation of soldiers in 2002 and the repeated terrorist episodes in India, especially the 26/11 attacks.

Major Achievements

The CBMs enumerated in the succeeding paragraphs, may be looked at as major successes in the Indo-Pak relationships during the last 2 decades.

Military CBMs.

Agreement on the Prohibition of Invasion against Nuclear Installations and Facilities, signed in 1998, and finally ratified in 1992. This specific exchange has persisted for 18 consecutive years.

Agreement on Move forward Notification on Military services Exercises, Manoeuvres and Troop Moves, brought into impact in 1991 and has had an important role to learn in the reduction of tensions on both sides of the Line of Control.

Agreement on Prevention of Airspace Violations and for Permitting Overflights and Landings by Military Aircrafts, agreed upon in 1991, has significantly reduced costs for both nations, and also helped bring into being, a composition of redress in case there is violations and mutual trust in things of necessity.

Formal ceasefire over the International Border as also some of the Ground Position Range, brought into impact at midnight of 25 Nov 03, has remained in place since.

Biannual conferences between Indian Boundary Security Pushes and Pakistani Rangers, has been in result since 2004.

Agreement on Advance Notification of Ballistic Missile Checks, in place since 2005.

Establishment of the communication website link between Pakistan Maritime Security Company and Indian Shoreline Safeguard in 2005, primarily to facilitate early on exchange of information regarding fishermen apprehended for straying into each other's waters. The contract also helped bring into conversation the probability of having joint search and rescue operations and collaborating in marine pollution control.

A hotline between DGMOs of both countries had been in effect since 1965, and was lately found in an unscheduled exchange to go over troop activities and allay tensions, in the aftermath of the 26/11 episodes in Mumbai.

Non-Military CBMs. The predominant CBMs in the non-military site have been travel options to increase people-to-people relationship. A few of the important ones, which have pretty much withstood the test of times, are enumerated below:-

Delhi-Lahore bus service, were only available in 1999, but ceased in light of the Kargil turmoil, was resumed in 2003.

Passenger and freight rail services between Attari and Lahore and air linkages were resumed in 2004.

The Samjhauta Exhibit was resumed in 2005, and regardless of the 2007 blasts, has continuing to run.

Bus service between Srinagar and Muzaffarbad was were only available in 2005.

Bus services from Lahore to Amritsar, Amritsar to Nankana Sahib and train links between Munnabao and Khokhrapar were started in 2006. Nights bus service between Ferozepur and Fazikla to Ludhiana-Chandigarh was also resumed the same time.

The first overland vehicle route between your two countries was exposed at the Wagah border crossing in 2007.

In 2008, triple-entry permit for cross-LoC travel was created and the occurrence of the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus service was increased from fortnightly to weekly.

Humanitarian aid was expanded by India, in the aftermath of the earthquake in Pakistan in 2005, and again during the floods in Aug 10.

A Joint Anti-Terrorism Institutional Mechanism to recognize and implement counter-terrorism initiatives and investigations in both countries was brought into result in 2006.

An arrangement facilitating regular contact between state-run think tanks, Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses (New Delhi), and Institute of Strategic Studies (Islamabad) was brought into being in 2008, primarily to contribute towards building channels of communication at the amount of scholars.

The first getting together with of any Joint Judicial Committee of judges belonging to both countries, meant to check out the welfare and release of prisoners, was conducted in 2008. More than 500 prisoners have been released by both edges since that time.

Joint Economic Commissions and Joint Business Councils were reactivated in 2004.

Foreign Ministers of both countries decided to some Kashmir-specific CBMs to aid crossing the LoC in 2008.

Both countries agreed to host festivals displaying each other's films in 2006. The Pakistani Government allowed for the legal release of Indian videos in Pakistan in 2008.

Major Failures

The CBM process has seen its good talk about of failures as well. A number of noteworthy one are enumerated below :-

Although there are hotlines joining both armed forces and political leaders in both countries, they are scarcely used when required most. The absence of communication has led to suspicions, followed by accusations of the pass on of misinformation.

