If anyone ever thought that a solution to the Kashmir problem was around the corner, the events of the past week may well convince them to think again.
In light of the growing bonhomie between India and Pakistan, President Musharraf invited the leaders of the separatists conglomerate, the Hurriyat conference, to Pakistan for talks. The Hurriyat on its part was pleased at the invitation it had received. For them it meant an increased role and greater prominence in any bilateral dialogue between India and Pakistan. In fact, the Hurriyat had insisted on visiting Pakistan before resuming talks with India. For India, the visit of the Kashmiri separatist leaders to PoK, in the peace bus, would have translated into a fantastic public relations exercise. Symbolism travels a long way in politics and nothing would have been more symbolic and supportive of India’s recent initiatives on Kashmir than this. Unfortunately chaotic travels, contradicting statements and changing itineraries dominated the developments in the run up to the visit reflecting possibly the problems that hinder peace in the region.
The moderate Hurriyat leaders wanted this high profile visit to reassert their role in any dialogue on Kashmir, which may not be to New Delhi’s liking. For Pakistan, and especially President Musharraf, the visit would merely have been another opportunity to highlight their ‘support’ for the Kashmir cause. And this is where it all began to unravel, unfortunately, mostly for India.
The fact that the moderate leaders have indeed traveled from PoK to Islamabad, without legal travel documents, indicates the negation of India’s Kashmir policy. As opposed to New Delhi’s desire to have soft borders, the visit has instead prompted visions of alternative solutions wherein an autonomous state of Kashmir could be a possibility. In addition the bus service linking Srinagar and Muzaffarabad has been rendered completely irrelevant given the fact the Hurriyat leaders took all means of transport, excepting the bus, in their journeys. For instance instead of taking the peace bus to the Kaman bridge, the Hurriyat leaders opted instead to travel in their own cars to the last Indian outpost. These developments have to be seen against the background of India’s policy in the recent past when New Delhi had refused to even discuss the issue of Kashmir with the Hurriyat leaders, outside the purview of the Indian Constitution. It is not surprising that the Government has preferred to not comment on the Hurriyat’s visit and subsequent statements in Pakistan.
The events of the coming weeks would be even more interesting for all stakeholders. For the Government of India, dialogue with the Hurriyat leaders would probably be on the anvil upon their return and it would be interesting to see how the Government decides to approach the same. What would be even more important to note is the level at which the dialogue takes place, when it does. In the recent past when the Hurriyat had demanded direct consultations with the Prime Minister their request has not been acquiesced. Now with the Hurriyat returning from Pakistan, after holding face-to-face consultations with President Musharraf himself, India may have to consider a altering its strategy to regain some momentum in the changed scenario. After all it has become clear that if New Delhi does not court the Hurriyat, Islamabad would be more than willing to bridge the gap. The Hurriyat leaders on their part would be keen on making their presence felt as representatives of the Kashmiri people in New Delhi. Their only singular worry in a dialogue with India would be if no headway takes place in the dialogue process despite their visit.
In the midst of all the brouhaha there remains one tantalizingly interesting question to address – what means would the Mirwaiz and other Hurriyat leaders use to return to India and thereby Kashmir?
In light of the growing bonhomie between India and Pakistan, President Musharraf invited the leaders of the separatists conglomerate, the Hurriyat conference, to Pakistan for talks. The Hurriyat on its part was pleased at the invitation it had received. For them it meant an increased role and greater prominence in any bilateral dialogue between India and Pakistan. In fact, the Hurriyat had insisted on visiting Pakistan before resuming talks with India. For India, the visit of the Kashmiri separatist leaders to PoK, in the peace bus, would have translated into a fantastic public relations exercise. Symbolism travels a long way in politics and nothing would have been more symbolic and supportive of India’s recent initiatives on Kashmir than this. Unfortunately chaotic travels, contradicting statements and changing itineraries dominated the developments in the run up to the visit reflecting possibly the problems that hinder peace in the region.
The moderate Hurriyat leaders wanted this high profile visit to reassert their role in any dialogue on Kashmir, which may not be to New Delhi’s liking. For Pakistan, and especially President Musharraf, the visit would merely have been another opportunity to highlight their ‘support’ for the Kashmir cause. And this is where it all began to unravel, unfortunately, mostly for India.
The fact that the moderate leaders have indeed traveled from PoK to Islamabad, without legal travel documents, indicates the negation of India’s Kashmir policy. As opposed to New Delhi’s desire to have soft borders, the visit has instead prompted visions of alternative solutions wherein an autonomous state of Kashmir could be a possibility. In addition the bus service linking Srinagar and Muzaffarabad has been rendered completely irrelevant given the fact the Hurriyat leaders took all means of transport, excepting the bus, in their journeys. For instance instead of taking the peace bus to the Kaman bridge, the Hurriyat leaders opted instead to travel in their own cars to the last Indian outpost. These developments have to be seen against the background of India’s policy in the recent past when New Delhi had refused to even discuss the issue of Kashmir with the Hurriyat leaders, outside the purview of the Indian Constitution. It is not surprising that the Government has preferred to not comment on the Hurriyat’s visit and subsequent statements in Pakistan.
The events of the coming weeks would be even more interesting for all stakeholders. For the Government of India, dialogue with the Hurriyat leaders would probably be on the anvil upon their return and it would be interesting to see how the Government decides to approach the same. What would be even more important to note is the level at which the dialogue takes place, when it does. In the recent past when the Hurriyat had demanded direct consultations with the Prime Minister their request has not been acquiesced. Now with the Hurriyat returning from Pakistan, after holding face-to-face consultations with President Musharraf himself, India may have to consider a altering its strategy to regain some momentum in the changed scenario. After all it has become clear that if New Delhi does not court the Hurriyat, Islamabad would be more than willing to bridge the gap. The Hurriyat leaders on their part would be keen on making their presence felt as representatives of the Kashmiri people in New Delhi. Their only singular worry in a dialogue with India would be if no headway takes place in the dialogue process despite their visit.
In the midst of all the brouhaha there remains one tantalizingly interesting question to address – what means would the Mirwaiz and other Hurriyat leaders use to return to India and thereby Kashmir?
No comments:
Post a Comment