A Note Of Caution

PAKISTAN Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's remarks on Indo-Pakistan relations have raised great hopes of a thaw in icy bilateral ties. Since the last secretary-level talks in January 1994, the two countries have not had any meaningful exchange. Pakistan's insistence that Kashmir was the core issue and that unless there was progress in this area no talks were possible led to a complete breakdown in all communications. Benazir Bhutto failed to respond to Prime Minister H.D. Deve Gowda's offer of talks on all issues, including Kashmir, made soon after he took over. Stridency in tone marked Benazir's stay in office until she was sacked in November 1996.

With Sharif, there is a marked change in atmospherics. Even during the election campaign, Sharif was confident enough to tell the Indian media that he wanted to restart the dialogue. In fact, he has since repeated this intention in several fora. Naturally, everyone sat up and took notice here.

But there is no reason to celebrate—not yet. In 1988, when Benazir first came to power, there was a similar stirring of hope. That these Oxbridge leaders—Rajiv Gandhi was heading the government in New Delhi—would forge a breakthrough in the war of attrition. But the Army, then headed by Gen. Mirza Aslam Beg, imposed its writ on foreign policy. Benazir hit it off well with Rajiv, paying heavily for this personal chemistry politically.

A lesson she never forgot in her second term. Her India policy became hostage to the Kashmir dispute. She avoided meeting the Indian prime minister in her three years in office, a practice started by Sharif in his first term. So the mistake India made with Benazir should not be repeated.

But, then, there are striking differences between Sharif and Benazir. Unlike Benazir, Sharif is trusted by the Establishment. Besides, he has a massive majority in Parliament, which adds to his strength. There is a widespread feeling in Pakistan that he will not let Kashmir go by default, like Benazir. A strange reaction because the Kashmir dispute snowballed during Benazir's first term.

Though Sharif's keenness to open a dialogue can't be doubted, the fact is, Kashmir remains the moot concern of the Pakistani Establishment. Whatever his views, Sharif cannot possibly ignore Kashmir.

But Sharif has his compulsions for sending positive signals to India. Pakistan is increasingly getting isolated in the region. The Pakistani support to the fundamentalist Taliban has severely affected ties with Iran. China is not too happy with Pakistan either because of the activities of Pakistani right wing groups among minority Muslims in China's Xingiang province. The recent unrest in this region, in which nearly 100 people are believed to have been killed, has put a strain on Pakistan-China ties.

An incident which has perhaps helped President Jiang Zemin understand India's problems with Islamic militancy in Kashmir. In a speech to the Pakistan Senate last year, he urged Islamabad to shelve the Kashmir issue and get on with ties with India. This candid comment surprised Pakistan.

Economic compulsions also weigh heavily on Pakistan for it makes economic sense to do business with India.

But the Pakistan Prime Minister has his share of problems. Despite an overwhelming majority, Sharif visited Army Chief Gen. Jehangir Karamat, at his home, before he took the oath of office—a gesture which clearly indicates who is paramount.

Islamabad accuses New Delhi for its rigid stance on Kashmir. The reverse is also true. Gen. Karamat used rather strong words recently when he described Deve Gowda's statement in Jammu that Kashmir is "a closed chapter" as "irresponsible and alarming". Pakistan, he said, does not want Kashmir, but wants the people to be given the right of "self-determination"—i.e., plebiscite. Significantly, Gen. Karamat did not rule out bilateral talks, he only laid bare the agenda.

Such statements engender scepticism about Sharif's offer for dialogue. Still, India should remain open to talks on all issues, including Kashmir. It may be the first step towards enhancing ties, but it will be a step forward. Gowda's remarks in Jammu can only weaken Sharif's position. However, India cannot accept pre-conditions from Islamabad. Dialogue is a necessity for both countries—if it boosts Pakistani interests, India can also benefit by reduced Pakistani involvement in the Kashmir militancy.