As the peace process moves and the composite
dialogue is likely to enter a more substantive phase,
new elements and actors enter the fray making it more
dynamic and complex. The interplay of internal and external
dynamics is now beginning to have an impact than was anticipated.
Powerful lobbies are emerging to sustain the process ,making
it difficult for governments to wriggle out. The Kasuri-Natwar
round, though not prized with a breakthrough, did break
grounds for forward movement in some crucial areas, including
an understanding on a back-channel. Much depends now on
Musharraf-Manmohan meeting on September 22 at New York
in setting the pace of the composite dialogue. What are
future prospects?
Although the pace and results of the first
round of the composite dialogue were not as bad as being
projected by the media since you could not expect miracles
in the preliminary round of initial exchanges, the observers
in both India and Pakistan feel that this has not even
kept pace with an incremental approach stressed by New
Delhi. And they are, perhaps, right. While talking to
a Pakistan parliamentary delegation, former Prime Minister
Vajpayee also expressed his concern over the ‘slow
pace’ of ongoing negotiation. Similarly, the Left
is quite perturbed over the snail-pace of the dialogue
process. As Prime Minister Manmohan Singh consolidates
his hold, a very close friend of his says, he is likely
to methodically take the process forward unlike ‘wayward
and instinctive’ approach of his predecessor.
What should not, however, be ignored is
that India went through a most unpredictable election
campaign, after the January 6 Islamabad joint statement
was issued, and a new coalition government of United Progressive
Alliance (UPA) headed by a technocrat, Dr Manmohan Singh,
replaced a much stronger Bharatia Janata Party-led National
Democratic Alliance (NDA) government of Mr A B Vajpayee.
The process was badly affected by the change of government
since, it is alleged by highly placed sources in New Delhi,
the Prime Minister Office, run by National Security Advisor
to Mr Vajpayee, Brajesh Mishra, did not leave any record
of understanding reached (if there was any) with President
Musharraf for the new incumbent. Yet the process not only
survived, but also delivered certain crucial confidence
building measures.
No doubt the Kasuri-Natwar round started
with highly charged statements on the ‘centrality’
of the Kashmir issue stressed by Pakistan foreign minister
and Indian external affairs minister’s rebuttal
with an added concern about the ‘rise in cross-border
terrorism’. The talks, however, got going in a more
business-like manner. Although India rejected Pakistan’s
proposal to appoint a special emissary for talks on Kashmir,
as was done in the case of Sino-Indian talks on Sikim,
New Delhi indeed has agreed to revive the back-channel,
revealed a highly placed and most reliable source, consisting
of National Security Advisor J N Dixit and Secretary National
Security Council of Pakistan Tariq Aziz. This was also
assured by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that the Foreign
Secretary level talks on the issues of security and Kashmir
will be more ‘purposeful’ and ‘substantive’.
Overall, the two foreign ministers, who
have in fact developed a good personal chemistry, were
able to pave the way for the gas pipeline from Iran to
India without haggling on granting MFN status to India
by Pakistan, or New Delhi reducing its tariff regime to
allow Islamabad the benefit of MFN status it had granted.
Demilitarisation of Siachin is almost agreed, given the
agreement reached between the two secretaries, and joint
survey of the boundary pillars in the horizontal segment
of the international boundary in Sir Creek area is also
a step forward. In terms of promoting tourism and pilgrimages
to sacred sites, the two sides have agreed to introduce
group visa. Talks on Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus-route and
Munnabao-Khokrapar rail link also moved ahead. The Joint
Statement issued speaks of "the serious and sustained
dialogue to find a peaceful negotiated final settlement"
of "bilateral issues, including Jammu and Kashmir
to the satisfaction of both sides".
No less important was the unequivocal
announcement by Mr Natwar Singh to grant countrywide,
multiple-entry visas to the Pakistani journalists, endorsed
by National Security Advisor J N Dixit, at the reception
hosted in honour of Mr Khurshid Kasuri, organised by SAFMA
India in New Delhi on September 7. While both the foreign
ministers agreed to jointly support SAFMA become the Apex
Regional Body at the next Saarc Council of Ministers’
meeting, Mr Kasuri assured SAFMA India that he will try
his best in reciprocating India’s goodwill gesture
towards the Pakistani journalists by allowing similar
facility to the Indian journalists after consulting other
concerned ministries. But, it is regrettable that the
interior ministry in Pakistan has tried to throw a spanner
in the works by deporting Resident Editor of Hindustan
Times, Mr Kanwar Sandhu. It may also be mentioned that
Mr Natwar Singh welcomed the visit of 17 Pakistani journalists
to J&K and a very high profile visit of sector leaders
from Pakistan to the Indian Punjab being organised by
SAFMA.
Not only that the people on both sides
want peace and steady movement on all counts and peaceful
settlement of disputes, including Kashmir, quite powerful
lobbies and influential regional constituencies have got
activated to push the process forward in the era of coalition
politics in India. The Confederation of Indian Industry
and big business houses are very keen in entering in joint
projects and opening up trades on a win-win basis with
their Pakistani counterparts and the Bollywood that had
crossed the limits in making war movies is now focusing
on peace themes and joint productions. If the flourishing
states in South carry no baggage against Pakistan, the
traditionally hostile North or the Hindi-speaking cow-belt
is now witnessing an upsurge for friendship with Pakistan.
As the UP and Bihar governments led by lower castes-based
parties are on the forefront of friendship with Pakistan,
the governments in the states of Punjab, Haryana and Himachal
Pradesh are competing in getting the Wahgah/Attari sector
opened for both border co-operation in all sectors and
tourism.
Chief Minister of Punjab Capt Amrinder
Singh was here and now Chief Minister of Haryana Om Prakash
Chautala is here to reap political benefits in his home
state. To settle his water dispute with neighbouring East
Punjab and run his election campaign, he is taking a bucket
of ‘sacred water’ from the birth place of
Bhai Kanhaia as a part of 300th anniversary celebrations
of "Bakhshish Diwas" of Kanhaiya. This bucket,
along with four urns of water drawn from the birth places
of Sikh saints of Sewapanthi sect in Sodhra, Pakistan,
would be mixed with the water from Anand Sahib in India
and would be taken on a "harmony yatra" to various
parts of Haryana to motivate the people with the ideals
of Bhai Kanhaiya, who did not discriminate among foes
and friends while quenching their thirst and distributing
water. How culture, religious traditions and the saints
across our borders can play a positive role in bringing
the two people closer and advance the agendas of regional
players can be best explained by M Chaudhary Chautala’s
visit.
The fact of the matter is that the respective
bureaucracies steeped in traditional rivalry and overwhelmed
with zealously guarding their turf do not let things move
forward in their respective spheres. Without the intervention
of political leadership they can’t relent, nor can
intelligent quid pro quos and trade-offs across sectors
be struck. The major issues that still dog the composite
dialogue process, especially the dispute over Kashmir,
cannot be handled in one-go, nor are there any quick-fix
solutions. They can be solved in and through a process
that allows, simultaneous, progress in all areas, especially
by building bridges across Northern India and Pakistan.
This is time for our Punjab to take the lead since Lahore
will become the epicentre of Indo-Pak co-operation which
will, in turn, help resolve the dispute over Kashmir which
must not be dealt as a ‘territorial dispute’
but as an issue of the Kashmiri people and their aspirations.
Let there be no hurdle in the way of Kashmiri people in
interacting among themselves. The solution lies in a process
that must soften LoC, not strengthen it, as should the
other borders with two sovereign nations living peacefully
side by side.
