Kashmir at breakfast, lunch and dinner

[Guest guest]

 

>OFBJP Admin

>vaidika1008 (AT) hotmail (DOT) com >[bJP News]: Kashmir at breakfast, lunch

and dinner >Wed, 18 Jul 2001 10:13:15 -0400 > >Title: Kashmir at

breakfast, lunch and dinner >Author: G. Parthsarthy >Publication: Rediff >Date:

July 18, 2001 > > Every visit by a Pakistani ruler to India has its interesting

and > ironic moments. The visit of the author of Kargil, General > Pervez

Musharraf was no exception. The lunch hosted by > Prime Minister Vajpayee on

July 15 had its own interesting > facets. A grim faced Abdul Sattar was

sandwiched between a > sombre Jaswant Singh and a rather relaxed looking L K >

Advani. Musharraf was seated on the head table with former > prime ministers V

P Singh to his left and I K Gujral to his > right. What an irony, I thought, to

have a Pakistani military > ruler sandwiched between two former Indian prime

ministers. > > Military rulers in > Pakistan have after > all ensured that >

former prime > ministers overthrown > by them are either > hanged, or exiled to

> Saudi Arabia! It must > also have been a new > experience for > Musharraf to

receive > the leader of the > Opposition in a > meeting arranged by > his

hosts. > Observance of civilised democratic norms does, after all, demonstrate

the > strength and resilience of a mature democratic system. > > Incidents like

those reflecting the strengths of our democracy and the virtual > servility of

some leading lights of our fourth estate when they received a public > dressing

down from the visiting military ruler of Pakistan for allegedly being >

influenced by the government on their reporting of developments in Kashmir >

were noteworthy. What, however, remains etched in one's mind is the tenacity >

with which Musharraf pursued his single point agenda of raising the

'centrality' > of the Kashmir issue on every conceivable occasion. > > The

general spoke like a man possessed whenever he got a chance to speak of >

Kashmir, whether at breakfast, lunch or dinner. This was not entirely >

unexpected, given his utterances prior to his visit. But by the time he left,

this > continuous invocation of what is now called the 'K Word,' left his hosts

tired > and unimpressed. Repetition may be useful to drive home a point to the

cadets > of the Kakul Military Academy in Pakistan. It is not necessary in a

mature and > civilised diplomatic discourse. > > It was evident even before he

arrived that Musharraf was determined to pursue a > highly focused single point

agenda in India, revolving around putting in place a > new framework for

conducting bilateral relations. He was determined to rubbish > and discard two

landmark agreements that India has entered into with > democratically elected

governments in Pakistan -- the Simla Agreement of 1972 > and the Lahore

Declaration of 1999. The reasons for this are self-evident. > > The Simla

Agreement is a virtual no war pact that commits Pakistan to resolve > issues

peacefully and bilaterally with India. It also requires Pakistan to respect >

the sanctity of the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir. Further, the Simla >

