Deflated Elation

The mood in Pakistan is quite akin to the disappointment that follows an abrupt end to a thrilling one-day cricket match. As the nation sat through the nail-biting, nerve-wracking hours of the night of July 16, hoping for a last-minute compromise between Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf and Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, the Agra summit went into a tailspin—almost as if, in a sudden cruel twist, wickets started tumbling and what seemed an imminent victory (for both India and Pakistan) turned into a 'defeat'.

Among the most disheartened are the Kashmiris living on the Pakistani side of Kashmir. "I am greatly disappointed with the negative attitude of the Indian government," says Raja Izhar Khan, a leader of Kashmiri refugees, who had migrated to Azad Kashmir in 1989. "The Indian leaders should have understood the ground realities and demonstrated sanity." Talking over the telephone from Muzaffarabad, Khan said he and others had planned to take out a procession to celebrate the anticipated success of the Agra summit. Instead, protest demonstrations were organised spontaneously. "We did not sleep till late night to know the outcome of the talks between the two leaders on Kashmir. The failure has depressed us," says Khan.


It is, obviously, post-mortem time now. And the question being addressed is: what went wrong at the fag-end of the summit? There are three varying perceptions on this, the most dominant being that home minister L.K. Advani and his hawkish brigade scuppered the summit, sabotaging the agreement the two countries had reached on the text of a declaration. For instance, The Nation, in an editorial last week, wrote categorically: "So strong was the hold of this (Advani) faction that it overruled its own foreign minister Jaswant Singh thrice to make changes in the agreed draft. This goes to prove how the bjp government in New Delhi has become hostage to the hardliners who now constitute the core of the ruling party. Given their strength, it appears that Pakistan was being overconfident about the prospects of a breakthrough on Kashmir, which President Musharraf believed he could count on."

Then there is the official line. Foreign minister Abdul Sattar thought that "the Agra summit remained inconclusive but it did not fail". He pointed to the precise reason for differences between the two sides: "The Pakistan side wanted that the final draft should contain the word 'resolution', with regard to the Kashmir issue, rather than the term 'address'."

Yet others think that it was Musharraf's breakfast meeting with Indian editors which was the reason why the Agra summit suddenly collapsed. Writing in The News, political analyst Naseem Zehra said: "It may not be an exaggeration to slot the Star News broadcast of General Pervez Musharraf's breakfast meeting with leading Indian editors as the important event of the Agra summit. It instantly impacted upon the diplomatic, political and media climate in and much beyond Agra. Some commentators and officials believe that the broadcast may have been responsible for the absence of an Agra Declaration."

Along with an introspection on the summit itself, the nation is also assessing the impact it will have on the future. Will the dialogue between Pakistan and India continue? Will Vajpayee ultimately visit Islamabad? And, more importantly, are the two nations back to square one, unable to reconcile their differences?

Optimists feel that not all has been lost, that the sentiments in favour of peace, stability and cooperation expressed by the leaders of India and Pakistan last week continue to be relevant. Says former finance minister Dr Mubashar Hassan: "The dialogue should not be called off now. The international community's attention is intensely and expectantly focused on South Asia. A new pattern of global politics is emerging as China and Russia join in a friendship treaty. In this situation, it is not wise for India and Pakistan to remain locked in confrontation."

Others think the Agra summit might have laid out definite markers for the future. Points out Pakistan's interior minister, Lt Gen (rtd) Moinuddin Haider: "President Musharraf has very sensibly conceded in categorical terms during his visit that the problem of Kashmir cannot be resolved by military means."



Countering the optimists though are a clutch of jehadi groups who have become even more strident in the wake of the summit. Jamaat-e-Islami ameer Qazi Hussain Ahmad feels the Agra summit testifies to India's unwillingness to settle the Kashmir question peacefully. Again, Jaish-e-Muhammad ameer Maulana Masood Azhar lavishly praises Musharraf for "articulating Pakistan's principled stance" on Kashmir and refusing to compromise on it. Says Azhar: "India had been gradually losing its military strength and now after a political debacle in Agra, it has lost its political edge over Pakistan as well. The mujahideen will now increase their strikes and force the Indian government to be serious during future talks."

The other topic of intense discussion is what the Agra summit has done for General Musharraf. "This is because, historically, Pakistan's foreign policy and domestic politics often intertwine. Both impact on, and reinforce, each other. A development in one realm has its spillover effect on the other. No wonder many of the country's political turning points are because of external factors and developments," says Islamabad-based political analyst Syed Talat Hussain.

The Opposition, particularly those in the Pakistan Muslim League (pml) of Nawaz Sharif, thinks that by returning empty-handed from Agra, Musharraf has only lengthened the growing list of his government's failures. The general's supporters, however, think that Agra has enhanced his moral standing. Their argument: the general went to Agra and was offered a bad deal, but like a true patriot, he refused to compromise and preferred to return home empty-handed. Most do think the general conducted himself well. As Naseem Zehra notes: "He spoke like a leader, logically, firmly, yet willing to create space for forward movement on the issue of Kashmir."

The self-exiled Pakistan People's Party chairperson Benazir Bhutto thinks the general's failure contrasts sharply with the gains the civilian leaders had notched up earlier. Says she: "The civilian leaders signed Simla, Islamabad and Lahore. All honourable agreements. Diplomacy is the art of the possible. Political leaders are trained in the art of give and take. General Musharraf is a military dictator. When he speaks, others jump to attention. If they don't, they are locked away. Surrounded by unelectable yesmen, Musharraf, despite proclaimed good intentions, stumbled at each key test: date for elections, political victimisation, economic revival and now foreign policy."

The Agra summit was doomed, argues Benazir, because Musharraf couldn't evolve a consensus among legitimate political forces. "He went to India on the props of Pakistan's extremist parties, posing with them before his visit. He relied on an inefficient team, which had failed him previously. Had they given good advice, he would have stayed an extra day, matching Indian patience with greater patience of his own."

The Nawaz faction of the Muslim League thinks Musharraf has not only damaged the Kashmir cause but also provided India an opportunity to further isolate Pakistan internationally. "The summit failure is like going back to the slate again. Whatever the deposed prime minister achieved in the Lahore Declaration through his diplomatic offensive has been washed away by a general lacking political wisdom," says Javed Hashmi, acting president of the pml.

It is, however, still too early for the Opposition to celebrate Musharraf's failure at the Agra summit. For one, as the general told the National Security Council on July 18, both India and Pakistan would continue to hold dialogue to sort out differences, and that a formal invitation to Vajpayee for visiting Pakistan would be sent soon. Most political observers are hopeful that as the dust settles on the Agra deadlock, it would gradually give way to pragmatism. n