|
India and
Pakistan talk again
Dr Shabir Choudhry
India and Pakistan are to face each other
again, but good thing is this time they are facing each other across the
table. They have faced each other in various fields since 1947,
including in the battlefield. Hitherto no confrontation or bilateral
dialogue has produced the desired results.
They are once again around the table and
this is good. But question is are they meeting because they want to
resolve all the outstanding issues or they have internal and external
pressure to sit down, even if that means sitting for the sake of it?
Some weeks back there was no sign of
this kind of meeting. So what has changed the minds? Is it the war next
door in Afghanistan and issues and
pressures related to that which is forcing both governments to sit down
and talk? What are they going to talk anyway? The statements coming from
New Delhi and Islamabad indicate that they want to talk on different
issues; and there appears to be no agreement on what they want to talk.
In other words the agenda of talks
doesn’t seem to be clear as it should be. Focus of India would be to
talk on issues related to ‘terrorism’ and may be other bilateral issues.
India's External Affairs Minister S M Krishna said: "Let's be very, very
clear, that the composite talks you [the interviewer] referred to are
suspended. Composite dialogue is not being renewed. The brief to the
foreign secretary is that terror would be the focal point of the talks".
Pakistan on the other hand
insisted that all issues should be part of the talks, including Kashmir
dispute and issue of water; but later on they changed their mind and
Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir in his press briefing said: "It is
important that there are no pre-conditions from either side. Pakistan
strongly believes that with pre-conditions there can be no dialogue."
Pakistan has a long history of
issuing statements for the consumption of Pakistanis and Kashmiris –
they claimed Kashmir was their priority in talks even when in the past name of
Kashmir was not included in the joint communiqué. Completely contrary to what
was agreed in the joint communiqué they would issue a statement that
Kashmir was the core issue and that they would not budge.
In line with their past practise, the
next day a statement was issued for the consumption of the Pakistanis
and Kashmiris that there was no point having talks if Kashmir dispute and issue of water was not on the agenda. The statement
emphasised that Kashmir must be
part of the talks.
Despite a bomb blast in Puna, India has decided to go ahead
with the talks. Some Indian politicians questioned for how long the
people of India would continue to get killed and India agreeing to
holding talks with Pakistan. Some Indian officials admit that there
could be more bomb blasts in Kashmir and India; but we will still pursue
peace talks in hope that Pakistani mindset will change one day and they
will be able to resolve all outstanding issues with Pakistan through a
process of dialogue.
Does this show a genuine desire for
peace or some kind of pressure to talk to Pakistan, even if that does
not produce any tangible results? Many analysts believe that it is the
hard work of US Defence Secretary Robert Gates and Washington's
‘Viceroy’ for Pakistan and Afghanistan, Richard Holbrooke, which has
resulted in resumption of talks.
Some analysts draw similarities of the
present talks to the talks which India and Pakistan had as a result of
the American pressure after Sino-India war of 1962. During that war,
Pakistan was urged to stay out of it in return for assured talks with
India on the future of Jammu and Kashmir. At that time five rounds of
talks between Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Sardar Swaran Singh did not
produce an agreement.
Despite what Pakistan has done to
advance American interests in Afghanistan and in the region, Pakistan is
continually asked to do more. Pakistan had apprehensions about the
situation on the border with India and about the situation in Kashmir; and refused to do more or commit any more troops. In view of that it
was imperative that both India
and Pakistan talked to each other; even if they talked about weather or
environment.
Militants and al-Qaeda, on the other
hand, have a different agenda, and want to ensure that there is no peace
between India and Pakistan. They want to ensure
that India and Pakistan are in a war-like situation, that Pakistan is
forced to commit itself to the threat from this side. The bomb blast in
Puna has to be seen in that light and especially in the light of a
threat issued by a Kashmiri leader of al-Qaeda.
Ilyas Kashmiri, who hails from district
Bhimber of Pakistani-administered Kashmir and who is commander of 313 Brigade, an operational arm of al-Qaeda
issued a statement:
“We warn the international community to
play their role in getting the Kashmiris their right of
self-determination and preventing India from committing brutalities in
Kashmir, especially in Bandipura, raping the women and behaving inhumanly with
Muslim prisoners. We, the mujahideen of 313 Brigade, vow to continue
attacks all across India until
the Indian Army leaves Kashmir and gives the Kashmiris their right of self-determination. We assure the
Muslims of the subcontinent that we will never forget the massacre of
the Muslims in Gujarat and the
demolition of Babri Masjid [a mosque destroyed by Hindu militants in
1992]. The entire Muslim community is one body and we will take revenge
for all injustices and tyranny. We again warn the Indian government to
compensate for all its injustices; otherwise they will see our next
action”.
Ilyas Kashmiri, before becoming a part
of al-Qaeda was involved in a ‘jihad’ in Jammu and Kashmir. I understand
he is a big fish and American’s have unsuccessfully tried to take him
out many times. He and his 313 Brigade certainly have the ability and
know how to commit acts of violence in Kashmir and in India to disrupt the peace talks or even to precipitate a confrontation
between India and Pakistan, but
there is no immediate danger to the talks. He will have to do something
really big to disrupt the present peace process.
But that doesn’t mean the new peace
process will produce any tangible results. It will be business as usual
- sit down, exchange of views, photo session and possibly a joint
communiqué to say that they will continue to talk. There will be no
agreement on anything as still there is a big gap in perception on
different things. For example, many people in the Pakistani government
still regard militancy in Jammu and Kashmir as a ‘Jihad’; and it becomes
‘terrorism’ only when bomb blasts take place inside Pakistan or in
Pakistani-administered Kashmir.
Similarly both governments have big
differences on the issue of water. Pakistan accuses India of ‘stealing
their water’. India of course disagrees with that. To us, citizens of
Jammu and Kashmir this is our water, which both India and Pakistan are
utilising against our wish. They are both exploiting our resources and
both want to advance their national interests at the cost of interest of
people of Jammu and Kashmir.
Like always Kashmiri leaders have
expressed their desire to take part in the talks, because it is their
biggest wish to sit on the same table with India and Pakistan to discuss
about Kashmir and violence. And like always both governments have no desire to
consider Kashmiri leaders as equal partners in this dispute and honour
them with a seat at the negotiating table.
The Kashmir dispute and problems associated with it will continue as usual. People
of Jammu and Kashmir on both
sides of the divide will continue to suffer by varying degrees.
And if America wins the war in
Afghanistan or the Taliban have upper hand, then unfortunately Jammu and
Kashmir will experience a new and battle-hardened Jihadi groups entering
Kashmir. They first time entered Kashmir on 22 October 1947 and caused
havoc; and we continue to suffer to date.
Writer is Director Diplomatic Committee
of Kashmir National Party, political analyst and author of many books
and booklets. Also he is Director Institute of Kashmir
Affairs.Email:drshabirchoudhry@gmail.com |