General Musharraf continues to be a ‘military dictator’. There is no respite in militant activities. Six months cease-fire has witnessed a spurt in the casualties of Indian security forces. New Delhi is preparing to receive General Musharraf and to accept the legitimacy of his government which till now was not acknowledged by the India. When they found none subscribing to their views, they got ready to negotiate with the Pak Dictator provided he controls the militant groups operating from across the LOC in Kashmir. As is obvious the General did not even do this, yet India got ready to receive him in Delhi. What are the motives and compulsions of this U-turn in the Indian foreign policy? Is it a repetition of Lahore bus Journey? Or an attempt to reconcile with the ground realities? Observers are attributing different reasons to this initiative. For some, the move is aimed at creating a positive image of India so that its benefits are harvested at the time of escalation of militancy in Kashmir. This is what India is perceived to have done at the time of Kargil conflict. Indians did anticipate an attack, yet pursued with Lahore Yatra to cultivate an image of peace loving nation for India in the West. They benefited from it and were rescued by Americans out of Kargil Conflict.
The optimists believe that Vajpayee’s sole aim during his tenure as Prime Minister has been to resolve the Indo–Pak disputes. He has realised that BJP is unlikely to return to power after completing its present tenure. Vajpayee in order to achieve this object is determined to utilize the time at his disposal for fulfillment of his long cherished desire. He is ready to give some concessions and facilitate resolution of Kashmir dispute as well.
There is a third view centered around the scenario in Kashmir. Some believe that Government of India has realized that fighting the insurgency in Kashmir is beyond the competence of its security forces. While extension of insurgency in Northeast and Punjab exhausted the insurgents, prolongation of Kashmir conflict is exhausting the potential of Indian security forces. On top of it, sympathy for insurgency is increasing with every passing day. After 1995, masses remained dormant for some time, now they openly come out to streets in support of militants. Even the nature of Kashmiri slogans has undergone a change. They seldom raise their voice in support of the Hurriyat Conference or its leaders. Kashmiris in the valley are often expressing their support to ‘Lashkar-I-Toiba’ and other hard-line militant groups. It was out of this popular trend that Hurriyat was scared of initiating any dialogue with the Indian Government. This mass upsurge in support for militancy has left New Delhi with no option but to negotiate with Pakistan.
There is a group of observers which attributes New Delhi’s exercise of inviting General Musharraf to US pressure. In case the offer is a result of such a pressure upon the parties which are otherwise unwilling to negotiate it is unlikely to be productive. Some Indian as well as Pakistani columnists have related the offer for talks to the withdrawal of cease fire in Kashmir. After recent debacle in the assembly elections of several states, hardliners within BJP have prevailed over Vajpayee. He had to offer some sops to pacify them. He did the same by withdrawing the cease-fire in Kashmir. In order to dilute any reaction to this withdrawal, offer of a dialogue with Musharraf was associated with it. Thus the negotiations are merely a cover to initiation of military action against the insurgency in Kashmir. Steep rise in the causalities of militants after withdrawal of cease-fire indicates that army has already started a large scale operation to curb the insurgency. Army action and civilian casualties are not getting reflected in the media because most of the journalists are preoccupied with tracing history and geography of Neharwali Hawle and its association with Parvez Musharraf. This is precisely what the Indian government wanted.
Unfortunately Hurriyat has also been swayed by the dialogue diplomacy of Atal Bihari Vajpayee. Inspite of being snubbed day and night by some ministers of his cabinet they welcome Vajpayee’s bold initiative and have suspended their activities. The activities are nothing more than issuing statements and visiting the families of victims of the atrocities of occupation forces. The only motive of Hurriyat by seeking audience with General Musharraf and Vajpayee seems to be aimed at becoming part of any dispensation that may come out of their parleys. Instead of becoming part of peace process it would have been appropriate for Hurriyat to provide the bottom line for any outcome of the dialogue. They have already faced a disgraceful refusal from Kofi Annan for a meeting. If same thing gets repeated this time Hurriyat will negate its locus standi as representatives of Kashmiri people.
Whatever be the motives and compulsions behind the proposed round of negotiations between India and Pakistan, one thing is certain that an avenue of getting out of the Kashmir trap has been created for both the countries. If their leadership is determined they can benefit out of it. But no breakthrough is possible unless deliberations attend to or are receptive to wishes of Kashmiri people. Kashmiris are now a war hardened community. They did come out of Shimla syndrome and know how to come out of any such compromises between India and Pakistan in future. Kashmir has attracted attention of so many powers who can be approached and relied upon by militants incase of any betrayal on the part of those who presently profess to be sympathizing with the cause of Kashmir. It is also to be seen how a compromising Pakistani leadership will be able to maintain itself within a volatile Pakistani society. The graceful Field Marshal Ayub Khan and popular Z.A. Bhutto were consumed by Tashkent and Shimla agreements. Nawaz Sharief was overthrown by Musharraf on account of his compromising postures during Vajpayee’s Lahore trip. Whether General Musharraf follows suit and gets dumped into the dustbin of history or returns graceful from the land of his birth solely depends upon his capacity to negotiate Kashmir problem with Vajpayee.
