Making A Difference

The Gaze Averted

Pakistan is looking inward. Kashmir is elsewhere. Next move: India.

Advertisement

The Gaze Averted
info_icon

As the plane ferrying India’s foreign minister S.M. Krishna touched down, the accompanying journalists believed Kashmir would dominate the media and his parleys with his Pakistani counterpart, Shah Mahmood Qureshi. The Kashmir we had left behind seemed to have regressed—a large swathe of the Valley was under curfew, young men were out on the streets pelting stones at the security forces, and 21 young men had died in recent weeks in police firing. Just the stuff the Pakistani media relishes and officials in Islamabad exploit to push the Indians on the backfoot, crying hoarse about New Delhi’s “misdeeds” in Kashmir.

Advertisement

On checking into our hotel rooms, we did what most foreign journalists usually do first in another country—glance at the newspapers. Surprise, surprise. Kashmir was missing from the front page, none of those screaming headlines in Europa bold stared at us. Stray stories on talks between the foreign ministers stressed upon the renewed engagement between the two countries, instead of castigating India for the unrest in the Valley. Most TV channels, sure enough, did telecast footage of stone-pelters, but even these lacked the strident punch, the bite and the customary rhetoric that is often dressed as news.

So then, has Pakistan changed? Is there a shift in thinking on Kashmir? Lt Gen (retd) Talat Masood provides a peep into the emerging mindset: “We have enough trouble of our own to deal with than laying stress on what is happening in Kashmir.” As an afterthought, he adds, “We have also realised that the more we hype the Kashmir issue, the more the Kashmiris suffer.”

Advertisement

The trouble Masood refers to is obvious—the devastating terrorist attacks in Pakistani cities that have engendered a pall of gloom and insecurity countrywide. Many among the elite have recognised the truth that it makes no sense to harp on the troubles of a neighbour when your own house is on fire. There’s also the realisation that only a naive person would expect major global players to single out the plight of Kashmiris in these troubled times. Afghanistan dominates the mindspace of the United States and other western countries, which are also engaged in combating threats from home-grown terrorists.

Yet, the Pakistani establishment can’t ignore certain internal dynamics. So when JKLF leader Amanullah Khan, who resides in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, cautioned the government against diluting the Kashmir issue during this week’s talks, Islamabad chose to walk the tightrope. It accused India of “human rights violations” in Kashmir and, during the Krishna-Qureshi talks, urged it to take immediate steps to normalise the situation there. But it did it subtly—in such a way as to not allow Kashmir to rock the renewed engagement, quite evident in just the passing mention Qureshi made to it during the two-hour informal discussion he had with Krishna over dinner on July 14. The following day, Kashmir was discussed during the formal talks, but not in a way to stump India.

Former Pakistani diplomat Riaz Khokar tried to justify this approach on Kashmir thus: “I see no reason for Pakistan to be apologetic for raising the Kashmir issue with India. The idea isn’t to criticise India but to discuss with candour the issue of human rights violations and killing of innocent Kashmiri youths by Indian security forces.” For a man widely recognised as a hawk, this is indeed a tepid statement.

True, Kashmir can always unleash emotions. Yet many say a fatigue has set in on the issue, which consequently must share space with other pressing subjects, such as water. Says a Pakistani commentator, “This is easily understandable...different provinces in Pakistan are busy fighting with each other over the sharing of water.” Since several rivers here flow from India, the Indus Water Treaty has started to dominate newspages.

Advertisement

Former Pakistani diplomat Jehangir Qazi is forthright, “There is a new generation in both countries that wants to move on. But that doesn’t mean the Kashmir issue is no longer relevant. There is no overnight solution to it. It will need a sustained dialogue to hammer out a solution.”

As a starting point for dialogue, isn’t it possible to revive the agreement (apparently a “signature away from being finalised”) reached through backchannel diplomacy during Pervez Musharraf’s rule? It’s said the agreement had more or less formalised the Line of Control in Kashmir as the border between India and Pakistan. Khokar is apoplectic, “It was nonsensical, a non-starter. It talked of maintaining status quo on Kashmir. It may have been acceptable to India but most Pakistanis would have seen it as a sell-out.” Former general Asad Durrani agrees, “The backchannel talks seemed to have gone on forever. Nothing can happen unless those talks are brought under a formal structure, which would allow people in Pakistan to examine the various provisions carefully.”

Advertisement

Others differ, insisting that the backchannel agreement did go beyond the status quo—it talked of an open border and more autonomy for Kashmiris. Says Masood, “It contemplated certain changes for Kashmiris. There were provisions which could have allowed India and Pakistan to move forward.” Agrees Qazi, “It can be a starting point for future talks on resolving the Kashmir issue, though we will have to keep in mind the public opinion not only in India and Pakistan but also the view of Kashmiris, which is vital to reach a meaningful resolution.”

As you talk to people in Islamabad, on the street as also opinion-makers, a realisation is likely to dawn—New Delhi should utilise Pakistan’s preoccupation with pressing internal matters to offer an olive branch on Kashmir, and hammer out a political solution acceptable to Kashmiris. It can then negotiate with Pakistan from a less defensive position. Obviously, to reach this situation, it’s imperative to maintain the tempo of the renewed dialogue. There’s also the small matter of an incident from two years ago that doesn’t get talked about all that much now—Pakistan has to take “viable, transparent and urgent” steps against the perpetrators of 26/11 and, crucially, ensure that no further terror attacks in India are staged from its soil.

Advertisement

Tags

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement