The Hindu Business Line : Indo-Pak dialogue — Moving towards a new dynamic

The Foreign Secretary-level Indo-Pak talks in New Delhi have been a quiet success, with action and cooperation planned in a wide swathe of areas. While Pakistan has, no doubt, reacted guardedly to India's push for greater contact between Kashmiris on both sides of the border, the change in the composition of the government will hopefully soon see business and economics guiding the dynamics of Indo-Pak relations, says Rasheeda Bhagat.

The Foreign Secretary, Mr Shashank (left), with his Pakistani counterpart, Mr Riaz Khokhar, in New Delhi... Serious and constructive dialogue.

THE striking aspect of the Foreign Secretary-level India-Pakistan talks that concluded in New Delhi on Monday was the absence of hype surrounding the exercise. One is not sure if this was by design, and even less sure if the credit for this should go to the new government at the Centre. Anyway, it has behaved a little churlishly in insisting that the joint declaration give importance to the Shimla Agreement, as though everything that happened between the two uneasy neighbours after Shimla did not matter at all.

The talks have achieved nothing dramatically less or more than the last couple of rounds of Indo-Pak dialogue initiated after the former Prime Minister, Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee's last-ditch attempt to make peace with Pakistan in the summer of 2003 while visiting Srinagar. But one cannot help recalling how the NDA government packaged each round of talks with Pakistan as a special achievement.

Anyway the talks between the two foreign secretaries — Mr Shashank and his Pakistani counterpart, Mr Riaz Khokhar — went off quite smoothly, despite the Pakistani Foreign Office spokesman, Mr Masood Khan, trying to queer the pitch, thankfully after the conclusion of the talks, over the contentious Kashmir issue. While addressing the media he reiterated the need for involving the Kashmiris in the Indo-Pak dialogue, saying: "It is their fate that you are deciding and they must be associated with the process."

When reminded that the joint statement issued after the conclusion of the talks had stated that the Kashmir issue should be resolved to the "satisfaction of both sides," he had the gall to say: "What satisfies Pakistan will ultimately satisfy the Kashmiris. That's the simple answer."

Well, Mr Masood Khan and his friends need to do much more ground-level investigation than listen to the anti-India and pro-Pakistani rhetoric of the hardliners within the Hurriyat Conference and elsewhere in the Valley. If they keep their ears to the ground in the Kashmir Valley and listen to what ordinary Kashmiris are saying about Pakistan, as well as India, and how the long-raging dispute has devastated their lives, Mr Masood Khan's cockiness will vanish.

Anyway, returning to the talks and the absence of any high-pitched claims of success or victory, their outcome should please both the sides. For one thing, they have achieved some substantive things, such as agreeing to restore the strength of the respective high commissions immediately to the previous level of 110.

After the fidayeen attack on Parliament on December 13, 2002, Indo-Pak relations had plummeted to an all-time low and the two High Commissions had been reduced to skeletal levels even as the High Commissioners returned to their respective countries.

The impact of the drastic reduction in the High Commission staff strength was felt most acutely during the Indo-Pak cricket series, when the Pakistan High Commission in Delhi really struggled to give visas to Indian cricket fans.

As people raved and ranted for being made to wait for long hours outside the Commission in Delhi, few people realised that even the family members of the staff had been pressed into service to process the visa papers. This is not to say that the Indian and Pakistani missions have not revelled in making visa-seekers run around as the Indo-Pak relationship has yo-yoed over the years.

Apart from restoration of the staff strength of the two High Commissions, another welcome feature, particularly for the business travellers, would be the decision to re-open the Consulates-General in Mumbai and Karachi. This would help people on both the sides who have to go all the way to Delhi or Islamabad to get their visas more easily.

The harassment and waste of time apart, the absurdity of the present arrangement can be seen from the fact that it is much cheaper to travel by air from Karachi to Mumbai than from Karachi to Islamabad! Worse is the plight of Mumbaikars who want to travel to Karachi.

Apart from these practical and people-related measures, there are other confidence-building measures too, such as releasing fishermen and other civilian prisoners and notifying the other side before flight-testing of missiles.

India, of course, went a step ahead, and in a departure from the past, suggested a number of Kashmir-specific proposals for improving transport, communication, trade, cultural and tourism ties. But Pakistan has been a little circumspect, and understandably so, in agreeing to immediately start bus services between Srinagar and Muzaffarpur!

Obviously, it suits India to press for a greater people-to-people level contact between the Kashmiris on either side of the border, as it wants the people of PoK to travel across the border and see for themselves the much higher levels of freedom and civil liberties that Indian Kashmiris enjoy.

There might be scope for debate on the justification for the Indian Kashmiris' disenchantment with the Indian state, but none whatsoever when it comes to the opportunities for better employment, health-care and livelihood prospects they have here compared to their counterpartsacross the LoC.

On its part, Pakistan has suggested that the proposed bus link from Khokhrapar to Munabao on the international boundary in Rajasthan be converted into a train link — something India has promised to look at.

At the end of the day, for Mr Khokhar to say that he had found the Indian leadership to be "serious, constructive... and determined to move forward" on the composite dialogue process, was an achievement indeed.

But unfortunately for Pakistan, the timing of the Delhi talks was not really ideal, as they coincided with the exit of the rather ineffective and unimpressive Mir Zafarrulah Jamali as the Prime Minister of Pakistan.

There was speculation for some time that Mr Jamali was on his way out as he had failed to deliver, particularly on the economic front. But what is puzzling — especially for a democracy like India, where governments fall on a single vote, as happened to the Vajpayee government in 1999 — is the Pakistan President, Gen Pervez Musharraf, naming the Pakistan Muslim League chief, Choudhry Shujaat Hussain, as "interim" prime minister.

The Prime Minister-in-waiting is Pakistan's highly rated — both on integrity and performance — Finance Minister, Mr Shaukat Aziz, who is likely to retain the finance portfolio even after his anointment.

He is popular with both Gen Musharraf — who had hand-picked this Citibank professional from the US to head the Finance Ministry after the military coup of October 1999 — and the international lending agencies, which are impressed by his steering of Pakistan's troubled economy out of the mess it was in five years ago.

But though the new prime minister will continue to bat on the wicket he knows best — that of the economy — politically he will be a light-weight, and not much of a threat to anybody. Is it not ironic that in the very near future the destinies of both India and Pakistan will be in the hands of internationally known and respected finance professionals but political lightweights? So, at the next Indo-Pak prime ministerial summit, whenever it materialises, it will be interesting to watch the body language and indulge in lip-reading as the cameras focus on Dr Manmohan Singh and Mr Aziz. Though the actual script will be written by somebody else on either side of the border, we can at least hope that for the first time in our troubled history, business and economy will take the lead in dictating the agenda.

Meanwhile, here is a nugget to chew on: Whoever pulls the strings of power in Pakistan, at least one tradition is maintained, as the Pakistani daily Dawn pointed out in its editorial on Tuesday: "No prime minister should be allowed to complete the constitutional five-year term. Mr Mohammad Khan Junejo, Ms Benazir Bhutto and Mr Nawaz Sharif never had the satisfaction of completing their five years in office and were booted out long before they could go to the people to seek a fresh mandate." However imperfect, at least the Indian democracy gives us something to cheer about.

Response may be sent to rasheeda@thehindu.co.in

More Stories on : Foreign Relations | Politics

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Indo-Pak dialogue — Moving towards a new dynamic

A case for equitable employment practice

Optimism on Doha Round

Budget 2004-05: Dipping into new resource streams

GDP: Don't count on it

Too many cooks

Whose interest is it anyway?

Not by credit alone