Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, October 2003, page 34

The Subcontinent

 

The Thawing of India-Pakistan Relations

 

By M.M. Ali

With the resumption of diplomatic ties between India and Pakistan—including the exchange of ambassadors and withdrawal of troops from the border—relations can now be described as normal. The restoration of limited bus service between the two countries is an additional step forward.

There was a time, however, when, in addition to its embassy in Islamabad, India had consulates in Lahore and Karachi. Similarly, Pakistan had an embassy in New Delhi and consulates in Bombay and Madras. But, even then, relations between India and Pakistan were never as cordial as they are between India and Russia, or Pakistan and China. Moreover, despite the recent encouraging developments, air travel between the two countries, suspended last year, has yet to be resumed, and trade, even at the minimal level of a decade or two ago, is nonexistent. The only constant throughout the years, in fact, has been the shooting and killings across the U.N.-drawn Line of Control (LOC) in the disputed state of Jammu and Kashmir.

But for the time being, at least, there is a letup in the bellicosity and venomous rhetoric between the two neighbors. The leaders of both countries may at best be described as being polite to each other. This apparent softness (akin to tolerance) may be due to external pressures and each side's possession of nuclear weapons.

 

Conciliatory Tone on Kashmir

While movement on the official front may be slow, recent unofficial developments on both sides have created an opening for dialogue between New Delhi and Islamabad. Significant in this regard has been the visit of a delegation led by Maulana Fazlur Rehman, the religious right-wing opposition leader in Pakistan's National Assembly. He was received by India's Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, and the two apparently discussed India-Pakistan relations, including the Kashmir dispute. The following week, a 59-member Indian delegation led by former Minister Ram Jetmalani, and including former Chief Minister of Behar Laloo Prasad Yadhav, visited Pakistan and met with Prime Minister Zafarullah Khan Jamali and President Pervez Musharraf. Hosts and visitors alike talked of easing tensions between the two countries, with Musharraf suggesting an "immediate" cease-fire across the LOC in Kashmir.

In early August the Indian prime minister for the first time received leaders of the Kashmir Hurriyat Conference,which has led the freedom struggle inside Indian-held Kashmir. Coincidentally, the Kashmir Muslim Council, a Washington, DC-based organization that opposes India's presence in Kashmir, organized a large conference under the banner, "Beyond the Blame Game—finding a common ground for peace in Kashmir" (see report on p. 64 of this issue).

 

Efforts are underway to open up a dialogue on Kashmir.

While there has been no letup of Kashmiri militancy, and Indian forces and paramilitary units continue almost daily to kill suspected "insurgents," indications are that efforts are underway to open up a dialogue toward finding a peaceful solution to the Kashmir dispute. In recent years—mostly at the initiative of American think tanks like the Washington, DC-based U.S. Institute for Peace—unofficial Indian, Pakistani and Kashmiri representatives, have met in India, Pakistan and Washington under the rubric of Track-II and attempted to break the impasse on Kashmir. To date, however, nothing has come of these efforts. The last official meeting between Delhi and Islamabad to discuss the Kashmir dispute stalled after Vajpayee's government refused to allow the participation of Kashmiris.

There is no question that bilateral talks between India and Pakistan would be futile without a third-party observer, facilitator or mediator—something India so far has rejected. While Pakistan has advocated a third-party presence, Islamabad's faith in American neutrality may not last much longer, given Washington's current heavy leaning toward Delhi. Israel's appearance there is yet another factor that might cause Pakistan to view the involvement of a third party with trepidation.

Simple-minded Washington brokers believe that Kashmir's Line of Control could be transformed into a loose dividing line between the two sides, if Pakistan would agree to it and Delhi could be persuaded to grant more autonomy to the Sirinagar government. To appease both sides, this arrangement could stand for a period of 5 to 10 years, when Kashmiris then would be asked to make their final choice—one which should include independence for the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Nor is this a new formula—the difference being that, this time, Washington and/or London would underwrite its security and economic viability.

However attractive the formula may be, it would be a very hard sell for all parties. As some equally simple-minded, but frank, people observe, "The Kashmir problem would have been resolved long ago if it had oil in the ground instead of snow on its mountain peaks."

It will be interesting to watch how the wheel spins in the coming weeks and months. Movement on the subject will have to be slow, especially in view of Indian elections next year. The ruling BJP can ill afford to make any conciliatory gestures on Muslim-majority Kashmir. As a matter of fact, its stance is likely to harden in the coming months before it softens.

 

Tensions in Afghanistan

Despite the U.S. military presence there, recent developments show that the situation in Afghanistan is far from normal or peaceful. Now the maintenance of law and order in the country has been handed over to NATO—marking the first time NATO forces have been deployed outside Europe. Neutral sources indicate that Hamid Karzai's government still has not been able to extend its control beyond the capital city of Kabul. In the rest of the country tribal warlords, big and small, control their various fiefdoms. Many have their own militias, collect taxes, and generate wealth through narcotic cultivation and trade. The remnants of the Taliban and al-Qaeda reportedly continue their sneak attacks and evoke resistance to foreign occupation.

Tensions have mounted between Pakistan and Afghanistan since military skirmishes broke out in the southern Afghanistan area of Kandahar, on the border with Pakistan. There have been several meetings between the two governments in recent weeks to resolve the problem. Pakistan, it must be remembered, finds these troubles equally detrimental to its own efforts to secure peace and development. Ever since the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the subsequent U.S. military assistance and intervention, Pakistan not only has had to house millions of Afghan refugees, but also inherited the arms and drugs culture that came with them. Today it has joined with the U.S. to fight terrorism—at the risk of alienating a sizeable number of right-wing Islamists. It makes no sense that Pakistan would want to add to Karzai's troubles.

Interestingly, while Afghanistan still is unable to put its house in order or deal adequately with the niceties of international law and diplomacy, India has opened an embassy in Kabul and three consular offices in strategic locations across Afghanistan—including one in the Kandahar-Jalalabad area, just across the border with Pakistan!

Prof. M.M. Ali, a specialist on South Asia based in the Washington, DC area, is a consultant with the United Nations Development Program.

< Prev		Next >