ISLAMABAD, 17 July 2004 — The Pakistan-India normalization process moves ahead with discernable ease. The normalization process has gone much beyond the pre-December 2001 period.
All lines of communication have been restored, embassy strength will soon be back to normal and official visits abound. Far beyond reduced tension at the civilian level, there is actually a palpable “connection” between the people of the two countries.
Citizens in the business of art, trade, media and academia seek areas of synergetic cooperation. This overall environment provides political space for the two governments to resolve outstanding issues, and above all to solidly negotiate the Kashmir dispute.
Yet, in the June dialogue, no substantive progress was made. India submitted Kashmir-specific confidence building measures (CBMs), which focused on cross-Line of Control (LOC) movement to facilitate interaction among Kashmiris on both sides. The issue of Indian violation of Kashmiri political and human rights was ignored. The Indians also blamed Pakistan-sponsored “terrorism” for trouble in Indian-held Kashmir.
Pakistan’s foreign secretary said old briefs would not work. India was asked to end human rights violations, include Kashmiri representatives in the dialogue, and seek a final settlement of the Kashmir issue.
New ways of handling the issue were required. But Pakistan did not present specific human rights or political rights related CBMs, which would have obliged Indians to respond. On Kashmir, it was a “talking at each other” session between the foreign secretaries, not a dialogue. The other indicator of the extent to which the “much-more-than-normalization” Pakistan-India process is or is not helping dialogue on Kashmir, is the progress on the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus proposal.
The talks have essentially stalled. Scheduled for April 8, they were called off the evening before with the Indians citing differences over the composition of the delegation as the reason for postponing the talks.
They could not accept Pakistan’s position that someone from Jammu and Kashmir should not be included in the Indian government’s delegation as it would “compromise” Pakistan’s position that Kashmir is a disputed territory and the Kashmiris have yet to exercise their right of self-determination. Delhi argued that Pakistan had earlier hosted an official from Jammu and Kashmir as part of the Indian delegation during negotiations for the construction of the Baghliar Dam.
Pakistan maintained that the Kashmiris, the politicians and the public, would find the inclusion of such a person in the bus talks unacceptable. India maintained Pakistan could have announced that they were not prejudicing their position on the Kashmir issue by participating in the talks. On India’s request, the postponement of talks was announced as a mutual decision. India subsequently proposed that the bus talks be announced as political-technical talks. This would give India the opening to include the Jammu and Kashmir official who would be involved at the technical level once the decision to run the bus service is made at the political level. The announcement of holding these politico-technical talks has been made, but still no dates. Conducting a meaningful dialogue on Kashmir was never going to be easy. Despite top political commitment on both sides to move beyond stated positions and to move away “from past positions,” the old rhetoric of “cross-border terrorism” still kicks in. Delhi emits dual messages on Kashmir. While recognizing that Pakistan will not accept LOC and, according to a statement released on Jan. 6, the Kashmir issue has to be resolved to the “mutual satisfaction” of both India and Pakistan, the Indian government maintains the Indian-held Kashmir troubles for India are no different from what Pakistan faces internally in the tribal area of Wana where the Pakistani forces are conducting anti-terrorist operations.
Privately Indians maintain they have covered the two points of President Musharraf’s four-point Kashmir resolution formula; one accepting that it’s a problem and two, knocking out the unacceptable. They are correct.
Yet, at the operational level, India has taken no concrete step to begin ending the state oppression in and around the valley. Kashmiris and Pakistanis fear India is merely buying time to crush the Kashmiri struggle. New Delhi has conveyed to Islamabad that they improve human rights unilaterally. Islamabad can claim credit. Whatever India’s position is, the fact remains that until now India has taken no step to end state-sponsored violence in Kashmir.
The Pakistan-India Kashmir talks remain bogged down by inaction. Concrete steps in three areas need to be taken on Kashmir. Firstly, the Muzaffarabad-Srinagar bus talks must begin soon. Delhi can host the talks if Islamabad has a problem receiving an Indian Kashmir subject in the Indian delegation. Secondly, India must take steps to reduce the repression in Indian Held Kashmir and to improve the human rights situation. This must include greater political freedom for the Kashmiris.
Finally, a small official Kashmir group needs to be set up to explore possible solutions to the Kashmir dispute. This group, would only explore possibilities. Clearly, an acceptable three-way solution could be finalized through tripartite negotiations. Tangible movement on Kashmir and safeguarding the interest of the Kashmiris is possible and necessary. A just and sustainable resolution of the Kashmir issue is critical to durable improvements in Pakistan-India relations.
(Nasim Zehra is an Islamabad-based security analyst and fellow of the Harvard University Asia Center.)
