At the beginning of the current year following the Pak-India summit in Islamabad, the widespread feeling in the two countries was that we had buried the hatchet for good and set out to live together happily. Now in December after taking a tortuous full circle, we are back at the starting point.
What has gone wrong? Would it be right to assume that BJP government under Vajpayee was keen and sincere for rapprochement while Sonia's Congress is not, notwithstanding their pious promises to continue the peace process? The initial confidence building measures, specially about re-establishing diplomatic, sporting and communication severed ties were greeted with pulsating enthusiasm by people of both the countries and were speedily implemented. But since the Congress took over in India the progress on further CBMS is stuttering creating doubts and disappointments about India's intentions.
The ice had thawed on India having unequivocally accepted that Kashmir was a disputed territory and its fate had to be resolved by peaceful negotiations. Under the circumstances the recent echoes of "atut ang" matra by responsible Indian leaders have sent a chill in Pakistan and a wave of frustration is spreading.
We do not exactly know what transpired at Musharraf's summit meeting with Manmohan Singh the Indian Prime Minister at New York, but the vibes were positive. As a matter of fact on return Musharraf gave the impression that the new Indian government was fully committed to the resolution of the core issue of Kashmir without preconditions. He was, therefore, greatly disappointed at the mixed signals coming from India and did not hesitate to express his frustration publicly. Pakistan still maintains that it is committed to complete flexibility in the proposed composite dialogue and perhaps India appreciates it. However, India wants longer time to prepare the public to accept concessions to be conceded, while Pakistan seems in too much of hurry to get is over with, which is unseemly.
Since the recent start of reconciliation process, Pakistan has been overanxious for a meaningful progress. So much so that President Musharraf at one stage demanded a time frame for settlement of the core issue of Kashmir which irritated India. We should have realised that after 50 years of stand off, having constitutionally incorporated the Valley of Jammu and Kashmir as an integral part of India, it would be not easy for any Indian government to go into reverse gear. Unlike Pakistan, India has a strong democratic environment. Presently it has a coalition government. Apart from differences within the Congress, there is a tough opposition within outside the parliament who would not miss any opportunity to discredit the government in office. Of course Musharraf subsequently withdrew the time frame ultimatum but the damage was done. There is also some sense in India maintaining that resolution of peripheral disputes, (and there are many) would create a climate to swallow the unpalatable pills. Development of trade, frequent interaction of people by facilitating travel and cultural exchanges are the steps necessary to build mutual trust and goodwill.
The establishment of Pakistan was never accepted by the Hindu majority of the sub continent in good faith. On the contrary it was taken as vivisection of Mother India generating feelings of wrath, resentment and hatred against Pakistan and the Muslims. No wonder the partition led to communal riots of the worst kind resulting in massacre of thousands of Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs further intensifying the discord which has persisted over half a century. Kashmir dispute has added fuel to the fire and we have fought 3 wars over it, not to speak of innumerable border skirmishes. The successive governments on both sides have found it convenient to keep the confrontation alive seeking to blame each other to cover their own shortcomings and justify heavy expenditure on arms and ammunition in the name of security.
This state of affair would have continued indefinitely until the acquisition of nuclear weapons of mass destruction first by India followed by Pakistan. The turning point came in 2002 when India amassed over one million troops across our borders to avenge a terrorist attack on Indian parliament. But for the nuclear deterrent in our possession, Pakistan's defeat was inevitable.
To conclude, Pakistan and India are both independent states and in that sense equal. But having said that, the eternal reality that "might is right" must be kept in mind. To start with we were a smaller nation in respect of territory, population and resources - natural as well as man made. Over the years India has stolen a manifold march over us in economic and military capability.
It's foreign exchange balance today stands at massive 122 billion dollars as compared to our paltry 12 billion. It's armed forces and conventional weapons of war are 6 to 8 times greater than ours. It is right to resist India's attempt at hegemony, but to threaten war for resolving Kashmir dispute is simply foolhardy. Under the circumstances prudence demands that while we must pursue our righteous cause, we should accept discretion as better part of valour for resolution of disputes.
I cannot speak for our jehadi compatriots but many saner elements in politics and particularly or leadership as represented by the President who happens to be a military man, have at last accepted the reality. Musharraf's recent feelers were possibly meant to prepare the country for developments which may not be too palatable, as pre-conceived notions will have to be partially modified in the interest of pragmatism. However powerful, India too has many problems of its own and is desirous of peace. It would therefore not be averse to some sort of compromise on Kashmir. The circumstances call for patience and perseverance on our part. Pragmatism demands that any settlement which ensures the right of the Kashmiri people to manage their own affairs should be acceptable to Pakistan.
Comments
Comments are closed.