A divergence of approach

JOHN CHERIAN in New Delhi AMIT BARUAH in Islamabad

THE third round of Foreign Secretary-level talks between India and Pakistan was held in New Delhi from September 15 to 18. Although both countries were committed to holding the talks in September, Pakistan delayed announcing the dates for the talks. After a spurt in firing along the Line of Control (LoC) in August, mutual recrimination had vitiated the atmosphere .

Just before the Prime Ministers of both the countries left for New York to address the U.N. General Assembly, the Foreign Secretaries came to the negotiating table. The main objective of the third round of talks was to operationalise the mechanisms of the working groups. Pakistan's insistence on a JWG on Kashmir threw a spanner in the works. Pakistan's stand is that Kashmir is the "core" issue that affects bilateral ties. On the other hand, Indian officials stuck to the position that since the issue of Kashmir was intended to be taken up by the Foreign Secretaries, both sides should adopt a flexible approach to accommodate mutual concerns.

Pakistan was keen on giving a JWG on Kashmir a concrete shape, with its terms of reference and the periodicity of its meetings fixed. Indian officials say that they had agreed to list Kashmir as one item in the agenda but Pakistan's game plan to focus on Kashmir was not acceptable to the Indian side. A senior Indian official said, "Great concern has been shown to Pakistan's sensitivities, but that does not mean that we are going to give up our position." Pakistan's accusation that India is backtracking is not true, he added.

In a statement from Islamabad, Pakistan said that India had resiled from the position it had taken in the joint statement of June 23, 1997. The External Affairs Ministry spokesman categorically rejected Pakistan's stand and said that India's commitment to the dialogue was "strong and unequivocal".

At the same time, the Indian side emphasised that there was a range of other equally important issues to be discussed. The main aim of the dialogue, Indian officials said, was to realise the full potential for cooperation between the two countries, which had a common history and culture. The Indian side also made it clear that their Pakistani counterparts should not be "fixated" on procedural matters. Indian officials said that JWGs were adequate to resolving border disputes, such as the one with China, but not for political disputes such as the one on Kashmir. They said that there was no rigidity in the Indian stand. Despite the positions that were taken, the outcome of the latest round was far from catastrophic. Indian officials do not anticipate any "quantum jumps". They said the dialogue would continue but it could turn out a to be long-drawn-out process.

The two sides may not have reached any major agreement but both are firm that the dialogue should continue. According to Indian officials, the talks may have helped clarify some points. The Indian side is against setting up a JWG on Kashmir, now or in the future. Past differences notwithstanding, Foreign Secretary K.Raghunath and his Pakistani counterpart Shamshad Ahmad emphasised the need to continue talking.

ON his arrival at Lahore airport after the third round of talks between India and Pakistan in New Delhi, Pakistan Foreign Secretary Shamshad Ahmed said that the discussions had remained inconclusive because "the other side had resiled from the agreement set out in the Islamabad joint statement." He attributed the problem to "a divergence of approach with regard to operationalising the mechanism on the Kashmir issue."

The joint statement issued in New Delhi on September 18 had said that the Foreign Secretaries decided to adjourn their talks and reconvene their meeting at a mutually convenient date as "it was felt that further consideration was required." Shamshad Ahmed said that Pakistan would not compromise on its position on Kashmir which, in its view, lay at the heart of all problems.

A Pakistan Foreign Office spokesman drew a clear linkage between the continuance of the dialogue and substantive discussions on Kashmir. "While we remain committed to the dialogue we consider it of fundamental importance that the issue of Kashmir is dealt with substantively... so as and when we can agree on a modality in which Kashmir is given its due place, Kashmir is discussed and negotiated substantively, the dialogue will continue."

It is clear that Pakistan does not favour a gradualist approach, where incremental trust and confidence would lend greater coherence to a dialogue that has not even got off the ground. Given the sensitive nature of the bilateral negotiations, a rigid position by Pakistan can have implications for future dialogue even though the Prime Ministers of the two countries are believed to have restated their commitment to the Foreign Secretary-level dialogue in their meeting in New York on September 23. This meeting, however, did not generate any of the euphoria of the May 12 meeting between Nawaz Sharif and Inder Kumar Gujral in Male. This time neither the "personal chemistry" nor the Punjabi language appears to have given the incipient dialogue process a fillip.

Meanwhile, Pakistan is keen to involve a Western third party in the talks, preferably the United States. Islamabad's briefing for Western envoys prior to the Delhi talks called for facilitation of talks between India and Pakistan. Talks or no talks, Islamabad appears to think that India can be pressured only through the West. Such an approach, needless to say, will find no takers in India.

A factor that seems to have influenced Pakistan's overall approach is the possibility of India securing a permanent berth in the U.N. Security Council. India's bid for permanent membership of the Council could well determine the course of the bilateral dialogue.