India and Pakistan vow to oress on for oeace but no Kashmir breakthrough

Producer: Bharati Jagdish
First broadcast: 7 September 04, Radio Singapore International

Pakistan's Foreign Minister, Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri, has said that he is confident that further dialogue with India would produce lasting peace between the nuclear rivals despite deep divisions over Kashmir.

Kasuri met his Indian counterpart, Natwar Singh, in New Delhi on Sunday and Monday and
agreed to push forward the nine-month peace process.

They agreed to speed up opening consulates in India's commercial capital, Bombay and Pakistan's port city of Karachi and to discuss conventional and nuclear weapons confidence-building measures.

However, the nuclear-armed rivals stuck to their entrenched positions on the key issue of control over Jammu and Kashmir.

India once again stressed its concerns about militants reportedly crossing from Pakistan and Pakistan reiterated its concern about human rights abuses allegedly committed by the Indian army in Kashmir.

So ultimately, was any real progress made at these talks?

Bharati Jagdish (BJ) put this to political analyst, Dr Suba Chandran (SC) from the Institute for Peace and Conflict Studies in New Delhi.

SC: "The success of the talks held in the last two days should not be measured in terms of how many breakthroughs were achieved on the issue of Kashmir or on other issues. Rather, the talks should be seen from a larger perspective. The fact that they've decided to continue the talks in the future is itself a success. The talks were supposed to be part of a process. They were not aimed at reaching a solution. They were aimed at reaching means that could lead to a solution at a later stage. So if we can keep ourselves engaged for the next one or two years, that in itself will be a great success. Maybe after one or two years, this engagement process itself will create a vested interest on both their parts and will result in even greater engagement and possibly solutions to long-standing problems."

BJ: The main opposition BJP leaders are saying that the issue of cross-border terrorism needs to be broached again since it was one of the pre-conditions whenever talks were held between India and Pakistan in the past. According to them, since May, infiltration has increased. Do you expect this issue to arise again as a sticking point before future talks are held?

SC: "It's not only this infiltration issue, but also Pakistan's concerns over human rights abuses allegedly committed by the Indian army in Kashmir. The fact is that in whatever progress that you see in terms of moving ahead, these two points will be continuously raised, to a larger extent, these are political issue meant for the respective sides' domestic political constituency. Perhaps there is a better understanding among the leadership in both countries to keep up this gimmick for the domestic audience and then let's engage in serious talks on our own. Pakistani President Musharraf has been saying for the last year that if there is no considerable progress in Kashmir, he will withdraw and India has been continuously saying that if there is continuous cross-border terrorism, it will disengage from negotiations. We should not take all this too seriously. It's political rhetoric to pacify the domestic audience."

BJ: Now, obviously, there was no progress on the Kashmir issue. How do you see the two countries getting round to looking at this issue again?

SC: "It's true there was no progress, but there ware no negative developments either. In spite of the fact that Musharraf had been insisting that Kashmir should be the core issue, India did not make any serious objections to that. In fact, Pakistan seems to be more agreeable to discussing Kashmir at a later stage. Two years ago, such a suggestion would have elicited an enormously negative response. There was no such response this time. I think we're slowly getting more mature when discussing Kashmir. One should not see any non-achievement of progress on Kashmir in last one year as an impediment. The process has begun and since we don't have any clear indications that this issue can be resolved in the next one or two years, we should not measure success based on what we've achieved in the last year. It's a long process, but the fact that it's an ongoing process is a success in itself."

BJ: I understand that currently, a proposal for the autonomy of Kashmir is being circulated. Can you tell me more about this?

SC: "This has stemmed from some reports that were done outside South Asia and has also been discussed in India and Pakistan. The idea is to have two autonomous Kashmirs instead of a single independent Kashmir. Two regions in which New Delhi and Islamabad give more autonomy to the respective parts of Kashmir currently under their control. And the two regions can interact with each other. In other words, it will be two autonomous Kashmirs with a soft border. This has been discussed over the last one or two years. It's seen as an alternative, but I'm not too sure whether it will be accepted by the Kashmiris themselves."

BJ: But would this be acceptable to the Indian and Pakistani governments?

SC: "In theory, it should be acceptable to the governments because they have noting to lose and they have a whole lot to gain. But politically, it may not be acceptable to the people on the ground. That's why the two governments need to have a serious discussion in their respective countries. India should have a discussion in parliament about this as should Pakistan. The people on the ground need to be included as well. We may be able to come to some agreement about this."

Political analyst, Dr Suba Chandran (SC) from the Institute for Peace and Conflict Studies in New Delhi, speaking to Bharati Jagdish (BJ).