Warning: Bumps Ahead

THE bus service was Nawaz Sharif's idea. But Atal Behari Vajpayee stole the world's imagination by riding the bus to Lahore. The media hype must have provided sorely needed relief to the beleaguered bjp government. India's 'peace initiative has also deflected criticism for its aggressive nuclear posture. The symbolism, too, was beautifully contrived, with a colourful bhangra troupe dancing across Wagah, heralding the entry of the Indian prime minister into 'enemy territory . Indeed, Vajpayee's visits to the Minar-i-Pakistan and Allama Iqbal's tomb were masterpieces of diplomacy.

Of course, 'bus diplomacy is most welcome. It has already reduced tensions between India and Pakistan. The two nuclear powers have also promised to take definite steps to reduce the risk of accidental war. Beyond that, it is difficult not to be swamped by a deep cynicism born from bitter experience. There are many hurdles ahead.

The Lahore declarations are lacking in substantive measures to resolve the outstanding issues between the two countries. The Pakistanis have not got the no-war pact they wanted. India has not got the no-first-strike agreement it covets. Neither side is ready to halt the nuclear and missile arms race in the offing. Why then is Sharif crowing about 'a historic breakthrough and Vajpayee claiming a 'decisive moment in history ?

Islamabad considers India's agreement to discuss the 'dispute over Jammu and Kashmir an unprecedented gain because India has consistently refused to acknowledge or discuss the dispute. But Sharif has ignored two facts: one, I.K. Gujral had also agreed to discuss the 'dispute over Kashmir with Pakistan in 1997 but backtracked; two, when pushed to the wall, India has acknowledged the 'dispute by referring to the 'illegal occupation of 'Azad Kashmir by Pakistan!

Islamabad is claiming kudos for a clause in the agreements which enjoins both sides not to violate human rights, an oblique reference to India's repression in the valley. But India countered with a clause demanding an end to interference in each country's internal affairs, an equally significant reference to the Pakistani hand in Kashmir.

India, however, has reason to be satisfied. It has long advocated a series of people-to-people contacts and progress on the 'soft issues before attempting to grapple with Kashmir. It has now got what it wanted.

Vajpayee was accorded a gracious reception. The Pakistan cricket and hockey teams have played to full houses in both countries. The Sharif-Vajpayee agreements preceded another between the top dogs of industry advocating freer trade. Both have stressed the 'vision of saarc. An Indian parliamentary delegation has visited Pakistan; a Pakistani parliamentary group may go to India in May. Some Indian film stars are scheduled to visit Pakistan; Pakistani artistes are already regular features in India.

These cbms (confidence-building measures) are already a far cry from Pakistan's decade-long position that without a resolution of the 'core Kashmir issue, there can be no cbms or bonhomie with India. In fact, Sharif has slowly abandoned Pakistan's rigid 'core issue position and is moving into line with India and the rest of the world. Bilateralism, which India has always stressed, is gaining headway at the expense of 'multilateralism , which Pakistan has always demanded. The Lahore Declaration is full of references to 'durable peace , 'friendly cooperation , etc. The two have also reiterated 'their determination to implement the Simla Agreement . It is highly significant that the issue of 'Jammu and Kashmir (not simply 'Kashmir ) is mentioned only twice.But there is no mention of the words 'core dispute or 'UN resolutions anywhere in the texts. Does Sharif realise what his 'historic Lahore Declaration really entails?

Not sufficiently, it seems. The transition from a rigid, jehad-oriented foreign policy vis-a-vis India to a forward-looking and moderate one is going to be very difficult. It cannot be conceived without a broad political consensus in its favour in Pakistan that also has the army's stamp of approval. But Sharif has made no efforts in this direction. He has taken no steps to bring the political opposition on board his new non-ideological 'foreign-policy agenda . Indeed, even his cabinet and parliament are troubled by the lack of discussion. My fear is that, like Sharif's many other hastily assembled initiatives, this one too could flounder on the rock of institutional confusion, political indecision and jehadi counter-pressure. The fact that the three chiefs of the Pakistani armed forces were absent from the Wagah reception, the fact that the Hizbul Mujahideen carried out its threat and killed 20 Hindus in Kashmir on the day of the talks in Lahore, the fact that the Jamaat-i-Islami activists rampaged on the streets of Lahore, are all pointers in this direction.

My cynicism on the Pakistani score is reinforced by the unbending attitude of India's security establishment and South Block which have so far refused even to 'talk about talks on Kashmir and have gone back on the detailed agreement on Siachen hammered out between Benazir Bhutto and Rajiv Gandhi in 1989. Also, I wonder about the bjp's longevity and ability to fulfil the tall promises made in Lahore. Finally, the continuing inability of New Delhi to reach an internal settlement with the Kashmiris in Srinagar could derail India-Pakistan progress on other fronts.

This could be a defining moment of history only if both countries adopt an anti-history stance. The new recipe will go begging if too many cooks insist on serving up traditional fare to both parties.

(The author is editor of 'The Friday Times' a Lahore-based weekly)