While over 70 Kashmir related CBMs have been decided to in process, only an inconsiderable ratio of them have actually seen execution.

There is a disproportionate emphasis on armed service CBMs and an inadequate reputation of several momentous non-military CBMs.

Many CBMs, which were originally crafted to address the stabilisation of relations, post the nuclear lab tests of 1998, have been decided to in concept, yet haven't seen implementation due to belief that dominant issues have to be resolved before the CBM process can proceed.

In the current scenario, when politics will in both says is waxing and waning intermittently, CBMs, that are difficult to establish, but easy to disrupt, havent been totally effective. There is a insufficient verifiability in many CBMs, which leads both countries to fall victim to mistrust, suspicion and misinformation, on a variety of issues.

Governments on both attributes often use CBMs as political tools to win over specific constituencies, which is often very damaging in the long run. Public conciliatory statements, which are designed to be CBMs, can have the contrary effect, if they turn out to be insincere, and worse, if they have been inexpertly drafted, as you saw in the aftermath of the affirmation issued after the Sharm-el-Sheikh assembly.

CBMs have been specifically inadequate, if not absent, during times of turmoil, because despite declarations to the effect, neither country has migrated beyond the point of conflict-avoidance, towards real CBMs, and lastly, towards strengthening tranquility.

While many hundreds of thousands visit India and Pakistan from across the border, the visa formalities and confirming procedures to them are definately not conducive to confidence-building.

Prioritising the CBMs

General. The prevailing record of CBMs, world over, is ambiguous. CBMs in some contexts have demonstrated possible and beneficial, whereas in South Asia, there's a certain disaffection with the very idea of CBMs. The expectation of quick results should be averted (in Europe, it needed over twenty years for the CBM process to be effective). A definite general rule is the fact once in place, CBMs must be abided by. CBMs, if disregarded and abused, can be worse than none by any means. The building of trust requires consistency. Certain concerns that need to be resolved by the Indian and Pakistani Governments, to be able to maximise the consequences of CBMs, are the following:-

While CBMs, which focus on much better communication links and people-to-people discussion could create the required environment for deeper issues to be tackled, the impact of the CBMs still hinges on political will for his or her implementation.

The hostilities distinguishing Indo-Pak relationships are systemic, and additional hampered by newer security threats, socio-politico-economic strife and India's preponderance in the bigger South Asian region. Therefore, there is absolutely no viable alternative to a steady and incremental serenity process through armed service and non-military CBMs.

There is you don't need to prefer armed forces over non-military CBMs. Both have their place in the serenity process and are needed.

Policymakers on both attributes need to note that conflict, whether of a typical or proxy characteristics, will not improve their national passions. Both factors stand to gain both, economically and politically from a well balanced peace.

Future options catering to conflict-prevention and confidence-building, must definitely provide for further explicit method of arbitrating execution problems. To the purpose, it is imperative that CBMs be made verifiable and the possible functions that may be enjoyed by non-state celebrities such as the private sector, professional and business organisations etc be evaluated.

It is often understood that the word stakeholders would include Indians and Pakistanis in general, and the people of Jammu & Kashmir in particular. However, there's a need for more focus on the importance of Kashmiris in the CBM process. It is their participation, which would make the process more important.

Suggested Workable and Plausible CBMs

The escalating situation in Kashmir, the bone of contention between India and Pakistan since 1947, may yet give a flash point and could induce both countries to come quickly to a negotiating desk and opt for quick implementation of 'enforceable and verifiable' CBMs. Few possible, workable and enforceable CBMs, which the two governments could consider, are enumerated in the being successful paragraphs.

Short Term Procedures.

The amalgamated dialogue process should be restarted and the CBM process must continue unabated.

Both the edges should formally recognise that there is no military method for the Kashmir dispute. Additional CBMs, in assessment with Kashmiri stakeholders, have to be determined to ensure their active contribution. The Kashmir specific CBMs could are the following:-

Encouraging and initiating intra-Kashmir dialogue on both attributes of the LoC on the final status of Kashmir.

The quality of the Kashmir discord and recovery and development of mutual trust should be cared for as interdependent processes.

The procedure for de-escalation of hostilities must be initiated and efforts should be produced to de-link Kashmir from point-scoring local agendas.

The hostile local propaganda around Kashmir in both electronic digital and print multimedia must be ceased.

Relocation of heavy weapons, which are considered a major reason behind tension escalation across the LoC.

Continuous planned and unscheduled trips to forward areas by journalists, associates of various nationwide and international human privileges organisations, diplomats, defence and UN military observers.

Visa formalities/registration should provide a more conducive environment in cross-border travel.

Rules of engagement along the LOC should be clarified, made open public, and honored.

Measures in the border areas to accomplish the unification of individuals and access for NGOs.

Medium Term Procedures.

The arrangement proscribing disorders on each others' nuclear facilities could be long to discovered populations and monetary targets.

The agreement necessitating notification on military exercises et al could be extended to associating military observers with major field exercises.

Pakistan should end support of any kind for militancy in the region and address India's concerns regarding infiltration.

Civil culture and keep track of II initiatives should be urged. This will help the official level talks between your two countries and move towards a thorough resolution of the turmoil in the region.

Utilising the economical and technical CBMs such as:-

Sharing of electrical power.

Increasing the trade moves.

Promoting railway freight traffic across the border.

Improving telecommunication links.

Making newspapers from both edges available over the border.

Long Term Options.

The redeployment of troops from the Kashmir region has been debated by both government authorities and really should be examined in full practicality.

India should get started to activate Pakistani citizens towards sensitising those to the turmoil situation and build home pressure on Pakistan to enhance its relationships with India.

The dichotomy between your maintenance of Jammu & Kashmir's self-reliance via Article 370 of the Indian Constitution and the requirement to include the talk about in the mainstream of Indian politics and society must be dealt with comprehensively.

Utilise South Asian Connection for Regional Assistance (SAARC) for building self-confidence over the region on the lines of Connection of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN).


CBMs are the most used and abused term in the 21st century international relations. They are a manifestation of value, goodwill and a measure of transparency signifying at the very least, no sick will no immediate threat. It could lead to a enjoyable parlay or, it may merely be an empty gesture meaning almost nothing of substance. They need to be nurtured and incremented from small steps to covering issues of various divergences.

The effect of the CBMs between India and Pakistan has been inconsistent and spotty. They are of help instruments in avoiding wars and facilitating discord resolutions. They may be a way to an end which end cannot be achieved if the market leaders do not desire to do so.

The first rung on the ladder to a issue quality is removal of mistrust and suspicion. Only then, can the process of dialogue be unleashed. It is a hard process to popularise the idea of CBMs between the two countries and remove misunderstanding among people about its objectives and program.

In order to institutionalise the process of CBMs, it's important to make basic awareness among people about the efficiency and relevance of this idea. The role of establishments in promoting the concept of CBMs is very significant. In a situation when the state of hawaii, has to a big extent played a job incompatible formations and it is accountable for promoting confrontation, non-governmental organizations can play an important role and be of immense use within creating basic trust and self-assurance between the people of two countries and encourage monitor II and trail III attempts in normalising the relationships.

We need to follow a proactive approach towards implementation of CBMs. A strong civil culture with vibrant political and social companies can help develop a proactive strategy. SAARC can sketch some creativity from ASEAN's constructively low-key method of contentious issues.

Balance between armed service and non-military CBMs is vital for creating conditions of peacefulness. Non-military CBMs such as normal water, environment, trade, culture, press and technology can certainly make things easier for sustaining the dialogue process between your antagonistic people.

