Evaluating the First Round

The News, Sun, August,22, 2004.

Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema


The first round of composite dialogue has just about been completed and in the first week of September the foreign secretaries would meet again followed by a meeting of the foreign ministers. The foreign ministers are expected to evaluate the performance so far.
The prevalent atmosphere and repeated assurances given by the leadership in both countries tend to generate positive vibes. However it would be somewhat unrealistic to overlook the past antagonistic relationships which had facilitated the evolution of a special kind of attitude towards each other.

Undoubtedly the most important aspect of the composite dialogue revolves around the ongoing Kashmir dispute.  A preliminary discussion between the two foreign secretaries had taken place at New Delhi on June 27-28. At the time the Pakistani foreign secretary expressed in no uncertain terms that Pakistan would discuss the Kashmir dispute with great sincerity and seriousness. Somewhat similar assurances were also advanced by the other side.

Six years after the Pokhran and Chagai explosions the Indians and the Pakistanis formally met at New Delhi in June this year.  At the end of the meeting a joint statement containing seven points was issued. It provided for an improvised hotline between the director-generals of military operations (DGMO), suggested setting up another hotline between the foreign secretaries, reaffirmed already announced unilateral moratoriums on conducting further tests, notifying the other side of missile tests, decided to engage in bilateral consultations on security and non-proliferation issues, and also called for regular working-level meetings etc. The successful outcome of the two days deliberations on nuclear related matters gave the two sides a good start. Not only it was viewed as a good omen but it paved the grounds for the subsequent meetings. Despite the existence of enormous complexities and internal difficulties both India and Pakistan demonstrated their desire to make the area safer.

The first round of talks that took place after the positive outcome of nuclear related meeting was that of the foreign secretaries. There was a detailed exchange of views on the ongoing Kashmir dispute and the two foreign secretaries agreed to continue with their  
‘Sustained and serious’ dialogue to find a feasible and final solution. Not only the talks were held in a very constructive and positive atmosphere but also both sides expressed their satisfaction with the progress of the dialogue process. This was the first time since Jan.1994 that the Kashmir dispute was subjected to a serious dialogue.

Reportedly the Indians proposed that the Line of Control (LOC) be converted into a line of peace and tranquillity and the ceasefire that has been in place for the last seven months be further be strengthened. Pakistan, on the other hand, stressed the need for a plebiscite in Kashmir. In addition, not only the Pakistanis referred to the incumbent tranquillity that has been in place especially along the LOC for quite sometimes but they also referred to the fencing of large portion of LOC as ‘illegal’. The Indian team’s reference to the existence of training camps for terrorists on Pakistani territory was politely dismissed.

The next round of talks focused on Tulbul Navigation Project or Wullar Barrage: an issue that in fact has already been settled if viewed within the context of Indus Waters treaty. Pakistan believes that the project is a violation of the Indus Treaty whereas the Indians think otherwise. Whine the India wants to release the water from the barrage in winter when Pakistan is short of water whereas the Pakistan wants day to day water releases which is its right under the existing Indus Water Treaty. Pakistan also reiterated its position that no increase should be made in the height of dam and it should remain at the point at which it was suspended in 1987.

While the two sides were unable to reach an agreement over the 20 years old dispute but the joint statement that was issued at the end of talks stressed that the talks were held in a cordial and constructive atmosphere and both sides not just reaffirmed their commitments to the Indus Waters Treaty but also expressed agreement to continue the dialogue in the next round. Reports emanating from Indian sources indicate that India is no longer interested in reviving the project as it stood suspended in 1987. If this is true then there was no issue to be discussed and an agreement could have been announced.

The talks on Water were followed by the meeting of culture secretaries of India and Pakistan with a view to explore possibilities to improve and encourage people to people contacts. Many constructive proposals dealing with relaxing visa policies, increasing cultural exchanges, release civilian prisoners and fishermen, increasing the number of visitor to religious places, promoting tourism and starting group tours, removing ban on TV channels,  cooperation among libraries, participating in book fairs, holding joint seminars, closer interactions between the educational institutions, collaboration in archaeological field, promoting film festivals etc. were tabled and discussed.

The joint statement that was issued at the end of meeting of the culture secretaries expressed complete satisfaction over the outcomes of the talks. While proposals dealing with exchanges and cooperation in the field of art, culture, education, archaeology, science, technology, youth affairs, sports, media, tourism were tabled but details of cooperative mechanism is yet to be evolved. As is often said that the demon is in the details, it may not be all that easy to work out smoothly a detailed implementation mechanism. However since both sides demonstrated much interest in increasing people to people contacts and if they maintain this level of interests that even the devil in details may not be able to impede the process effectively.

The talks on Siachin and Sir Creek were scheduled to be held on fifth and sixth August. Defence secretaries wrapped up talks on Siachin with the resolve to pursue an agreement over Siachin glacier. It was agreed that the military experts would soon meet in Islamabad to narrow down their differences surrounding the world’s highest battlefield and discuss the modalities for disengagement and redeployment of troops. Both sides also agreed to continue discussions in order to have the issue resolved. It needs to be mentioned here that the two sides had been able to develop somewhat similar understanding in 1989 but it was not implemented because of the likely political cost to Indian leaders at the time. Let us hope that this will work this time.

The talks over Sir Creek were also held on the same dates as were the Siachin talks. The talks on Sir Creek quickly flopped and failed to yield any concrete results. Both sides continued to maintain and argue for their respective positions. India says that the boundary lies in the middle of the 60 kilometres estuary whereas Pakistan stresses that boundary lies on the eastern bank of the creek. Not only the area is considered strategically important and involves lot of area in term of maritime boundaries but it is also believed to have large deposits of oil and gas. However the two sides agreed to continue their discussions.

The talks on drugs and terrorism were held on 10^th and 11^th August. The fate of these talks was not radically different than those of earlier talks. While there were no major differences on how to check drugs trafficking, the issue of terrorism defied an agreement on definitional aspect of terrorism. Not only both sides assessed the meeting as positive but also expressed their determination to combat terrorism and emphasised the need to complete erosion of this menace.

However it needs to be mentioned the Indian sides did not miss the opportunity to once again allege the increase in cross border terrorism in Indian held Kashmir. They stated that Pakistan was not taking long term measures for its complete elimination. Pakistan of course categorically denied and stressed that not only a strict policy was formulated at the top but the government has insured that no one is allowed or able to cross LOC. The Indians were also reminded that their own military commanders had publicly stated that infiltration had gone down substantially.

Finally the trade talks were held on 11^th and 12^th August. Reportedly the official sources indicated that both sides discussed a wide range of proposals on promotion of bilateral trade, economic and commercial cooperation. Indian also once again reiterated that Pakistan should accord it the most favoured nation status (MFN). To which Pakistan responded that it is willing to consider MFN status for India if good progress is made on broader front of conflict resolution talks between the two countries. At the end of meeting it was once again stated that the discussions were held in a frank and cordial atmosphere.

Undoubtedly the talks have been frank and constructive as these were held in a cordial atmosphere. What one has to keep in mind before passing any verdict that after a long times the dialogue at official level has started? Not only both sides reportedly have been making sincere efforts in order to find effective and practical recipes but to expect solutions or settlements to complex problems in the first round is indeed unrealistic. If the incumbent trends and the assurances given by the top leadership are continued to be sustained, then there is no reason, at least at the moment, to entertain pessimistic outlook.

The people of the both India and Pakistan along with international community are keenly looking forwards to positive outcomes of these talks. The realisation that neither the geography can be changed nor going alone could be beneficial is increasing. To facilitate the ongoing process a comprehensive efforts need to be undertaken by all concerned.