‘India, Pak meeting under foreign pressure’

The medium differs, but the message from Pakistan’s former prime minister Benazir Bhutto is invariably the same: the forthcoming Agra summit will not change status quo in Kashmir. Ensconced in London, Bhutto has been replying to e-mails from journalists with alacrity.

Excerpts from interviews with the Gulf News, Khaleej Times and a signed piece in The News:

I think there will neither be any relief on the Kashmir issue nor in the intensity of violence in the troubled territory as a result of the parleys.

India and Pakistan are meeting under pressure from a strong international power... The main objective of Musharraf’s meeting was to please the international community in order to show that he is making peace efforts to defuse tension between the two nuclear powers over Kashmir.

Democracy is the main course of our politics in Pakistan. We do want peace in the country and cannot accept a military dictator holding talks which should be held by the democractically elected government with full mandate of the public.

Neither is Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee going to agree with what Musharraf wants nor is Musharraf willing to listen to what vajpayee wants him to do defuse tension in Kashmir.

When we tried to make peace with India in 1989, Parliament approved our agenda for peace but the Army’s general headquarters said it was against national security and the government was sacked. Our government was doing everything the generals are doing now but with dignity and honour.

I am definitely not interested in becoming a puppet prime minister for a third time in a situation where power lies somewhere else. ... People of Pakistan will have to give me enough votes this time round so that if return I can carry out my agenda of reconstructing the country.

The story of the budget is the story of a country where economic recession bites, the huge debt is a monstrous burden; there is low investment and an alarming rise in poverty... Four years back, the average direct foreign investment was above $1 billion with promises of over 22 billion dollars in the short term. That massive inflow dried up as soon as democracy was derailed by presidential order. Even the medals on the General’s chest failed to dazzle investors as he spoke of order, transparency and stability in countries as far off as Vietnam, Baghdad and Tripoli and as near as Burma. Now foreign investment still trickling in from old MoUs have fallen to below $200 million.

As Pakistan’s experiment with democracy showed in 1996, Pakistan can emerge from its low growth-high debt trap. But it seems unlikely that the Generals are in any mood to give up derailing democracy. At least until the plummeting economy bites into the army.