Going by the antagonistic mindset of India, as was being envisioned–”yet another round of Foreign Minister-level talks between nuke-neighbors of South Asia has ended amid stories of ‘progress’ on peripheral issues–”keeping a deadlocked on the core Issue of Kashmir–”intact.
At a joint news conference in New Delhi, Indian Foreign Minister Natwar Singh and Pakistani Foreign Minister Khursheed Mehmood Kasuri tried to put ‘a positive gloss’ on their two days of meetings but could not resist–”a dig at each other.
It seems that the two men had no significant agreements to announce, which reveal clear differences in approach–”and reverted to the mutual recriminations of the past over the dispute on the Himalayan State.
Whereas, the Indian Foreign Minister continual baseless rhetoric of so-called ‘cross-border infiltration, phrasing it as terrorism’, the views, beamed by Pakistan’s FM were atypical–”backed by icons of reservations. Yet he made it clear, "we are not unifocal". Pakistan is not interested in just discussing this issue. "We know we can cooperate in other areas … it is a matter of common sense that in order to have durable peace in South Asia, this [Kashmir dispute] will have to be resolved, hopefully sooner than later".
At the same time, Kasuri came out with an awful perception that Islamabad was "not imposing pre-conditions" on resolution of Kashmir issue by adding; "sky is the limit if the two sides cooperate" with the desire for resolving it–”the Kashmir Issue, setting aside the reality that it is the core irritant, the solution of which is much more significant than any aspire for ‘love’ with each-other–”on any facet.
We wish that Pakistan’s Foreign Minister would have categorically told his Indian counterpart that there can be no peace, no trade, no friendship and no links between the two countries–”at all, sans the solution of the Kashmir Issue–”may be in line with fresh requires of the new epoch–”which is hallmarked by ‘ground realities’–”as the podium of the new scenario. We should have told that there can’t be any progress–”in any style–”vis-Ã -vis the ‘Composite Dialogue’ unless a pragmatic and meaningful solution of this Issue is found–”one way or the other–”but, of-course the one, which could reflect the aspirations of the real owners of the charismatic State, the people of Jammu and Kashmir.
As is indexed in the folio of the recent history, amid signals of fabulous concessions to generate amity with India, Pakistan had set off yet another proffer vis-Ã -vis Kashmir, which has been the nucleus symbol of irritants between the two countries for the last five-n’-a-half decades.
Towards this facet, the text of President Musharraf’s interview with a British news agency had mottled and disseminated–”around the global Atlas–”with mixed feedback from Annan of the United Nations, Armitage of USA–”to Atique of Kashmir.
The then top Indian headship–”with the ex-Prime Minister, AB Vajpayee and his aficionado LK Advani–”however remained mute and mum as none of the two came out with an eloquent reaction–”for obvious reasons with India’s arrogance atop.
They seemed to be in a silhouette of yawning thinking or confronted with a complex course as by accepting President Mushrraaf’s proposal for flexibility, India would have to seize at-once its groundless typical oratory that the disputed state of Jammu and Kashmir was its ‘integral part’:
If such a course had happened, it would have been a great diplomatic achievement for Pakistan.
Yet, there has been a sharp and swift retort in Pakistan and in the Kashmiri circles on both sides of the Line of Control [LoC] in the magnetic State.
Whereas some had endorsed Musharraf’s point of view, phrasing it as the acknowledgement of ‘ground realities’ as their pedestal of vision, the others beamed their outlook that they would–”in no way–”go along such a plea.
Analyzing pragmatically, he have had taken a bold step to bring the Indian leadership to the table of talks, an imperative point, New Delhi has–”by and large–”been evading with one hideous ploy or the other.
Even with a changed universal scenario–”meticulously due to the post-Nine/Eleven episode–”which has shrunk the role of the United Nations, opening vistas for the United States to behave as the solo master of world’s destiny, Musharraf has always voiced the aspirations of Kashmiris–”in an unequivocal style, overtly supporting their birth right of self-determination, as has been mandated by the world body time n’ again.
With this expediency, it was and is hard to believe that the President would ever let down the nation as he has been and is the firm promoter of peace in South Asia–”yet with dignity n’ honor–”as its base.
