INDIA & PAKISTAN

A surge of optimism

JOHN CHERIAN

The ceasefire agreement and the realisation on either side that the other has softened its stand appear to have brightened the prospects of peace in the region.

AMAN SHARMA/AP

A BSF patrol and a soldier removing grass from the fields for better visibility on the border in Amritsar district, Punjab, on November 28.

THE ceasefire announced by India and Pakistan along their border has led to a surge in optimism about the prospects of peace in the region. The international community has been lavish in its praise for the leadership of the two South Asian neighbours for the dramatic initiative they took on the occasion of Id ul-Fitr. This is the first comprehensive ceasefire agreement between the two countries in the past 14 years. However, the Indian government and the major militant groupings operating in the Kashmir valley have announced that the ceasefire would apply only to Indian and Pakistani forces along the Line of Control (LoC).

The Indian government has said that the longevity of the ceasefire depends on Islamabad's willingness to halt the infiltration of militants from its side of the border. India has insisted that Pakistan is training the militants and facilitating their infiltration into Jammu and Kashmir. After the failed 2001 Agra summit, relations between the two countries had plummeted to an abysmal low. Since then, Prime Minster Atal Bihari Vajpayee had been steadfastly turning down suggestions about restaging a summit meeting between the two countries. Instead, the Indian side has been demanding a "step by step" approach in resolving the contentious issues. On the other hand, Pakistan Prime Minister Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali has been quite persistent in his calls for a face-to-face meeting with his counterpart, ever since he assumed office a year ago. After Vajpayee's speech in Srinagar in the first week of May this year calling for a dialogue to resolve the Kashmir issue, Jamali had immediately proposed a summit meeting between the leaders of the two countries.

President Pervez Musharraf had offered a ceasefire along the LoC in August and later in September, while speaking at the United Nations General Assembly. However, his offer was conditional. He suggested that India, as a quid pro quo, agree to reduce its troop presence in Jammu and Kashmir and reduce what he called atrocities by the security forces. Then it was India's turn to make a counter-offer. Vajpayee's Deepavali proposals to Islamabad were wide-ranging in nature; they included suggestions to start bus, train, sea and air services between the two countries, the highlight being a bus service linking Srinagar and Muzaffarabad in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (POK). The Pakistani response, as articulated by Foreign Secretary Riaz Khokkar, was considered "churlish" by the Indian foreign policy establishment, especially his suggestion that people travelling to Pakistan from the valley should have U.N. travel documents. Khokkar had also offered free medical treatment for the "victims" of Indian troops in the valley. Both capitals then duly resorted to diplomatic mud-slinging until Jamali came up with his dramatic peace package just before Id.

New Delhi's suggestion that the ceasefire be extended to the Siachen glacier was immediately accepted. Jamali said that Pakistan was willing to start talks to expedite a ferry service between Karachi and Mumbai and a Sindh-Rajasthan road link. The Pakistani Prime Minster also called for a new bus route between Lahore and Amritsar. Pakistani officials feel that a bus service emanating from Amritsar will make it easier for people from North India, especially Kashmir and Punjab, to meet their relatives across the border.

Indian officials are of the view that it was strong international pressure coupled with a spurt in sectarian violence that prompted the Pakistani government to make the surprise offer. The impression in Delhi is that another important factor that possibly prompted the Pakistani gesture was the desire to make the forthcoming summit of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) in Islamabad a success with the Indian Prime Minster's presence there. Vajpayee seems to have become more flexible on the issue of high-level talks after Jamali's Id initiative. "There is no difference between a one-on-one meeting or meeting all of them together. I am going there and I shall be happy if Mr. Jamali meets me," Vajpayee told the media in Lucknow.

The Indian side is of the view that Jamali's proposals are a climbdown from the hard stance adopted by Khokkar in October in response to India's Deepavali offer to defuse tensions. Pakistan had then talked about the need for a "composite dialogue" before agreeing to talk specifically about opening new transport links. Vajpayee has expressed the hope that the ceasefire will hold and that the efforts to normalise relations will progress. Indian officials are optimistic about the ceasefire continuing beyond the SAARC summit in January. A Foreign Ministry spokesperson, while responding to the latest Pakistani proposals, said that for the ceasefire to be durable, infiltration from across the border had to end. There is also quiet optimism that the guns would fall silent on Siachen. The two sides had virtually agreed to withdraw from the heights and return to base camp way back in 1989. The exigencies of electoral politics derailed the deal at the eleventh hour.

The Pakistani side is of the view that New Delhi has also softened its stance on the dialogue issue. Lack of preparatory work was the reason the Indian site ascribed to the failure of the Agra summit. Pakistani officials have a different explanation. "The Agra summit was a reiteration that the dialogue process should be restarted. It signified nothing else. A lot of preparatory work has been done in the last 40 years. We have discussed everything threadbare," said a Pakistani official. He pointed out that the people-to-people "atmospherics" have always been good. What was lacking, he said was determination on the part of the two governments.

