People's Democracy

EDITORIAL

                         Resolve Disputes Bilaterally

LAST week, through this column, we had heartly welcomed the new confidence building measures (CBMs) announced by the Indian government for improving Indo-Pak relations. We had also said that the initiative to discuss the Kashmir issue with the Hurriyat, announced simultaneously, must be seen as the part of a new package alongwith the Indo-Pak CBMs. At the same time, we had said that such declaration of intent must be followed up by concrete actions. The failure to do so would only give credence to the opinion that these initiatives are not only insincere but have been announced under international pressure.

A week later, however, we find contradictory and often conflicting statements by leading ministers of this government. These not only betray the ambivalence of this government but, more importantly, that there is much more in the agenda than improving the Indo-Pak relations. 

Even before the framework for the proposed dialogue in Kashmir has been worked out, the deputy prime minister made observations limiting the scope of the talks to "decentralisation.” Further, the attempt to talk only to one section of the Hurriyat does not serve any purpose. On the contrary, it could be counterproductive. The former chairman of the Hurriyat, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, has predictably blamed the government for lack of clarity. We maintain that essentially the dialogue must be centered on the question of autonomy within the framework of the rights granted by the article 370 of the constitution. Naturally, the question of Kashmir being an integral part of India is non-negotiable. Further, such talks must be all-inclusive in the sense that the entire political spectrum of the Kashmir, including the elected state government, must be made party to this dialogue. 

However, given the BJP's known attitude towards article 370 of the constitution, nothing much appears to be expected. There can be no discussions or dialogue on the question of autonomy while the BJP and its government seek the abrogation of article 370. If the government is sincere, then it cannot run with the hares and hunt with the hounds. 

On the Indo-Pak front, the defence minister has thundered that this is the "final effort" that India shall make for improving relations. If these fail, then the only meeting with Pakistan, we are told, will be in the battlefield. What such bluster will achieve can only be told by the government. 

The external affairs minister, on the other hand, has reiterated that there will not be any bilateral talks with the Pakistan as long as cross-border terrorism continues.

On the question of containing cross-border terrorism and Pakistan's support to it, the entire country has backed this government. We have also had the occasion to point out a potential danger in making the cessation of cross-border terrorism a pre-condition for talks. Pakistan has been outrightly denying any support that it gives to such activities. That it is not speaking the truth is known to all. However, Pakistan has also suggested the appointment of an international observer group by the United Nations to check on infiltration and cross-border terrorism. With both India and Pakistan maintaining their position, India finds itself in the danger of being willy-nilly forced to accept a third party intervention. This would be against the unified spirit in India that seeks and has always sought the resolution of Indo-Pak disputes within a bilateral framework.

What is more interesting in this entire confusion is the external affairs minister's comment that these initiatives would have a positive impact on the elections. He has, probably unwittingly, let the cat out of the bag. By characterising these initiatives as "tactical,” the BJP seems to be calculating its electoral fortunes more than the stated desire for improving Indo-Pak relations. The defence minister's statement of meeting Pakistan on the battlefield may well suggest another agenda before the general elections next year.

If such are the calculations, then there can be nothing more sinister or diabolic. The peoples of both the countries want peace and improved relations. A sincere effort must be made to achieve this. We can only hope that the Vajpayee government leaves aside its tactical and electoral considerations and pursues with genuine sincerity these initiatives towards resolving the Kashmir dispute and improving Indo-Pak relations.

P S: As we go to press, the Pakistani response has just begun to come. It has apparently found it difficult to reject the Indian initiative. However, in a manifestation of typical one-upmanship, Pakistan has accepted many of the Indian proposals with a rider. There is a danger that these riders may grow to become obstacles. Pakistan has also made some additional proposals for India to consider.

The people of both countries would feel relieved that Pakistan has not outrightly rejected the Indian initiative. What needs to be done is to proceed forward on the basis of accepting and implementing the commonly agreed aspects. This is what the people of both the countries, who seek good neighbourly relations, would like to materialise. We would be in a position to comment more meaningfully on Pakistan’s response when we are able to study the details.