Prima facie, he can’t be coerced or dictated by any power [as he reiterated on the onset of this week]–”even its’ a mightier-one like the United States–”towards his perceptions of Pakistan’s national interests–”wherein the solution of the Kashmir issue stands atop. Hence–”irrespective of the upshot of the FM-level parleys on New Delhi–”we are ought to have a reliance in his [Musharraf’s] vision–”explicitly–”in the wake of his zest for bringing the despotic era, unleashed by India in occupied Kashmir–”to an eternal end.
With this realism, it would be rather asymmetrical and lop-sided to over-react on the outcome of the Kasuri-Natwar interaction–”by lifting eyebrows in any style–”as the time ahead shall make every feature, as clear as crystal.
Now when Pakistan is cruising through the most significant phase of its history–”with atypical settings–”specifically due the hostilities, being posed by a couple of its neighbors–”of-course with India atop, it is vital that every-one eschews ‘opposition for the sake of opposition’. Instead, the actualities are needed to be evaluated with a down-to-earth mindset.
Simultaneously, it is an apposite time for President Musharraf to attest that Pakistan–”in no way–”would ever make a 180-degree shift in its principled policy, for which the country has suffered a lot during the last half century.
Such an appraisal would evaporate loads of perceptible dilemmas as well as several ramifications. Else it will give the impression that ‘we are conceding too much to India—in return for almost nothing.
To bear in mind, Pakistan has already proclaimed a number of concessions for India–”such as ceasefire on LoC, moves to increase bilateral trade and accelerating the SAARC processes which might give India an apparent edge in economic and trade terms but in return we could extract only what India had done unilaterally after the so-called attack on its Parliament.
At the same time, India is not only obstinate in getting into a momentous and meaningful dialogue with Pakistan to resolve all issues including the longed dispute of Jammu and Kashmir but also persists–”adamantly–”with its ferocious and wicked plans to fence the LoC and construct Bagliar power project to the detriment of Pakistan’s interests.
Again, it has to be kept in mind that Pakistan is one of the parties to the conflict and the key party, for sure–”are the Kashmiris.
The time is still ripe for such a measure. To avert all types of qualms, it would be apt if a series of meetings with top political leaders of Pakistan in the Parliament or outside its two august Houses, even those politicians who are in exile, one way or the other and–”irrespective of one’s leaning towards a specific party or alliance–”with Kashmiris as the foremost is set off at-once to develop a consensus on–”‘what to do next’–”under the current circumstances, articulated by the changed global milieu.
A skirting or elusion from such a modus operandi would result into nothing–”except a state of perplexity–”which Pakistan can, in no way afford due to manifold raison d’Ãªtre, more markedly due to its shadowy political situations–”wherein a tug of war for power perseveres as an inexorable icon ever since the egalitarian system took re-birth as a follow-up of the October-10 polls–”almost 3-year ago.
With the affixing of a magnificent jewel [Shaukat Aziz] into the corridors of power as the new Prime Minister–”backed by a hefty cabinet, we foresee the advent of an affluent era, marked by a strong foreign policy in Pakistan.
With such a backdrop, it makes all the more essential that a flexible approach is opted–”both by the government and the opposition–”to evolve a reciprocal harmony on the political horizons of Pakistan–”most exclusively on topics like the jugular vein of the nation–”Kashmir to thwart every maneuver of all the foes.
As a sovereign domain, we ought not to feel fretful on the notions and tempers of any power–”even if it is a super-one–”as the national interests of Pakistan are much more vital than the ‘aspires’ of any-one else with any stature–”dwelling beyond oceanic.
Although the newest result on India-Pakistan does not seem cheering and soothing–”we feel optimistic that the upcoming contact between President Musharraf and the Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh–”on the side-lines of the UN General Assembly’s session–”towards the end of this month, shall yield fragrant and meaningful results for the revival of a trauma-free and affluent South Asia–”a zest which can be gripped only–”through the solution of the Kashmir Issue–”in an apt and apposite style.
No other course can ensure an eternal peace in this part of the Orb–”in any mode or manner–”what-so-ever, it may be.