Talk the Indo-Pak talk

Talk the Indo-Pak talk

Shitanshu Shekhar Shukla
New Delhi, February 19

Indian and Pakistan Foreign Secretaries are ‘only’ meeting in New Delhi on February 25, for the first time since suspension of composite dialogue between both the countries in the aftermath of Mumbai terror attack on 26/11.
The initiative to talk was taken by Manmohan Singh surprising even Pakistanis. That it has survived Pune blast in German Bakery demonstrates a purpose. It is significant because the Indian Government has for the first time de-linked terror from talk. New Delhi is believed to be reconciled to spate of terror strikes, with talks or without talks.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh last attempted to de-link talk from terror at Sharm-al-Sheikh last year. It raised such a public outcry in the country that the Congress party came rather close to criticizing him.
Now what are the Indian and Pakistani Foreign secretaries going to speak about when they meet?
Indian Foreign Minister SM Krishna said that composite dialogue stays suspended since Mumbai attack and will remain so till tangible action by Pakistan to dismantle the structure of terrorism. So, the proposed meeting is only about terror, he said.
Pakistan says that it is resumption of composite dialogue, suspended since Mumbai attack. Its strategy is to avoid terror issue by widening the scope of issues. Pakistan foreign office said that their understanding was that the talks were the first step towards resumption of composite dialogue.
Well, they have already started speaking about what they will speak. They won’t wait. They don’t have to sit across a table to lash their tongues.
Any speculation over the subject of discussion appears misplaced.
The Ministry of External Affairs itself cautioned against reading too much into the talks. An official said, “We only wanted to unlock the halt in the process. We will insist on terrorism being the core issue. Mind you, this is only a first step and whether it leads to a process is to be seen,”.
The secretaries will only speak when they meet. They will not even tell, much less listen. After all, both have behind them the mandate of their respective countrymen. Neither is burdened with a successful precedence.
The experts call this ‘theatre of absurd’ a psychological game. Some also question the timing. After all what has so dramatically changed since January 28 as forced the talk offer, they ask?
The foreign ministers of India and Pakistan had met in London on January 28 over the London conference on Afghanistan. Neither had appeared willing to break the ice. Only six days later the Indian Government offered the talks, raising eyebrows.
Former Indian High Commissioner to Pakistan, G Parthasarthy believes that it is ill-timed and has made India look like a supplicant. It has given Pakistan the feeling that we are batting on a sticky wicket. India has lost the agenda to Pakistan,”.
Why is India offering talks then?
Apparently, London Conference on Afghanistan showed India its mirror. That too, in spite of earning enormous goodwill among the Afghanis and the international community by building Afghanistan with Indian currency. Ravaged by Taliban, the schools, the roads, the hospitals etc were rebuilt by India entering lives of local populace.
Pakistan was understandably alarmed over India co-opting the region, they believed as their own. Pakistan maintains links with the predominantly ethnic-Pushtun Taliban in Afghanistan, as a hedge against the day America leaves and a way to thwart a perceived Indian plan of strategic encirclement. Playing on the fears of the international community, Pakistan prevailed upon US, NATO and allies to engage with good Taliban. Since Pakistan served them as a window to Afghanistan, their words carried more credence. India’s stand that there is not such thing as good Taliban and bad Taliban was overlooked, however true it was. Upset with US for not supporting him in his controversial presidential win, Karzai also wants a deal with Taliban. India stood marginalized on Afghanistan and therefore did a quick sum of its losses and gains.
It reckoned that it would be better to agree to disagree across the table rather than disagree to agree, sitting at respective homes. Talking may not go further than words, they realized but not talking is proving to be worse.
Benjamin Franklin had long said, “There never was a good war and there never was a bad peace.”
Second factor was that India is more confident than ever before about Kashmir problem. The troubled state has an elected government backed by a popular appeal against Pakistan.
Thirdly, with a civilian government in place in Pakistan, India has lost an excuse over whom to talk as it did earlier when Manmohan Singh said after ignominious exit of Pervez Musharraf, “we don’t know who we should be talking to in Pakistan,”.
Fourthly, suspension of composite talks in aftermath of Mumbai terror attack has paid as much dividend as it could. There is no need to hang fire any longer. In any case the talk on Feb 25 will not be composite.
Fifthly, the steady degradation of Taliban capabilities. Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar is the most significant Taliban terrorist to be captured since US entered Afghanistan after 09/11. He is Mullah Omar’s second in command. Second capture is of Mullah Abdul Salam by Pakistani forces and ISI, backed by CIA. He is a shadow governor of Afghanistan’s Kunduz province. Pakistan distinguished between Pakistan Taliban and Afghan Taliban. Pakistani leadership sees in former a direct threat and in latter a strategic asset against India. However the twin arrests hint a change in Pakistani leadership’s thinking. Pakistan Army chief Parvez Kayani doesn’t appear to be favouring Afghani Taliban any longer, a good news for India.
No wonder, SM Krishna has suddenly made a virtue of discussion. He is reported to have said “We have been advising others including those involved in Palestine that outstanding issues must be addressed through dialogue. How can we prescribe a different medicine for ourselves?”
India-Pakistan negotiations are going to be a high wire act. Genuine realism will call for some political risks, which the political establishments on both sides can ill afford to ignore.
However, this may prove too much to expect. India fears Pakistan leadership can play very hardball and to the gallery. If they go to Pakistani people saying they forced talk about Kashmir and conceded nothing, Indian MEA officials said the talk will run aground for longer than feared.