Agreement and the Lahore Declaration require both countries to enhance mutual >

trust and cooperation even as they seek to address differences on all issues >

including Jammu and Kashmir. These are provisions that Musharraf finds >

irksome and embarrassing -- provisions he would like to discard. > >

Seventy-six persons lost their lives in terrorist violence in the three days

that > Musharraf was in India. These included 49 militants, 20 civilians and

seven > members of the security forces. Most of the terrorists involved were

not > Kashmiris, but Pakistani nationals. Yet, Musharraf brazenly claimed that

the > violence in Kashmir was the result of an 'indigenous' movement. It is

obvious > that Musharraf has neither the will nor the inclination to deal with

the > perpetrators of terrorist violence. > > The question that logically

arises is that what is India to gain by giving in to the > general's demands

for an entirely new framework for dialogue, if there is > reciprocally going to

be no guarantee that the generals in Rawalpindi are going > to end their support

for terrorist activities in Jammu and Kashmir and elsewhere > in India? It has

always been our view that it is necessary to build a climate of > trust,

confidence and cooperation if complex issues are to be addressed and >

resolved. This approach lies at the very heart of the Simla Agreement and >

Lahore Declaration. Why should we dilute or undermine this approach, merely >

to please a Pakistani general who publicly avers at Agra that the Kargil

intrusion > was justified because of what transpired during the Bangladesh

conflict in 1971 > and has proclaimed in the past that low intensity conflict

with India will > continue even if the Kashmir issue is resolved to his

satisfaction? > > Prime Minister Vajpayee clearly spelt out India's approach to

relations with > Pakistan in his comments to the visiting general in Agra. He

spoke of the need > for a "comprehensive view" of Indo-Pakistan relations

involving a "broad based" > approach to our relations. He candidly referred to

problems posed by Pakistani > support for terrorism in Kashmir and elsewhere.

He also dwelt at length on > issues of concern in India like the continued

detention of Indian PoWs, the > haven and support provided by Pakistan to

people involved in the Bombay bomb > blasts and in organized crime like Dawood

Ibrahim, the hijackers of IC 814 and > to residual terrorist elements who have

been engaged in terrorist activities in > Punjab. > > Vajpayee spoke of the

need to facilitate and expand people to people interaction > and referred to

the need to expand mutually beneficial trade and economic ties. > While noting

that there were differences in approach to the Kashmir issue, > Vajpayee made

it clear that India was quite prepared to enter into a meaningful > dialogue

with Pakistan on all outstanding issues including Jammu and Kashmir. > >

Negotiations on finalizing the text of a "Agra Declaration" remained the focal

> point of attention in Agra. It is quite obvious that these negotiations did

not > succeed primarily because of the basic difference in approach between the

two > sides. While India favored an inclusive approach in which the provisions

of the > Lahore Declaration and Simla Agreement were not eroded, the Pakistani

side > had a different approach. But, there is reason to believe that in an

anxiety to > reach an agreement, we were not quite as firm and forthright as we

could have > been during the actual negotiations. > > Despite this, one could

not help noting that behind his rhetoric on Kashmir > aimed primarily at his

domestic constituency Musharraf was showing a degree > of realism and

flexibility in his approach. We will now have to wait and see > whether this

trend continues. Pakistan has made substantial details of the > negotiations in

Agra public. Jaswant Singh has claimed he will not speak about > the contents of

the negotiations on grounds of confidentiality. This is not > desirable in the

present day in a democracy. The public and Parliament will > have to be

provided far greater details than the government has provided so far. > > It

would be incorrect to label the Agra summit a failure merely because there >

was no joint declaration issued. We need to remember that seven rounds of >

summit talks preceded the Lahore Declaration. Vital national interests should >

not be compromised by over-anxiety to get the dialogue process restarted. There

> will be occasion for Vajpayee and Musharraf to meet on the sidelines of the

next > UN General Assembly session. With the SAARC process set to recommence >

there are going to be occasions for official and ministerial level meetings >

between India and Pakistan. > > In the meantime it is imperative that New Delhi

unilaterally implements the > measures that have been announced for promoting

people to people contacts, > including the opening of new entry check posts

along the > Srinagar-Muzzafarabad road and elsewhere. It would then be for

Pakistan to > decide whether it will permit its nationals to visit India across

these checkpoints. > > New Delhi's approach in dealing with Musharraf has been

both mature and > restrained. It is, however, important to ensure that

restraint is not mistaken for > weakness across the border. Further, the

diplomatic pressure on Pakistan needs > to be maintained as long as jehadi

outfits operating from its territory or from > Taleban-controlled Afghanistan

continue to act with impunity whether in > Kashmir, the Ferghana valley or

Chechnya. There can also be no cause for any > relaxation on issues of national

security. It would be naïve to believe that the > optimism voiced after the

summit by Jaswant Singh in Agra or by Abdul Sattar > in Islamabad is in any way

going to weaken the nexus between the ISI and the > jehadi outfits they support.

> >---- >

http://www.ofbjp.org

>---- >A

worldwide community of BJP's friends, supporters and activists: >Friends of the

BJP - Worldwide: http://www.ofbjp.org/fob

>---- > > Get

your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com