In New Delhi Gen. Pervez Musharraf and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh tried to distance the nuclear-armed subcontinent from the powerful shadow of a complex historical animosity sustained by unresolved bilateral disputes.
As top-level Pakistan-India interaction continues, keenness within the current political leadership to address the Kashmir dispute is evident. The conventional wisdom in Pakistan that the solution to Kashmir should be sought only when Pakistan is in a stronger diplomatic and political position appears to have been overruled by the view that the Kashmiris deserve an early, fair and honorable solution.
Similarly in India the view that the normalization process with Pakistan can go ahead with minimal movement on Kashmir has also been overtaken by the view that normalization, cooperation and movement on Kashmir must move simultaneously.
Musharraf’s statement at the April 18 Indian Editors Guild meeting that the LoC cannot become a permanent border, that no redrawing of territory can take place and that the borders would become irrelevant is significant. He also said that the relevance of words like sovereignty, independence and joint control is important for finding a solution. This broadly indicates the nature of work in progress on finding a three-way acceptable resolution to the Kashmir dispute.
Beyond the Musharraf-Manmohan focus on Kashmir, the Pakistani president also held his first-ever detailed talks with the entire All Parties Hurriyat Conference leadership. He met the JKLF leader Yasin Malik and Shabbir Shah of the Democratic Freedom Party for the first time. Frank and vigorous discussions took place. The Kashmiri leadership conveyed their observations and reservations regarding the Pakistan-India peace process.
Only Syed Ali Geelani openly disagreed with the flexibility being shown by Pakistan in an effort to break the five decades old diplomatic stalemate on the Kashmir dispute. The rest supported the peace process. They however demanded an end to three things: Continued human rights violations, presence of Indian troops and near denial of political space to the APHC. They also wanted direct APHC involvement in the peace process.
An intra-Kashmiri dialogue is likely to take place in May when the APHC leadership from the Kashmir Valley will travel to Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK).
Meanwhile in the absence of any organized politics by APHC the political and administrative space occupied by other New Delhi-supported and also partially elected forces like Omer Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti would continue to increase.
India too needs a peaceful settlement of the Kashmir dispute. For a peaceful settlement granting political space to APHC is essential. Otherwise the Kashmiri freedom fighters will be compelled to remain underground and resort to violence. Manmohan Singh’s May meeting with the APHC leadership must be accompanied by the repeal of draconian laws, release of political prisoners and reduction in Indian troop present especially in the Kashmir Valley.
At the Delhi summit additional moves have also been agreed to ensure further unification of the divided Kashmiris. This includes promoting trade across the LoC, new meeting points for divided families, cultural interaction, pilgrimage facilities and opening additional bus routes for Kashmiris between Poonch and Rawalakot.
Significantly the two have not merely returned to their respective pre-1989 Kashmir policies. Then New Delhi was keen to crush Kashmiri political struggle and demanded conversion of the LoC into a permanent border. Pakistan before the 1988 indigenous uprising could only provide verbal support plus minimal covert material and arms support to the Kashmiris. Now in 2005 both India and Pakistan are, with some Kashmiri input, trying to resolve the dispute.
At the summit specific decisions to further expedite the normalization process have also been taken.
This has created the political space to sincerely and boldly moves ahead on resolving the Kashmir dispute. In the coming months it will be clear if indeed this political space is used to further find such a solution to the Kashmir dispute which deals with the core question of the right of all shades of Kashmiris to determine their political future.
That alone can make Kashmir the peace bridge between the two South Asian nuclear powers.
