India's National Magazine
From the publishers of THE HINDU

Vol. 16 :: No. 05 :: Feb. 27 - Mar. 12, 1999

---

INDIA AND PAKISTAN

Lahore and beyond

There are sections of opinion in Pakistan that are sceptical about the Nawaz Sharif-Vajpayee diplomatic initiative, but the general impression is that it is a step in the right direction.

JOHN CHERIAN
in Lahore

PRIME Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee may not have taken Lahore by storm but the impression his short visit created in Pakistan is that it was a step in the right direction. Vajpayee and his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif conjured up an atmosphere of cordiality, even as they reiterated their original agendas. However, just as there are questions about how substantive the outcome of the visit will prove to be, there are doubts about the bonhomie percolating to their respective bureaucracies.

Senior officials on the Indian side are of the view that the Lahore Declaration is an important step towards establishing good-neighbourly relations. One of them pointed out that confidence-building measures (CBMs) in the nuclear field were in place between the two countries in less than a year after the Pokhran-II nuclear explosions. They pointed out that it took more than a decade for the United State and the former Soviet Union to agree on CBMs after the Cuban missile crisis. The bilateral talks in Lahore covered the entire gamut of nuclear issues, he said, and added that the Foreign Secretaries of the two countries would meet in March.

However, the disappointment was palpable when the Prime Ministers failed to take meaningful steps to address the security problems that have emerged after the May 1998 nuclear tests. The Lahore Declaration talked in general terms with both sides confining themselves to "recognising that the nuclear dimension of the security environment of the two countries adds to their responsibility for avoidance of conflict". It also reiterated that both countries were "committed to the objectives of universal nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation."

Before the two leaders met, there were hopes that they would reach an agreement on the non-deployment and non-induction of nuclear weapons, non-conversion of nuclear fissile materiel into weapons and avoidance of further nuclear testing. Given the realities of the subcontinent, where a possible nuclear attack leaves either country with barely three minutes to react, the risks of a nuclear holocaust are real. Experts feel that mere unilateral nuclear moratoriums are insufficient as both countries are keen on deploying nuclear weapons.

Ahmad Rashid, a Pakistani political commentator, told Frontline that he had expected Vajpayee's visit to result in CBMs in the nuclear field and that he was disappointed when the two sides chose to sidetrack the vital issue. Other analysts said that the CBMs agreed upon failed to address the nuclear issue.

Rashid is of the opinion that much of the show was put up for Western consumption. (The U.S. State Department described Vajpayee's visit as a "very positive development".) It is important for the people of both countries to be aware of their respective nuclear "command and control systems," Rashid said. "We should know who is running the show. The populations of the two countries should not be held hostage. There should be transparency." Rashid felt that the Indian side was reluctant to discuss this crucial issue.

Pakistani opinion-makers who have taken a hawkish stand on the nuclear issue see the peace process as a ploy for de-nuclearisation of the subcontinent through various non-proliferation measures. Many Pakistanis believe that the acquisition of nuclear weapons has given their country strategic parity with India. They fear that the Western game plan to make India and Pakistan sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) this year will prove detrimental to Pakistan's strategic interests.

SHANKER CHAKRAVARTY
Prime Ministers A.B. Vajpayee and Nawaz Sharif exchanging documents after signing the Lahore Declaration at the Darbar Hall of Governor House in Lahore.

The leader of Jamaat-I-Islami leader, Qazi Hussain Ahmad, has warned the Pakistan Government against signing the CTBT. Addressing a rally in Lahore, he said: "Until a reliable system of defence and deterrence is in place, signing the CTBT will be fatal for Pakistan." The Jamaat chief said that his party also wanted peace and friendship with India but this, he said, was possible only after a solution was found "to the central issue of Kashmir".

The Jamaat organised demonstrations and enforced a strike to protest against Vajpayee's visit. There were sporadic incidents of violence, including the stoning of the cars of diplomats who were proceeding to attend an official reception hosted by Nawaz Sharif in honour of Vajpayee. The Jamaat's anger was targeted at Sharif. Qazi even accused Sharif of being "a friend of Hindus" and a "traitor" for inviting the Indian Prime Minister. Qazi Hussain Ahmad wanted Sharif to discuss just a single-point agenda, namely Kashmir, with Vajpayee. The Islamists seem to be emerging as a threat to the Pakistani state. Rashid said that the process of "Talibanisation" was already on, with the Shariat law being imposed in various places.