"All major issues between the two countries have been discussed threadbare," said a diplomat. He emphasised that the only issue that was not near resolution was the "core issue" of Kashmir. Once the root cause was redressed, Siachen, Tul Bul, Sir Creek and all other issues could be resolved, he said. There was no shortage of people trying to sidetrack the core issue of Kashmir, he pointed out. However. the diplomat warned, the "current euphoria" would not last unless the Kashmir issue was discussed seriously. He recalled that President Zia-ul-Haq had said way back in 1985 that the other issues could be resolved before attention was focussed on Kashmir.

Joint commissions were formed in the mid-1980s to solve the Siachen problem, trade issues, and water and power disputes and to demarcate the Sir Creek maritime border. The official said that good progress had been made on all these fronts and agreements could be reached expeditiously. According to a Pakistani official, these issues could have been settled amicably in the late 1980s itself. He said that when Pakistan suggested in August 1990 that Kashmir should also be discussed, the Indian side undercut the proposal by demanding that POK should be handed over to India.

Pakistani diplomatic sources admit that "jehadis" were involved deeply in the struggle in Kashmir. However, they say that the "mujahideen", who participated in the war in Afghanistan, started entering the valley only after 1989. Officials closely involved in policy-making in Pakistan claim that they themselves were taken by surprise by the "indigenous insurgency" that erupted in the valley around that time. They point out that several hundred Kashmiris had gone to Afghanistan to wage "jehad" against the Soviet Union. After the Soviet withdrawal, they, along with the Arab and Pakistani "jehadis", turned their attention to Kashmir. According to these officials, they thought that they could easily replicate in Kashmir their achievements in Afghanistan. One official said Islamabad found it difficult to control the "jehadi" fervour and that was when "cross border terrorism" started. Had India agreed to start serious stalks on Kashmir, the relations between the two countries would not have deteriorated to such an extent, the official claimed. He pointed out that relations had improved considerably in the mid-1980s. The Pakistan High Commission in New Delhi issued 852 visas every day in those days.

The official said that the Pakistan government was now in a position to deliver, provided India was serious about solving the Kashmir problem. He emphasised that the civilian government headed by Jamali had the full backing of the Pakistani establishment, including the omnipotent military. To create the right atmosphere, Pakistan would prefer New Delhi to start talking with the All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC) and Islamabad at the same time. They are not too happy that New Delhi has started talking first with what they consider an unrepresentative faction of the Hurriyat. He is of the view that both Pakistan and India should state their "entrenched" positions on Kashmir. If the positions are not acceptable, both sides should try to find a common, negotiated position. He ruled out any probability of the LoC being converted into the border. "The trouble is on the Indian side of the LoC," he said. He denied the existence of training camps for militants on the Pakistani side or of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) providing "motivational training" for the jehadis. He said that using AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenades and making plastic bombs were quite simple and required very little training. He averred that those crossing the LoC were motivated mainly by the jehadi fervour.

The official said that India should do more on the economic front. He is of the view that the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline proposal, if implemented, will benefit the economies of all the three countries. He said that Indian fears that Pakistan could sabotage the pipeline were far-fetched. Pakistan, he stressed, could not afford to annoy Iran.

He also wanted the Indian private sector to invest in Pakistan in a big way. Some companies were already beginning to do so, he pointed out. Dabur has already opened a factory in Pakistan. The official wants India to be more accommodative on issues related to trade. He pointed out that India's exports to Pakistan were already four times more than Pakistan's to India. The official said that Pakistani farmers did not get subsidies of any kind unlike their counterparts in India, which made their agricultural products less competitive.

He said that Islamabad was willing to discuss all outstanding issues, including Siachen, with New Delhi. The official was also of the view that on the issue of resumption of aviation and rail links, New Delhi wanted to have its own way. He said that a token gesture from the Indian government, like the handing over of Jinnah House in Mumbai to Pakistan, would generate a lot of goodwill in Pakistan.

Islamabad is also worried about what it perceives as heightened Indian activity along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. The Indian consulates in Kandahar and Jalalabad are being mentioned in this context. Pakistani officials say that positive steps by India will be amply reciprocated. They say that Pakistan can help open up the Central Asian market for Indian goods if the relations improve. The route to Central Asian countries will be much shorter and cheaper, especially after the Gwadar port is ready for operation.

The officials deny that there was any pressure from Washington to initiate the ceasefire. Sections of the Pakistani media have speculated that Islamabad is finding itself isolated diplomatically in the international arena. Pakistan's traditional "all weather" friend, China, has been expanding its ties with India dramatically. There is a distinct impression gaining ground that China is becoming more even-handed in its relations with the two countries. Beijing has welcomed the ceasefire announcement. The Chinese foreign policy spokesperson has said that a "greater level of trust" between the two countries is "conducive to regional peace and development".

Pakistan has also been asked by the American government to open up its national database and records of those involved in terrorist activities. It has been reported that American officials have been putting tremendous pressure on Islamabad to abandon its Kashmir operations.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail