Yes, it can — and the chapter itself points to it as an example of what is possible. The corridor shows that even between two countries whose relationship the chapter calls “one of the most complex in South Asia”, a practical arrangement can be agreed on and made to work.
What makes it a model — four things it got right
- It solved a real, felt need. For decades Indian devotees “could only view this holy site from a distance, using binoculars set up near the border at Dera Baba Nanak in Punjab”. The corridor turned looking through binoculars into walking across.
- It kept the aim narrow and clear. It is a crossing for pilgrims to one gurdwara, not a general opening of the border. A small, well-defined aim was easier for both sides to agree on.
- It removed the biggest practical barrier. Pilgrims “do not need a visa, only a permit, which makes it easier for thousands of people to visit the gurdwara”.
- It rested on something both sides respect. Gurdwara Darbar Sahib is the final resting place of Guru Nānak Dev, founder of Sikhism, who spent the last 18 years of his life there. Faith, not politics, was the ground it was built on.
What the chapter also makes clear
The corridor was not quick or easy. The idea “was first proposed in the 1990s but only became a reality in 2019”, when it was opened to mark Guru Nānak's 550th birth anniversary. Nearly thirty years passed between the idea and the opening. And the corridor did not by itself change the wider relationship, which the chapter describes as an ongoing tension marked by wars and by terrorist attacks. So it is a model of how progress can be made, not proof that it always will be.