Interestingly, Benazir Bhutto, the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) leader and former Prime Minister, has adopted a conciliatory stance on the issue of normalisation of relations. In a speech to Indian parliamentarians, who visited Pakistan recently, she even called for the creation of a common economic zone for South Asia. She admitted that she had sometimes taken an unnecessarily hawkish stance towards India. The PPP leader is once again drawing huge crowds. A recent rally addressed by her attracted more than two lakh people. But Sharif's refusal to take her into confidence on his foreign policy issues, has prevented her from openly supporting his latest initiative. The Pakistan Army has also transformed considerably in the last few years and despite reports to the contrary in sections of the Pakistani media, it appears to be fully behind Sharif's initiative.

Sharif is reported to have promised during his election campaign that he would improve relations with India. Kashmir was also not a big issue in the last elections. But his invitation to Vajpayee took many Pakistanis by surprise. "It was a coup by the Prime Minister against the Foreign Office," said Imtiaz Alam, Editor of The News, Pakistan. Sharif took neither his party colleagues nor the Pakistani people into confidence on this matter. In his address to the nation, broadcast a day before Vajpayee's arrival, he did not mention a word about the visit or its significance to his nation.

It was a big political gamble on sharif's part. "Fifty years of history cannot just be rolled back," said Rashid. Political commentators feel that the Government suffers from a lack of vision and swings from one extreme position to another. To illustrate this point, Rashid said that Nawaz Sharif delivered a belligerent speech on February 5, on the occasion of Kashmir Day. And now, two weeks later, he said, Sharif played host to the Indian Prime Minister.

ZAHID HUSSEIN/ REUTERS
Women supporters of the Jamaat-i-Islami during a rally in Karachi.

Pakistanis concede that the Kashmir issue cannot be resolved overnight. They are happy that Vajpayee referred to the issue in his banquet speech and that it figured in the Lahore Declaration. P.K. Shahani, a former member of the National Assembly, said that it was time the two countries stopped arguing about jurisdiction and took a "quantum jump" together into the next century. Bilateral discussions could continue but both countries should also take unilateral initiatives that can build mutual trust, he said. The Indian Government, he added, should stop behaving as if it was Lord Curzon's successor.

Although Vajpayee's visit has caused a bit of political turmoil, Sharif has reason to be happy with Vajpayee's reference to Kashmir in his banquet speech and in the Lahore Declaration, which states that the respective governments "shall intensify their efforts to resolve all issues, including the issue of Jammu and Kashmir", indicating a softening of stand on Kashmir.

Rashid says that the pressure on Pakistan from Washington was much more than it was on India. U.S. diplomats in the region, including Richard Celeste, U.S. Ambassador to India, were in Islamabad keeping a close watch on the progress of the bilateral talks. Both Sharif and Vajpayee want President Bill Clinton to visit the subcontinent in 1999, he said. Their calculation is that such a visit would be a tacit recognition of their status as nuclear powers. He expects both the countries to sign the CTBT and make concessions on the fissile materiel issue. Pakistan has already indicated that it is willing to withdraw from the Siachen glacier if India reciprocated. This issue could be taken up at the Foreign-Secretary level. Other disputes such as those relating to Sir Creek and the Tulbul barrage, seem to have been put on the backburner although there are areas of broad agreement on these issues. Eqbal Ahmad, a prominent Pakistani intellectual, who argues for detente between the two countries said that it was unrealistic to expect substantive agreements on long-standing disputes during diplomatic summits. Another intellectual, I.A. Rehman, said that although Kashmir issue needed to be resolved, the history of five decades of mutually destructive confrontation had to end.

Pakistanis in general consider it significant that the leader of a right-wing nationalist party was visiting Lahore and had agreed among other things to discuss Kashmir. The onus to fulfil the expectations given rise to among the people of the two countries is now on the leadership of the two countries.