 |
||
|
||
|
||
Change of guard in Pakistan aroused great expectations in New
Delhi. Pakistan watchers were quick to discover a great
opportunity for normalising relations between the two neighbouring
countries. Subsequent developments showed that the optimism was
premature. The euphoria is fast evaporating thanks to confusing
signals from across the borders and one faux pas after another by
the Indian establishment.
>From New Delhi's point of view, it was heartening to note that
unlike previous elections, "hate India" campaign was put on the
back-burner during the recently concluded polls in Pakistan. Nawaz
Sharif's constant refrain during the campaign was the need for a
new beginning in relations with India. After winning a massive
mandate, he followed this up with repeated pronouncement that he
was for resumption of a dialogue with New Delhi.
These positive signals, however, appear to be too good to be true.
The new Prime Minister soon reverted to the traditional discourse
about "liberation of Kashmir" and Pak Government's continued "moral
and diplomatic" support to Kashmiri militants. Not content with
this, Sharif also reiterated Pak's known stand for plebiscite under
UN resolutions. He went on to advise India to take "bold"
initiatives on Kashmir.
Despite his massive majority in Parliament, Sharif is neither
unable nor unwilling to break new ground. One can appreciate his
limitations as the army and presidency, which have a big role in
Pakistan's defence affairs, have given no indication that they were
interested in improving relations with India. But Sharif is going
too far in expecting New Delhi to give major concessions to resolve
the Kashmir dispute even while his Government continues to export
terrorism to J & K.
Prime Minister, H. D. Deve Gowda could not have been left behind.
After warmly welcoming Sharif's statements, he announced that
Kashmir was a closed chanter and could not be discussed with
Pakistan. As is his wont, he retraced his steps and clarified that
his Government was willing to discuss the issue with Pakistan
within the parameters of Shimla agreement. As if this was not
enough, the "humble farmer" ,observed during a media interview that
"minor adjustments" could be made in Kashmir to resolve the tangle.
Nationalist parties and media took the Prime Minister to task for
this faux pas. The External Affairs Ministry clarified the next
day that the statement was made in a different context.
J&K Minister for Tourism, Ajatshatru, came out with the startling
statement that the state government would hold a referendum on
Chief Minister, Farooq Abdullah's proposal that the Line of Control
(LOC) in Kashmir be converted into international boundary so that
Pakistan could keep Pak-occupied Kashmir (PoK) to resolve the
"dispute". He went on to disclose that a resolution to that effect
might be adopted by the newly elected Assembly. His irresponsible
and damaging statement drew flak from all sides forcing Farooq to
admonish his minister and asking him to speak only about his
portfolio and not on national and international issues.
Farooq has, however, defended his position on recognition of LOC as
the international border saying he was not alone in suggesting
that. Since the party he heads, National Conference, is a
constituent of the ruling United Front and a partner in the
coalition government, it is incumbent upon the Prime Minister to
take the nation into confidence on his Government's stand on this
highly sensitive issue. As BJP leader, Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi, has
so forcefully brought out, this is tantamount to violating the
solemn resolution adopted by Parliament to get PoK vacated by
Pakistan. The then PM Narasimha Rao, had described the liberation
of PoK as the nation's "unfinished agenda" on J & K.
New Delhi's silence on the subject is deafening. Has it made up
its mind to abdicate a part of J&K to Pakistan under US pressure?
Ambassador Frank Wisner has left no one in doubt about his
country's pro-Pak bias on Kashmir. The US is questioning the very
constitutional process by which the state acceded to India and
treats Kashmir as a disputed area. It wants India and Pakistan to
resolve the dispute in consultation with the people of the state.
Our chattering classes are arguing in favour of accepting the
"ground realities" meaning thereby that the division of J&K has
come to stay. Noted commentator, Kuldip Nayar, has gone a step
further to support Deve Gowda's reference to "minor adjustments".
He has argued in a recent article that only suitable adjustment in
LOC would persuade Pakistan to accept it as the international
boundary. He claims that Jawahar Lal Nehru was thinking on these
lines and that Mrs. Indira Gandhi and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto had
agreed at Shimla in 1972 to convert LOC into the international
border but the Pak leader later went back on it as it was not
acceptable to public opinion in Pakistan.
Even if one was to grant for argument sake that Nehru and Indira
Gandhi wanted it, New Delhi has committed a blunder by conceding
before the talks have even commenced what it might ultimately agree
to part with. The UF Government has once again come out in poor
light by showing chinks in its armor. This Government is too knave
to protect national interests in negotiations with hard bargainers
like Pakistan.
The ramshackle coalition which is in power by default cannot be
allowed to compromise with the nation's security and territorial
integrity. Governments come and go but national interests remain
constant. The national policy as contained in Parliament's
unanimous resolution is that J&K is an integral part of India and
that Pakistan cannot be allowed to keep what it grabbed by deceit.
UN resolutions on Kashmir are dead. One resolution stipulated
withdrawal of Pak forces from PoK before holding of a plebiscite.
Pakistan is unwilling to withdraw its forces from areas under its
control. As for ascertaining the wishes of the people of J&K, this
has been done by holding free and fair polls.
No sane person will oppose a dialogue with Pakistan to ease the
tension and to strengthen economic ties. Businessmen on both sides
of the border are keen on improved trade relations between the two
countries. There are immense possibilities in this sector which
need not be ignored because of the Kashmir problem.
One is reminded of what a visiting Israeli dignitary told Indian
leaders about three years ago. He talked about the futility of
India trying to accommodate Pak wishes on J&K. Even if India were
to gift Kashmir to its western neighbour, the Israeli dignitary
remarked, Pakistani rulers would invent another reason to quarrel
with India as "anti-Indianism" was the very rationale of the
existence of Pakistan. Deve Gowda will do well to remember this
advice while conducting negotiations with Nawaz Sharif.
|
||
|
||
|
||