Waiting to be surprised

Will Vajpayee and Musharraf agree upon a new way?

SALMAN HAIDAR

PREPARATIONS for the Vajpayee-Musharraf summit are now virtually complete. One cannot recall when last an event attracted such saturation coverage. Every detail of the programme has been scrutinised and analysed. The issues before the leaders have been appraised from diverse viewpoints. Their political standing, personal commitment to a peace process and their ability to move, however slightly, from the positions to which they have so long been bound have all been assessed and re-assessed. At the end of it all, as President Pervez Musharraf prepares to board the plane to New Delhi, it is safe to say that nobody really knows what to expect. The intentions of the two principals have been kept private, to be revealed perhaps only to each other.

Forecasts about the summit have wavered between cautious optimism and gloomy expectation. Each move or gesture from either side has enhanced one mood or the other. Some Pakistani comments imply that India was forced to invite General Musharraf for want of any other viable option. In India the argument has been advanced that the summit should be seen as a smart move that puts Pakistan on the spot: fail or succeed, the meeting cannot but bring advantage to India as the party that took the initiative. Such comments sound very much as if the summit is no more than a stratagem to gain advantage over the other side. Yet if the meeting is to have any real worth, it must be as an attempt to transcend the constraints and to seek a new way. Neither side can gain lasting advantage from trying to put the other in a fix, for this will lead to no enduring agreement. The task is to find an outcome helpful in equal measure to each of the parties.

The path to the summit has been smoothened by a number of goodwill gestures. India has been more forthcoming in this respect, offering scholarships to Pakistani students, releasing civilian prisoners, easing trade arrangements, among other gestures. The decision to ease visa and border processes is especially to be welcomed. With its different priorities, Pakistan remains more reserved but yet has made one or two tangible gestures.

Against this, the toughening of Pakistan’s rhetoric in the last few days came as a surprise. The question of whether or not Hurriyat leaders would be invited to meet Musharraf was earlier being handled tactfully but all of a sudden Pakistan announced that they would, after all, be asked to the high commissioner’s tea party. For good measure, the Pakistani spokesman made a sharp denunciation of India’s actions in Kashmir, reverting to language that was deliberately toned down in the run-up to the summit.

India was as much puzzled as dismayed by this development: what was the purpose? One explanation is that these stern sounds emerged after the Pakistan government had engaged in extensive internal consultation with political parties who demanded reassurance that no sellout was on the cards. The aggressive official rhetoric was aimed as much at appeasing them as at intimidating India. Whatever be the fact of it, India has done well not to be flustered by this development. However unfortunate, it has not been permitted to cloud the summit prospect.

The run-up to the summit has been observed most keenly in Jammu and Kashmir. That state’s affairs are bound to dominate the discussions and Kashmiri opinion is naturally alert and watchful. Their long travail has given the Kashmiris the determination to ensure that their voice is not ignored and that they have a proper say in decisions relating to their future. Pakistan has long tied itself to the Hurriyat, whose role it has constantly magnified. Now, at crunch time, it finds itself unable to walk away from the demands of its own creature. And the Hurriyat is only one of the many groups in Jammu and Kashmir. Kashmiri voices from across the spectrum have been heard as the summit nears. Their concern at what they see as the risk of a deal being struck above their heads cannot be ignored and makes the task for the two leaders more complex.

At this penultimate stage, what can we hope for from the summit? It will be the first occasion for a serious talk between the two leaders, each of whom has indicated willingness to do something to improve bilateral relations. The most important outcome would be that the meeting should generate trust and confidence between them. Without that, no significant further steps can materialise. A number of agreements of various descriptions will no doubt come from the meeting but they cannot lead very far in the absence of top level understanding on essentials. There is thus an inherent unpredictability about this summit. This is not unusual in itself and is bound to be present at any important meeting of the sort now awaited.

Assuming that things go well at the top, some dents in longstanding problems may become possible. No dramatic solutions are to be expected, but some useful measures may become attainable. Pakistan will doubtless seek something on the ‘‘core issue’’ as part of any acceptable package. India has its own demands about cross border infiltration. The curbing of infiltration by Pakistan would permit an easing of the Indian security presence in Kashmir. If an arrangement to this effect, possibly a tacit one, can come out of the meeting, it would be a considerable achievement which would greatly improve conditions in Jammu and Kashmir. It would also encourage a process of continued dialogue between the two parties, a structure for which is widely expected to be agreed upon at the summit. Continued serious engagement between the two sides would be a significant outcome from the meeting.

Several other tangible agreements can be part of an agreed package, among them Pakistan’s no war pact proposal in one form or other. Already India has decided to ease visa controls and open new crossing points on the internatio-nal border and the Line of Control. This bold move to facilitate people-to-people contact can be enlarged further, hopefully from both sides and not unilaterally as now. Other important measures that can be agreed in principle at the summit include solutions to the disputes over Siachen, Tulbul and Sir Creek, all of which are attainable if there is sufficient political will. In the economic area one can look for improved trading arrangements and also for agreement to go ahead on at least one major project, like the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline.

There are many possibilities and the two leaders can yet surprise us all by the scale and daring of what they agree. For now, one can only wait in expectation.

(The writer is a former foreign secretary)