A disappointing start

The POST, Sun, Jul,27, 2008.

Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema

Even after the passage of four years that saw considerable progress in areas like Confidence Building Measures (CBMs), people to people contacts and trade, India continues to demonstrate its irrationally hardened attitude towards the resolution of almost all known disputes with the Kashmir dispute topping the list. Many people were hoping that the fifth round would turn out to be a result orientated round but the dismal start does not augur well for the optimists.

Briefing the press after the Foreign Secretaries meeting in New Delhi, the Indian External Affairs Secretary stated that the peace process was under stress as a result of Indian embassy bombing incident at Kabul. He did not hesitate to revive the blame-game and alleged that elements in Islamabad were involved in the Kabul embassy blasts. He also referred to recent violations of the Line of Control and repeated the old mantras of cross border terrorism and incitement of violence in Jammu and Kashmir.

Compared to the Indian Foreign Secretary’s blunt accusations, the Pakistani Foreign Secretary was much more restrained, dignified and balanced in a separate briefing to the press who rejected the Indian allegations and said, ‘if they share intelligence, we will allay any misgiving they have, but it is wrong to point fingers without evidence’.

It needs to be stressed here that this is not the first time that the Indians have accused Pakistan or elements based in Pakistan without providing any evidence. In fact in most cases the Indians later discovered that the culprits were Indian citizens and were awarded punishments by the Indian courts. Yet the Indian officials continue to adhere to their old technique of quickly pointing finger at Pakistan or elements in Pakistan following similar incidents.

What is perhaps interesting and deserve some comments are the two statements of the Americans. While the Indian media and officials have been accusing that elements in Pakistan are involved in Kabul blasts, the Americans quite categorically stated soon after the blast that Pakistan was not involved. However it needs to be mentioned here that recently American Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher reportedly stressed that Pakistan should take Indian charges seriously.

It is intriguing to note that following the Kabul blasts the Americans had given statement that Pakistan was not involved but have now suggested that Pakistan should take Indian charges take seriously while totally ignoring the fact that the Indians have provided no proof despite the Pakistanis have repeatedly asked for evidence. The American official did not bother to mention that without substantive evidence the accusations would be regarded as wild statements aimed to distract public opinion.

Why should Pakistan consider the Indian allegations seriously if no evidence is provided? The past history of Indo-Pak relations is studded with innumerable such Indian allegations against Pakistan. Despite Pakistan’s repeated requests no evidence was provided. It appears that such tactics have become part of India’s overall strategy to quickly point the finger at Pakistan in order to buy time.

At this perhaps it would not be out of place to mention that following the Samjuhta Express tragedy it was expected that the Indians would conduct their inquiry and share the findings with their Pakistani counterparts. Despite the existence of a joint investigative mechanism we don’t know what exactly happened and how the tragedy occurred. The level of trust is so fragile that even a concocted newspaper story could easily inject doubts.

While it is true that the fifth round of composite dialogue has begun with a dismal start, the redeeming aspect revolves around the announcement of some CBMs dealing with bus services in Kashmir. To agree to operate Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus service on weekly bases from 21st August 2008 which would be followed by Poonch-Rawalakot bus service from Aug. 25, 2008 are indeed good moves which could facilitate the cross-LOC movement.

An additional positive development that has recently taken place revolves around Pakistan’s decision to expand trade with India. With the inclusion of 136 new items, total list of tradable products with India has been increased to 1,938. Some people in Pakistan referred to 2008-9 trade policy as ‘India specific’. Indeed Pakistan has been gradually liberalizing trade with India.

Undoubtedly the dismal beginning of the fifth round of composite dialogue is a bad omen. Already critical voices are on the increase. The questions that are repeatedly voiced in many forums revolve around the inability of the two parties to resolve any dispute. While many in Pakistan recognize the complexity of the Kashmir dispute and willing to give time latitude for its resolution, it is indeed difficult to convince them on issues like Siachin and Sir Creek.

Both Siachin and Sir Creek are viewed as easily resolvable issues and the unnecessary delay in their resolution has already begun to take a very heavy toll. While it is true that most Pakistanis are keen to see that all outstanding disputes between India and Pakistan are resolved, the critics are consistently highlighting Indian obduracy and the failure to resolve even the less complicated disputes like Siachin and Sir Creek which, in turn, is paving way for the rapid advent of disappointment and dismay.

It is imperative for both India and Pakistan to accelerate their efforts to resolve the outstanding disputes. Each resolution would not only have positive impact on the process but would also garner more support for the ongoing peace efforts. Instead of dabbling in blame games and buying limited time, the efforts should concentrate on securing the much sought after resolutions of all disputes which in turn would inject the mush desired stability in the region.

The writer works for Islamabad Policy research Institute.