India-Pakistan trust deficit

Although the Mumbai blasts may have clouded the India-Pakistan peace process, both sides have kept front and back channels open. Foreign Minister MA Kasuri has revealed that Pakistan, for the first time, received non-papers on Kashmir on self-rule and joint management under a joint India-Pakistan ministerial commission. This is a leaf out of the Good Friday Agreement (GFA) in Northern Ireland and one of the themes discussed at the peace process conference in Colombo two weeks before the Mumbai tragedy. A popular description of the India-Pakistan peace process used to be a glass half empty or half full. At a stocktaking conference in June at Colombo between a regular group of Indian and Pakistani think-tankers, there were other descriptions: From strategic fatigue, stalemate and 'dead' to 'healthy and alive but fragile' and 'at least we're talking to each other'. Also prominent in the discussion were perennial phrases: Irreversibility of peace process, progress on Kashmir, ending violence, trust deficit, fear of the unknown and Kashmiris First. Those who dabble in conflict resolution (conflict management, as Pakistanis call it) are familiar with these terms. Fortunately there was a relatively new coinage: No final solution following 'no preconditions' in relation to J&K. At the meeting the majority of Pakistanis, at least privately, subscribed to an interim settlement of the Kashmir dispute without prejudice to their copy of the final solution ala GFA in which all stakeholders have put aside their claims and submitted to the political process for an interim solution pending a final settlement. The warring factions have gone beyond ceasefire to ending the armed campaign and decommissioning their weapons while still squabbling over power sharing. The idea of an internal ceasefire in J&K is still premature as the previous attempts were disastrous. Between India and Pakistan, and to some extent between two Kashmirs, you have an unmarred three-year old ceasefire on the border, three rounds of composite dialogue, two summit meetings, several CBMs including many J&K specific, narrowing of gap in mutual perceptions, and an expanding people-driven constituency for peace. As violence has not ended, it is 'cold peace'. While India has virtually dropped its precondition of ending CBT before talks in Kashmir, Pakistan too appears to have relented on making progress on Kashmir contingent to movement on other issues. But this relaxation will obviously be stressed after the Mumbai blasts. Take Siachen. It is no secret that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has been keen to settle Siachen since last year but he does not enjoy the political authority to initiate a breakthrough. Pakistan and India go to elections in 2008 and 2009 and the political fallout of any concessions to Pakistan in the face of unending violence is politically risky. The Pakistanis conjured up the image of big brother, India, and expect it to make concessions. Yet, while emphasising that Pakistan is not Indo-centric or seeking parity, they were worked up over the India-US nuclear agreement, saying it would disturb the geo-strategic balance. But in the same breath they said, "Inshallah, we have the nuclear equaliser" for which "we are eternally grateful to India". On Mr Singh's offer of a Treaty of Peace Security and Friendship, the Pakistani generals were very dismissive, calling it premature which prompted a civilian Mohajir colleague to exclaim: "The Pakistan military mindset is exposed." New ideas like self-rule, joint management/sovereignty, making borders irrelevant and demilitarisation drew mild discussion. Both sides felt these concepts had not been defined and meant different things to each side. For example, India has made clear there can be no redrawing of boundaries, no second partition and no division on religious lines. India has, in its internal and inclusive dialogue, encouraged autonomy and self rule. Pakistanis are reminded that both PoK and Northern Areas are federally ruled. The three participants from Northern Areas had no wish to become part of PoK and were happy with direct central rule. By international standards, where there are 1000 fatalities a year like in J&K the state is deemed to be at war. In J&K, terrorism and violence have been criminalised and in response to CBT there is pressure on the Indian side to end the Pakistan-initiated ceasefire because it is advantageous to Pakistan, explained an Indian. The participants from Gilgit and Skardu said they are not part of Kashmir but only part of the Kashmir dispute. There was no representation at the conference from PoK due to the July elections. Unthinkable two years ago, people from the two parts of Kashmir can meet freely in India and Pakistan or in Colombo and Kathmandu. In the Northern Areas there are no elections but the people enjoy easy travel to Sinkiang as a bus now goes from Gilgit to Kashgar. Though not many, the CBMs connecting the people of the two sides are by far the most outstanding feature of the peace process. The person from Kargil made a fervent appeal for opening of the road from Kargil to Skardu as 7,000 Shia families in Kargil had relatives in Skardu. The rewards from jointness in trade, tourism, water resources and horticulture were plentiful but bureaucratic hurdles made it no go. There were no cell or telephone facilities from J&K to the other side or even Pakistan. Visas to PoK must include travel to Islamabad and Rawalpindi where many Kashmiris had moved. The only agreement that has remained inviolable is the Indus Water Treaty of 1962. But 60 years on, it is proving a constraint on social and economic development of J&K and has turned it into a parasite economy. The waters expert from Srinagar called for its renegotiation which is against the charter of the treaty. It was a Pakistan suggestion that India and Pakistan work together in the reconstruction of Afghanistan and make it the ninth item on the composite agenda. Call it trust deficit or fear of the unknown, at the end of the conference, both sides held on to their core concerns: Kashmir and CBT. Post Script: While it is useful to make a distinction between the people and the establishment in Pakistan, both have to realise that there are limits to India's tolerance on CBT. There is public opinion. Taking the proxy war out of disputed J&K was breach of the red line. Adding fuel to fire can only destroy the peace process. Let Gen Musharraf not forget this.