The optimists believe that Vajpayee’s sole aim during his tenure as Prime Minister has been to resolve the Indo–Pak disputes. He has realised that BJP is unlikely to return to power after completing its present tenure. Vajpayee in order to achieve this object is determined to utilize the time at his disposal for fulfillment of his long cherished desire. He is ready to give some concessions and facilitate resolution of Kashmir dispute as well.
There is a third view centered around the scenario in Kashmir. Some believe that Government of India has realized that fighting the insurgency in Kashmir is beyond the competence of its security forces. While extension of insurgency in Northeast and Punjab exhausted the insurgents, prolongation of Kashmir conflict is exhausting the potential of Indian security forces. On top of it, sympathy for insurgency is increasing with every passing day. After 1995, masses remained dormant for some time, now they openly come out to streets in support of militants. Even the nature of Kashmiri slogans has undergone a change. They seldom raise their voice in support of the Hurriyat Conference or its leaders. Kashmiris in the valley are often expressing their support to ‘Lashkar-I-Toiba’ and other hard-line militant groups. It was out of this popular trend that Hurriyat was scared of initiating any dialogue with the Indian Government. This mass upsurge in support for militancy has left New Delhi with no option but to negotiate with Pakistan.
There is a group of observers which attributes New Delhi’s exercise of inviting General Musharraf to US pressure. In case the offer is a result of such a pressure upon the parties which are otherwise unwilling to negotiate it is unlikely to be productive. Some Indian as well as Pakistani columnists have related the offer for talks to the withdrawal of cease fire in Kashmir. After recent debacle in the assembly elections of several states, hardliners within BJP have prevailed over Vajpayee. He had to offer some sops to pacify them. He did the same by withdrawing the cease-fire in Kashmir. In order to dilute any reaction to this withdrawal, offer of a dialogue with Musharraf was associated with it. Thus the negotiations are merely a cover to initiation of military action against the insurgency in Kashmir. Steep rise in the causalities of militants after withdrawal of cease-fire indicates that army has already started a large scale operation to curb the insurgency. Army action and civilian casualties are not getting reflected in the media because most of the journalists are preoccupied with tracing history and geography of Neharwali Hawle and its association with Parvez Musharraf. This is precisely what the Indian government wanted.
Unfortunately Hurriyat has also been swayed by the dialogue diplomacy of Atal Bihari Vajpayee. Inspite of being snubbed day and night by some ministers of his cabinet they welcome Vajpayee’s bold initiative and have suspended their activities. The activities are nothing more than issuing statements and visiting the families of victims of the atrocities of occupation forces. The only motive of Hurriyat by seeking audience with General Musharraf and Vajpayee seems to be aimed at becoming part of any dispensation that may come out of their parleys. Instead of becoming part of peace process it would have been appropriate for Hurriyat to provide the bottom line for any outcome of the dialogue. They have already faced a disgraceful refusal from Kofi Annan for a meeting. If same thing gets repeated this time Hurriyat will negate its locus standi as representatives of Kashmiri people.
Whatever be the motives and compulsions behind the proposed round of negotiations between India and Pakistan, one thing is certain that an avenue of getting out of the Kashmir trap has been created for both the countries. If their leadership is determined they can benefit out of it. But no breakthrough is possible unless deliberations attend to or are receptive to wishes of Kashmiri people. Kashmiris are now a war hardened community. They did come out of Shimla syndrome and know how to come out of any such compromises between India and Pakistan in future. Kashmir has attracted attention of so many powers who can be approached and relied upon by militants incase of any betrayal on the part of those who presently profess to be sympathizing with the cause of Kashmir. It is also to be seen how a compromising Pakistani leadership will be able to maintain itself within a volatile Pakistani society. The graceful Field Marshal Ayub Khan and popular Z.A. Bhutto were consumed by Tashkent and Shimla agreements. Nawaz Sharief was overthrown by Musharraf on account of his compromising postures during Vajpayee’s Lahore trip. Whether General Musharraf follows suit and gets dumped into the dustbin of history or returns graceful from the land of his birth solely depends upon his capacity to negotiate Kashmir problem with Vajpayee.
No comments:
Post a Comment