Since India's political landscape is dominated by pygmies, we should, I suppose, be grateful for Atal Behari Vajpayee. Despite his manifest deficiencies—lack of interest in policy detail, an irrational fear of the foreign media, to name just two—he is a calm, thoughtful and modest visionary fulfilling a lifetime ambition. Surprising, then, that he should allow himself to get boxed on the dialogue with Pakistan issue.
Whether this self-defeating approach is the result of pressure from hawks within his own party or the hope of a bonus in the UP elections is unclear. Perhaps it is a combination of both. Or perhaps it is Atal Behari Vajpayee advised by his spin masters to look tough. This fake bellicosity (the over-blown rhetoric regarding the smashing of General Musharraf's metaphorical bangles, etc) is most visible when the prime minister assumes command in set-piece Hindi speeches to a fawning audience. Alas, it doesn't work. He sounds shrill and theatrical and unconvincing.
Infinitely more critical than how Mr Vajpayee looks and sounds is the import of his words. He and his government are making a momentous mistake by spurning General Musharraf's invitation for talks. If it was only a question of the famous "brownie points" the general is winning with the international community, we could let the matter pass. Unfortunately, the prime minister is conveying the impression of a) petulance and b) funk. There is a law of diminishing returns in the no-talks-till-cross-border-terrorism-stops policy.
The goodwill which India enjoys as a vibrant and prosperous democracy possessing what George W. Bush calls "brain power" is fast being eroded. Senior officials accompanying the French foreign minister and the German Chancellor told me they were baffled at India's "negativity". Ditto the US. No one expects India to seriously compromise on its well-established and increasingly better understood position on Kashmir. What they do expect is for Vajpayee and Musharraf to sit across a table, restart the Agra process and set the agenda for a sustained bilateral conversation. The pace of that conversation, its content, its structure, its venue—these are things the international community is persuading us to discuss.
The precondition we have set appears to the world as naive and obstructionist—an excuse, in fact, for avoiding talks. One French official told me that if Yasser Arafat and Israeli leaders had insisted on a similar precondition, there would never have been any dialogue between the parties in West Asia. Doubtless, it is useful for us to keep Pakistan on a tight leash as far as cross-border terrorism is concerned, but to insist that any dialogue can only begin when it ceases ensures that the pot is kept boiling. Incidentally, the precondition assumes that all militant activity in Jammu and Kashmir is exported by Pakistan. As most of us know, that is simply not true. Some of the militancy is home-grown.
The frustration of the international community with our obstinacy is exacerbated because of the blunder the bjp government committed in 1998. The big bomb has failed Mr Vajpayee and Mr Advani on every count. The expected political gains from Pokhran for the party remain elusive. Our acknowledged superiority in conventional weapons over Pakistan has been neutralised. Above all, thanks to the bomb, the Kashmir issue is well and truly internationalised. Not for nothing does everyone from Bill Clinton to Kofi Annan to Colin Powell to Abdul Sattar call Kashmir "the most dangerous place on earth".
The writing is on the South Block wall. The world has given us notice. Either the estranged neighbours de-escalate by dialogue, or the dreaded sword of third-party mediation hangs over our head. Either we go to the negotiating table with dignity and grace or we go kicking and screaming.
Actually, we should be rather keen to restart Agra. One does not have to be a South Asia expert to assert that our long-time adversary has recently upturned many cherished policies. Pakistani society is in ferment. The present dispensation, with the support of the majority of its citizens, has successfully launched a war on groups it manufactured, sustained and encouraged. In the past weeks, not just the Northern Alliance, but General Musharraf too has triumphed.
All the dire warnings that he was tempting fate, that the mad mullahs would create havoc on the streets and topple him, have proved fanciful. For the moment, the Jaish, the Lashkar, the Hizbul appear soundly thrashed. Like the Taliban, they have also turned out to be paper tigers.
In India, I know there is deep, deep suspicion of the general. Can we trust him again? Even if the answer to that question ranges from no to doubtful, Pervez Musharraf's capacity to continue his duplicitous game has been hugely weakened. Musharraf cannot turn to the very people he has humiliated and (some) killed, cannot turn to groups who consider Mullah Omar and bin Laden Islamic icons and request them to recommence their business in Kashmir.
Moreover, whatever remnants of the jehadis are left, we can be certain the Americans will be keeping a sharp eye on them. Not because of their potential for mischief in our country but because they will have diabolical plans for the US. Maulana Azhar and others of his ilk would, one can be sure, be preoccupied with thoughts of revenge against New York and Washington rather than Srinagar and Doda.
Thus, to use Mr Advani's favourite expression, we are in a win-win situation. Even if the US reneges on its promise to fight our terrorism, George W. Bush has no option but to neutralise these jehadis in the US security interests.
Finally, and I know this is not easy, given the new set of circumstances, we mustn't totally disbelieve Pakistan's proclaimed desire to normalise relations. Pakistan has embarked on a historic journey. It is bravely confronting self-created demons. Even if the journey is half-way successful, a different Pakistan will emerge. For every sensible Indian, that is a consummation devoutly to be wished.
Atalji, this is no time to fudge. Please call Islamabad.