It would be foolish to expect miracles from CBMs immediately. It took a considerable amount of time for the CBMs to be effective in European countries. However, the need for India and Pakistan to make a deal CBMs is both immediate and essential. Structural factors are important and have certainly retarded the establishment of CBMs in South Asia. Nevertheless, CBMs may become the harbingers of serenity and stability in the region. History reveals they may have usually been negotiated pursuing serious bilateral crises and/or mounting of exterior pressures. However, not until the communal stronghold is attacked and reduced, and both countries, therefore, start behaving as two proven and accountable entities, would CBMs have much of a chance to succeed.

Wellington (Hitesh Goel)

Sep 10 Cdr

Total range of words: 3723

Appendix A

(Refers to Para 10)


Hotlines. Hotlines, such as the ones that exist between your USA and Russia, and between Indian and Pakistani sector commanders over the line-of-control in Kashmir, can offer reliable direct programs of communication at occasions of turmoil.

Regional Communication Centres. These centres can assist area states in conflict and problems management. The Western european model of a marketing communications and security centre, set up by the Seminar on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE), has been adapted to suit the Middle Eastern security environment.

Consultations. Regularly slated consultations, like the twelve-monthly meetings established between US and Soviet/Russian navies by the 1972 Incidents at Sea Agreement (INCSEA), or those between Chiefs of Staff of the military of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay, and Uruguay, can provide rare opportunity for direct military-to-military contact. Such message boards allow functions to words concerns and air any grievances they may have.

Constraint Options. These measures are designed to keep certain types and levels of states' military pushes far away from one another, especially along borders.

Thin-Out Zones. Thin-out areas, or limited drive deployment zones, restrict the type and quantity of armed service equipment or troops permitted in or near a certain place or boundary. Detailed procedures of the 1975 Disengagement Contract between Syria and Israel founded a demilitarised area (DMZ) as well as an area extending 20 kilometres on each part of the DMZ where pushes and weapons were limited.

Pre-Notification. Pre-notification requirements included in the Stockholm Accord of 1986 positioned constraints on armed forces exercises by imposing longer lead times, 42 times for major armed forces exercises and 1-2 years in the case of larger level exercises, before activities at the mercy of prior notification could arise. Pre-notification requirements of a certain time-period for planned military services exercises or troop actions of an arranged after level also help make a state's armed service intent more clear. Notification mechanisms may also be put on missile testing. Near contentious borders, this type of transparency measure can help eliminate concerns an exercise may be part of preparations for conflict.

Transparency Measures. These are measures that expresses engage in to foster increased openness of their military capacities and activities. Transparency options merit a particular target as important first steps in the confidence-building process.

Exchange of Data. Data exchanges describing existing armed forces holdings, planned acquisitions, military personnel and budgets can clarify a state's current and projected military services capabilities and offer move forward notice of destabilising hands build-ups. Data exchanges may take place bilaterally or multilaterally.

Military Observers. Voluntary observations of another state's armed service exercises provide first-hand access to that party's equipment and operating types of procedures.

Verification. Verification measures are designed to accumulate data or provide first hands access in order to confirm or confirm a state's compliance with a particular treaty or arrangement.

Aerial Inspections. These permit parties with an agreement to monitor compliance with drive deployment restrictions in restricted areas, to confirm data exchanges on the disposition of armed forces forces, and also to provide early caution of probably destabilising activities.

Electronic Receptors. Ground-based electronic digital sensor systems, manned or unmanned, can also confirm states' compliance to agreed constraints on equipment deployment or troop actions.

On-site Inspections. On-site inspections, problem and schedule, can help verify that claims are complying with agreements. Inspections may be carried out by third celebrations, opposing functions, or jointly.

Appendix P

(Refers to Para 9)

STEPS TO Self confidence BUILDING














Also We Can Offer!

Other services that we offer

If you don’t see the necessary subject, paper type, or topic in our list of available services and examples, don’t worry! We have a number of other academic disciplines to suit the needs of anyone who visits this website looking for help.

How to ...

We made your life easier with putting together a big number of articles and guidelines on how to plan and write different types of assignments (Essay, Research Paper, Dissertation etc)