REVIEW 2000-SOUTH ASIA: World Pressure May Re-start Kashmir Peace Talks Next Year

By Ranjit Devraj Reprint | | Print |

Ranjit Devraj

NEW DELHI, Dec 22 2000 (IPS) - It was yet another difficult year for peace between nuclear rivals India and Pakistan, but bold steps in the second half of 2000 have brightened chances of bilateral talks to sort their half century-old Kashmir dispute.

Though political analysts caution against expecting too much, they say that both New Delhi and Islamabad will find it hard to disappoint the international community by letting go this chance.

Another favourable factor is the sheer weariness of the parties — Kashmiri militants, the two governments, separatist political groups and the unfortunate residents of the once peaceful and scenic Kashmir Valley.

This is believed to be a key reason why the leading Kashmiri militant outfit, the Hizbul Mujahideen, surprisingly offered a unilateral cease-fire in July.

It is also said to be the motivation behind Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s cease-fire offer to the militants during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, which was extended by another month on Dec. 20.

Islamabad too has been compelled to reciprocate — first by announcing a self-imposed “maximum restraint” along the Line of Control (LoC), which runs across Kashmir. Pakistan then responded to the extension of the Ramadan cease-fire by pulling back part of its troops from the LoC.

“…relative peace has prevailed all along the LoC ever since my announcement (of the Ramadan cease-fire) on 19 November,” Vajpayee reported to Indian Parliament before announcing the cease-fire extension Wednesday.

The former princely state with a majority Muslim population, joined India soon after the subcontinent’s partition by departing colonial British rulers in the year 1947. India and Pakistan have fought two wars over Kashmir, a third of which is controlled by Pakistan.

At least 30,000 people have died in the valley since a separatist movement turned violent a decade ago with the infiltration of armed militant groups that India says are armed and trained in special camps across the border in Pakistan.

New Delhi matched Hizbul’s July cease-fire surprise offer by starting first-time talks with the militant groups. The talks collapsed when the militants later demanded Islamabad’s inclusion in the peace negotiations.

Former Indian foreign secretary J.N. Dixit acknowledges that a permanent solution to the Kashmir issue would have to include Islamabad. “But this will have to be at a later stage,” he says.

The Hizbul Mujahideen, though based in Pakistan, is said to command respect among the local Kashmiris and the Indian government is singling out this group for attention.

The Hizbul acts in tandem with the All Party Hurriyet Committee (APHC), an umbrella group of 23 secessionist political parties. Both have welcomed the Ramadan truce.

Most of the other Kashmiri militant groups are believed to be dominated by foreign mercenaries specially Afghan, Pakistani and Arab ‘mujahideen’ (holy warriors) and this is why New Delhi has refused to deal with them.

The period between the two Kashmir cease-fires also saw a stepping up of so-called ‘track two diplomacy’ between New Delhi and Islamabad, involving prominent South Asian businessmen based in the United States, former diplomats, senior ex-army officers, and women’s groups.

The latest moves by New Delhi and Islamabad are seen as having set them on the road to resume talks that were snapped by last year’s Kargil conflict, which was triggered by the intrusion of Pakistani irregulars across the LoC.

The military takeover in Islamabad later that year was also a major setback to efforts to revive the peace dialogue.

However, New Delhi gained ground when U.S. President Bill Clinton, whose intervention ended the Kargil conflict in the summer of 1999, ‘snubbed’ Pakistan’s military rulers during a trip to the two capitals early this year.

Reacting to Vajpayee’s Dec. 20 offer to resume the talks, Islamabad said it was ready for this. However, the process is complicated by Pakistan’s insistence that this be a three-way process involving the Kashmiri people.

While New Delhi is opposed to sitting down at the same table with Pakistan and the Kashmiri militants, the Indian government is not opposed to parallel talks — one with Kashmiri secessionists and another with Islamabad.

New Delhi is already in touch with Hurriyet leaders, who have decided to send a team to Islamabad mid-January next year to hold consultations with Pakistan’s rulers and meet leaders of Kashmiri militant groups based there.

A Dec. 21 meeting of Hurriyet leaders described the extension of the Ramadan cease-fire in Kashmir as “bold and appreciable.”

On the positive side, analysts have noted that Islamabad this time has dropped its insistence on trilateral talks and indicated that it would accept a three-way consultation.

However, some in Pakistan see the Indian cease-fire as a “tactical ploy” meant to divide Kashmiri secessionists.

“By extending the offer of talks to Kashmir Mujahideen, the main aim of India is to marginalise Pakistan’s role in the whole affair,” says Khalid Mehmood of the Institute of Regional Studies.

Pakistan hopes that India would open formal talks with Hurriyet leaders and then allow them to go to Pakistan to hold separate talks, a Pakistan government official, who did not want to be identified, told IPS.

Vajpayee has described the Ramadan cease-fire as an extension of the ‘Lahore’ peace process initiated by his celebrated bus ride across the border to that Pakistani city early last year, which won him plaudits from the international community.

The extension is also seen here as a sign of New Delhi’s confidence that hardline Islamic militant groups are losing their hold on the rulers of Pakistan under U.S. pressure.

Leading among these is the ‘Lashkar-e-Toiba’ (Soldiers of God), which has criticised Pakistan’s announcement of “maximum restraint” along the LoC and the Kashmir Ramadan truce.

“Had Islamabad preferred ‘jehad’ (holy war) to talks, the situation would have been different and there would not have been any Kashmir issue,” said the group’s chief Hafeez Muhammed Saeed who now accuses the Pakistan government of succumbing to pressure from the United States.

According to G. Parthasarathy, former Indian high commissioner in Islamabad, Pakistan cannot ignore international pressure now because of its severe economic woes.

Pakistan has just collected 200 million U.S. dollars of a 538 million dollar loan sanctioned by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and is struggling to cope with debt rescheduling.

The U.S. president and other Western leaders have emphasised the importance of respecting the LoC.

Says former Indian foreign secretary Dixit: “One motivation animates all protagonists — to show responsiveness to international pressure to resume dialogue and scale down violence, which the international community feels could precipitate a nuclear confrontation.”