The K question

On his state visit to Pakistan in December 1996, then Chinese President Jiang Zemin told his hosts:
"We should look at differences or disputes from a long perspective, seeking a just and reasonable settlement through consultations and negotiations while bearing in mind the larger picture. If certain issues cannot be resolved for the time being, they may be shelved temporarily so that they will not affect the normal state-to-state relations." [Quoted in "Explaining Pakistan's Foreign Policy": Routledge, 2011, p.127]
Observers noted at the time that this speech, which was delivered to the Pakistani Senate, was the first-ever public disclosure of China's policy toward South Asia. It was widely interpreted as China prodding Pakistan, its longtime friend, to improve relations with India, with whom China's own economic relationship looked set to soar in the late nineties.
Kashmir wasn't mentioned in President Zemin's speech, and it dismayed Pakistan. But Beijing was consistent. They advocated to Pakistan what they practiced themselves: a policy of economic coexistence. China has been able to bolster its trade with India despite a border dispute that keeps simmering. Same as it had earlier opened its doors to America without compromising on the Taiwan issue.
Now Kashmir wasn't mentioned in the Indo-Pak joint statement after the two countries premiers recently met on SCO summit sidelines. Folks at home are riled up at the missing "K" reference when "expediting the Mumbai trial" figured in the five-step proposed course of action. We are told Nawaz Sharif threw it all away, all those toiling months of piling diplomatic pressure on India. If broadcast media is any guide, Nawaz is as culpable in Ufa as Ayub was in Tashkent.
Reality can be nuanced. The meeting, which took place at India's request, reduced tensions between the neighbours. Measures proposed in the joint statement can pave the way for formal, comprehensive dialogue. From civilian security advisers to military border chiefs, communications are to resume. Proposed CBMs like fishermen's early release and religious tourism facilitation have support on both sides. PM Modi's confirmation to attend next years' Saarc summit in Islamabad also sets a good mood.
What about Kashmir? Well, the civilian governments approach on it now seems in sync with what President Zemin seemed to advise nearly two decades ago: don't budge on core issues but don't remain hostage to them either. Sartaj Aziz, Pakistan's National Security Adviser hinted as much in a press conference earlier this week when he explained Ufa's significance:
"The 10 July meeting served to achieve one major objective i.e. reduce tensions and create environment for meaningful talks on all issues of importance to both countries. Our country and our region have several challenges, ranging from outstanding issues like Kashmir to terrorism to poverty and low human development. People of South Asia are yearning for peace so that their governments could focus on socio-economic agenda to improve the quality of life of millions of people living in South Asia."
So, Kashmir and other contentious issues are to be taken up via the "Track-II diplomacy" route. That approach showed some promise in later years of the Musharraf and Zardari administrations. Will this time lead us somewhere, who knows. The lesson from the past is that the civilian and military leaderships must be in unison over the scale and pace of normalization of relations with India.
Given that Pakistan seems to be taking off economically after years of lethargy, it is no time for escalating confrontation with India, which some talking heads seem bent on. It is time to heed the dragons call, normalize neighborly relations, and deal with contentious issues at a suitable time. It is not in Pakistan's interest right now to be a hawk despite a saber-rattling government in New Delhi. If they are willing to talk, there is no reason why Pakistan should refuse.