Peace At Gunpoint

This column is being written, not for the first time, at that awkward moment when what is still a prophecy for the writer may have become a fact for the reader. It is Thursday morning as I write. General Musharraf spoke at the United Nations last evening, and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is to speak this evening. I am caught in the middle. Despite the dangers this poses, I am going to stick my neck out and predict that their first meeting will be a fruitful one and will pave the way for more intensive discussions on Kashmir in the coming months. The reason is the marked change in Gen Musharraf's tone between last year and this year. Last year also Gen Musharraf proposed peace and a dialogue over Kashmir's future at the UN. But on that occasion his purpose was not to inform the assembled heads of state and governments but to score points at India's expense. The Indian delegation responded appropriately, which is to say that A.B. Vajpayee was provoked into giving an untypically harsh speech and there the matter rested.

In sharp contrast, this time Gen Musharraf used his speech to pave the way for his meeting with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, and everything he said was constructive. The first and most important statement was that "we desire a settlement which is just and acceptable to India, Pakistan and the people of Kashmir". This is the first time that he, personally, has fleshed out his original proposal, made at Agra in 2001, that India and Pakistan should follow a four-stage process of which the first should be to rule out solutions that are not acceptable to either side. In New York he made it clear that such a solution would be one that respected the vital interests of both countries but gave Kashmiris what they wanted within these parameters.

Musharraf's second hint was his assurance that Pakistan would be bold and flexible in its search for a solution. The third was his emphasis on social and economic benefits that both countries would garner from a settlement of their disputes. He left no one in any doubt that Pakistan, in short, was now looking firmly towards the future and was prepared to put the past behind it. However, his most significant reference was to the importance of time. This, he said, was the moment for peace. That is the message New Delhi needs to pay heed to.

Even a cursory examination of the changes that have taken place in Pakistan since the signing of the Islamabad Declaration will reveal why Musharraf feels pressed for time. To begin with, the full impact of the two attacks on his life in December have sunk in. The interrogation of the conspirators by the police has shown that all of them have or have had a connection with the jehad in Kashmir. This has brought home to Musharraf and the Pakistani establishment that the strategy of fighting terrorism in Pakistan and Afghanistan while encouraging it in Kashmir is no longer a viable one. The jehadis are part of a single continuum and the only sure way of ridding Pakistan of the menace they pose is to uproot their organisations root and branch.

The attitude of the Pakistan army towards the jehadis has also undergone a change. In the last year, it has lost as many as 400 soldiers in the fighting on the Afghan border. Crushing the mujahideen has now become a matter of honour for the Pakistan army.

A third important change has been the dismissal of Prime Minister Zafarullah Jamali and his replacement by the former World Bank economist Shaukat Aziz. This and other changes in the inner circle of Musharraf's advisors has strengthened the hands of the economists who have been pushing for closer economic relations with India and, therefore, have been more willing to adopt a flexible position on Kashmir. Aziz's appointment has, in particular, strengthened the hands of foreign minister Khursheed Mehmud Kasuri, who till then was the most vocal advocate of compromise with India.

Lastly, senior Pakistani journalists maintain that among the people of Pakistan there has been a shift in emphasis from wanting to 'liberate' the territory of Kashmir towards meeting the aspirations of the people of Kashmir. This shift was clearly reflected by Kasuri's remark before he left Islamabad for Delhi earlier this month, when he admitted that "by denying them (Kashmiris) their rights, we have kept their future in a perpetual limbo and our relations in perpetual tension".

All this bodes well for the talks between Musharraf and Dr Manmohan Singh. But Musharraf is pressed for time. He is under pressure to resign as chief of the Pakistan army by the end of the year. If he does, his influence over the army will be reduced to a substantial extent. Even if he does not, he is now 10 years older than his corps commanders, and so is not as close to them as he was to their predecessors. What is more, Musharraf cannot but be aware that the longer Kashmir hangs in limbo, the greater is the chance that the jehadis will make another attempt on his life.

This is a risk New Delhi too cannot take. No matter how much one may prefer to see democracy reinstated in Pakistan, there can be little doubt that the chances of reaching a settlement with Pakistan will diminish sharply if Musharraf ceases to be the head of state and a democratic regime is installed in Pakistan. One can only hope that in the months to come New Delhi will not let caution become the enemy of peace.