Musharraf’s Quest to initiate a debate on Kashmir

The News, Sun, October,31, 2004.

Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema



Few days back President Musharraf has suggested a formula with a view to have a debate on Kashmir’s options initiated. This is not the first time that the President has talked about the Kashmir dispute. In fact he has been very consistent in putting ideas with the specific aim to secure a solution of the most complex dispute confronting India and Pakistan.

It has been repeatedly stated by the President that in order to find an acceptable solution, the involved parties will have to move away from their rigid and hardened positions and opt for a flexible approach. Rigidity could only perpetuate the stalemate but flexibility could enable us to explore new options. However it needs to be stressed that unilateral flexibility can only be demonstrated up to an extent and then it hits the stone wall. The only thing which can sustain its course is the reciprocity. Without reciprocity, unilateral flexibility would soon evaporate enabling rigidity to step in.

However even the flexibility demands that in order to start the process an idea is floated which should be subjected to a debate.  While one fully recognises the merits of negotiations from a hardened position as one feels secure and safe, but to narrow the gap between the two hardened stances and to secure a desired solution one needs repeated injections of flexibility along with continuous demonstration of political will by the leaders.

The latest efforts by the President reflects both a desire to end the sufferings of the people of Kashmir and to secure a solution along with demonstrating the political will to support a process aimed to find an acceptable solution. His earlier four point formula contained four stages; the recognition of Kashmir as a dispute, the initiation of a dialogue, shedding of unacceptable solutions and securing a win-win situation. The first two stages of his formula have already been attained and we are at the moment focusing on the third stage which is probably the most complex and difficult one.

To have the dialogue on Kashmir dispute move forward, the President has put forward an idea which needs to be subjected to a focused debate. According to the Musharraf formula there are seven regions of Kashmir, two of which are in Pakistan and five are in India. What the formula stresses is first to identify the regions, then seek demilitarisation of identified region and finally change the status. Each of these stages deserves explanation and some comments.

The first stage is to identify the region. The President has suggested that this region could be identified either on the basis of ethnicity or linguistic homogeneity or on religious commonalities or geography proximity or compactness. It is also possible that some of these regions may contain more than one of the above mentioned identified bases. Not only a close geographic scrutiny of the state of Jammu and Kashmir clearly points towards the existence of distinct regions but the history of the state confirms the regions distinctiveness.

The next suggested step is demilitarisation. This is not going to be easy. . If objectively judged, no one is going to dispute the fact that demilitarization is one of the major hurdles.  During the early phase of the dispute UN failed to resolve it mainly because it was unable to secure demilitarization of the disputed state. The 1948 United Nations Security asked for ceasefire, demilitarization and plebiscite. However it is also important to mention that without demilitarization one cannot move on to the next stage.

Once the demilitarization is secured, then we can move on to the next stage which is to change the status within the identified and demilitarized region. To secure the changed status, the formula merely suggests certain approaches. It could be done under the auspices of the UN or a joint control or a condominium type approach.

Perhaps the most important aspect of the President’s speech is that a debate regarding the possible solution must begin within Pakistan. His address appears to be aimed at attaining some form of consensus through a debate in order to enable Pakistan to move forward. For obvious reasons a national consensus if it emerges would strengthen the hands of Pakistani negotiators and may facilitate the forward movement.

The initial reaction to the formula appears to be fairly positive. Many Kashmiri leaders including leaders from the APHC have extended both open and cautious support. ‘It is a very positive development’, said Mirwaiz Umar Farooq. ‘It is a path breaking statement, I welcome it’, asserted Javed Mir who was one of the main leaders to initiate the armed struggle against Indian military occupation in 1989. Syed Ali Gilani, the most popular Kashmiri leader expressed his apprehensions that India is unlikely to respond positively to Musharraf proposal

It is not surprising that the Kashmiris appear to be supportive of the formula as most of them view it as a way forward. This does not mean that an agreement has already been reached on the formula but many think at least there is somebody who is attempting to push the peace process forward. Indeed it not only opens options but also his readiness to discuss all of them with a view to find a solution that is acceptable to all involved parties is a welcome move. Pakistan’s Foreign Minister has further clarified that there is no question of agreeing to a formula that does not take full cognizance of Kashmiri’s aspirations.

Compared to Kashmiri leadership, some Pakistani leaders have categorically rejected the formula on the grounds that it amounts to the abandoning of Pakistan’s principled position. They refer to the UN Security Council’s resolutions of August 13, 1948 and 5^th Jan.1949. Taken together these resolutions asked for ceasefire, demilitarization and plebiscite. To them dropping this basis amounts to letting down the Kashmiri’s cause.

The Indian response to President Musharraf’s proposed formula has been rather cool. According to the official spokesman of the Indian External Affairs ministry that ideas on Kashmir should not come through media. Since Kashmir is one of the subjects of comprehensive dialogue process, such ideas should be mooted through official channels.

Many critics of this Indian approach stress that India does not like that ideas aimed to seek an acceptable solution of the most complex problems be discussed in any open forum but prefers a closed bilateral forum.

In a closed bilateral dialogue, the public is kept ignorant regarding the process of give and take and secrecy rules supreme whereas in a public forum, transparency becomes the hallmark. Transparency enables the people of both countries to undertake their own evaluation of the process itself. Secondly transparency keeps the international community fully in picture while in the case of bilateralism; the international community becomes heavily dependent upon the information released by the involved actors.

It appears that President Musharraf has put forward an idea with specific aim that it may be subjected to rigorous discussions and analyses facilitating the involved parties to move forward. There can be different interpretations about the feasibility of the formula but it certainly deserves a comprehensive debate at almost all available forums such as parliament, both electronic and print media, educational institutions etc. All modes of opinion makers need to thrash the idea thoroughly.