Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema

Almost all Indian writers/analysts have made much out of Lahore Declaration and implicit Lahore Spirit. A myth was being built that the Indian initiative produced the spirit of cooperation whereas the Kargil clashes damaged it rather badly. Apart from negligible few, most Indian writers/analysts accuse Pakistan for Kargil clashes. The Lahore Declaration was hailed as a crescendo of cooperative behaviors of both the Indian and Pakistani leaders. On arrival in Pakistan, the Prime Minister Vajpayee referred to the visit as the defining moment in South Asian history and expressed hopes that the parties will be able to rise up to the occasion. Somewhat similar feelings wee expressed by his counter part the Pakistani Prime Minister.

Despite the efforts of the hawks on both sides to torpedo the anticipated détente, the two sides were able to sign not only the famous Lahore Declaration but also a joint statement and a memorandum of understanding. The signing of the three documents was viewed, at the time, as a historic development. It was envisaged that this development would lead the two neighbours on peace path rather smoothly. Optimistically orientated statements and interviews were being aired on both sides of the border. The realists, of course, recognized it as a useful beginning but were constantly advocating caution.

It did not take long to realize that mere symbolism that was epitomized by the signing of the Lahore Declaration would need to be backed by concrete measures aimed to resolve the outstanding disputes. Nevertheless one cannot ignore the fact that the symbolism itself raised hopes among the people of both countries. In additions, the introduction of nuclear and missile related confidence-building measures were indeed seen as a welcome development.

During his Lahore visit Vajpayee expressed the need for bold initiatives, which he later repeated in his article entitled 'Kumarakom Musings'. 'Let us talk of peace, friendship and denounce war and nuclear race' stated Vajpayee while addressing a huge civic gathering on the lawn of Governor House. He called for a new era in Indo-Pak relations and pleaded for a sustained joint effort to promote an environment of peace, friendship and cooperation between the two countries. Quoting from his anti-war poems he highlighted the preciousness of life and the need to ensure that war never takes place.

Many interpretations are in circulation regarding what led to the Lahore meeting. While some claims that the foundation was laid by the SAARC meeting at Male, others maintain that it the consistent application of external pressures. Whatever has caused the advent of Lahore meeting in Feb. 1999 and the subsequent signing of three documents, the important fact is that the meeting gave birth to the much-desired spirit of cooperation.

The next logical step should have been the initiation of a sustained dialogue leading eventually to the much-needed normalization of relationships. Once it was claimed that the spirit of cooperation was born with the signing of Lahore Declaration, the quick initiation of a meaningful dialogue was absolutely imperative. No such development took place. Instead the efforts were directed to either misinterpret the spirit of Lahore or to cause an irreparable damage to what was achieved at Lahore.

Almost all Indian writers tend to project that the Kargil border clash struck the first major blow to the spirit of Lahore Declaration. Nothing could be far from the truth. The truth is that much before the initiation of Kargil border clashes; two other developments had already damaged the Lahore spirit. These developments include India's twisted interpretation of discussing all disputes including the ongoing Kashmir dispute and Indian promise to support Pakistan's application to Indian Ocean Rim Association for Regional Cooperation (IOR-ARC). Another development that took places later but contributed towards the damaging the Lahore spirit. It was an attack on the bus that was then plying between New Delhi and Lahore.

The first deadly blow struck to the evolving desired cooperative spirit that was the product of Lahore meeting was almost immediately after the return of the Indian delegation back to Delhi. Since Vajpayee had openly committed at Lahore that he was willing to discuss all outstanding disputes including the Kashmir dispute, many in India were curious and keen to seek explanation of this sentence. When asked to elaborate, the Indian high officials gave a twist to the statement and attempted to project that Vajpayee actually was making reference to Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) territories and not to the Kashmir dispute as it is known to the world.

During the Lahore trip Vajpayee had categorically stated that the two parties would negotiate with sincerity all issues including the Jammu and Kashmir. But the Indian foreign office officials deliberately opted to give a wrong interpretation. The desire to turn a new leaf in the chapter of Indo-Pak relations was stifled by the Indian officials. Much later they struck somewhat similar blow to Agra Summit.

The second development that needs to be highlighted here in order to explain how the Indians irreparably damaged the Lahore spirit deals with Pakistan's quest to become a member of IOR-ARC. Following the signing of the Lahore Declaration, the two foreign ministers stated that the outcome of Nawaz-Vajpayee summit would be revived at a meeting of foreign ministers of both countries for which modalities would be worked out soon. The Indian foreign minister Jaswant Singh also stressed that not only very positive talks had been held between the two Prime Ministers but also India had decided to support Pakistan's application in securing the membership of IOR-ARC.

Seven Indian Ocean countries (Australia, India, Kenya, Mauritius, Oman, Singapore and South Africa) met in Mauritius in March 1995 in the first inter-governmental consultative conference and declared themselves as the founding members of the IOR-ARC. Seven more were later nominated and admitted to the association one each nominated by the founding members. The second list of the seven new members included Indonesia, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mozambique, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, and Yemen. The expansion of the IOR-ARC is decided by the member's states. Pakistan was keen to become the member but India made, rather successfully, every effort to keep her out of it.

After the signing of the three important documents at Lahore, the India foreign minister openly committed to support Pakistan's quest for membership of IOR-ARC. The meeting of the association was scheduled in March 1999 and it was expected that Pakistan would have a smooth sailing this time but when the meeting was held India once again opposed rather than supporting Pakistan as was publicly committed at Lahore. This was the second major damage done to what has been so frequently highlighted as the Lahore spirit. As a matter of fact the Indians struck a severe blow to the evolving Lahore spirit in its infancy.

The third major event that contributed a substantive share towards damaging the spirit that was the product of Lahore meeting was the attack on the bus plying from Delhi to Lahore. However it needs to be mentioned here that this incident took place much later the spirit of Lahore had already been badly damaged. Hindu activists pelted stones at the peace bus. The bus service was launched in Dec.1998 but actual trial run was undertaken in Jan.1999 in an attempt to improve the troubled Indo-Pak relations. The bus was accompanied by its usual escort of a pilot car but was brought to a halt by the right wing Hindu militants.

In needs to be stressed here that the first two developments took place much before the Kargil border clashes. Since these developments had taken place before Kargil clashes, it is only logical to conclude that the spirit was in fact severely damaged by the Indian attitudes. However it is not surprising for me to read grossly exaggerated accounts and wild interpretations of events by the Indian analysts. Most Indian writers are engaged in their attempts to demonize Pakistan and provide justifications for the Indian twists, misinterpretations and dangerous policy pursuits. Finally it would only be appropriate to mention that the Kargil clash also made its contribution to the already damaged spirit of Lahore.