How India has conducted international relations in 2010

This year all five permanent members of the Security Council visited New Delhi, in addition four have committed themselves supporting India’s permanent membership of the council and at least three have formerly recognized the country as a nuclear weapon state but the big outstanding problem remains Pakistan.

Karan Thapar discusses India’s foreign policy with Professor Amitabh Mattoo, Former Foreign Secretary, Kanwal Sibal and Former Deputy, National Security Advisor, Leela Krishnamurthy Ponappa.

To watch the discussion click on the following link:

http://www.moneycontrol.com/video/special-videos/how-india-has-conducted-international-relations2010_508350.html?utm_source=Article_Vid

Mission implausible

It is unfortunate that the most important initiative on Jammu and Kashmir in recent years has provoked such widespread disappointment and dismay. New Delhi's decision to appoint interlocutors to carry out a dialogue with all stakeholders in the state — as part of the eight-point plan of action unveiled last month — had generated tremendous hope and enthusiasm. And yet the actual announcement of a three-member non-political team has provoked widespread anger and hostility and even invited ridicule.

Although the three members are undoubtedly professionals, who have excelled in their respective fields, the impression has been created that the panel has been finalised without due diligence or a serious application of mind by those who are quite oblivious to the complexities of the problems in the state and are insensitive to the sentiment of the people living there.

Surely the multiple agencies of the Government of India, operating in the state, should have been able to provide a feedback about the likely response of the stakeholders. Why has this initiative almost collapsed before it has started? What can New Delhi learn from this dreadful mistake? And what can still be done to redeem the situation?

Ever since September 25, 2010, when the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) finalised the political initiative on Jammu and Kashmir, expectations were raised that a seasoned politician would lead the panel of interlocutors. This was not a myth created by the media. This perception was built on the successful all-party delegation that had visited the state.

Moreover, inspired news stories, selective leaks, privileged briefings, and even specific names were floated to generate a sense that the dialogue with the people would not be just another bureaucratic exercise to buy time. So much so that at one stage there were sections within the Valley which believed that the only reliable trouble-shooter in the government, Pranab Mukherjee, would be deputed to initiate the dialogue.

The impression was created for two weeks that hectic parleys were going on among the home ministry, the Prime Minister's Office, the leadership of the Congress and the state government to give shape to a high-powered team that could lead to a genuine breakthrough.

The shock and bewilderment are not surprising given this background, and the approval of a panel of names, admittedly eminent but without any political weight, who should have been best part of a legitimate track II exercise, and at least two of them have played such a useful role in the past.

In Jammu and Kashmir, symbolism is almost as important as substance. Consider the history of the last half a century. Almost every political crisis and political agreement has been possible through initiatives led by heavyweights and backed by the political leadership of the country.

It was Lal Bahadur Shastri who was deputed by Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru in 1963 to help defuse the crisis following the theft of the Prophet's relic. While the chief of Intelligence Bureau B N Mullik also played a vital role and enjoyed Nehru's confidence, it was Shastri who was the public face of the initiative.

The 1974 Kashmir accord was possible because of the confidence that G Parthasarthi enjoyed of then Prime Minster Indira Gandhi. Similarly, in the 1990s, interlocutors like Rajesh Pilot and George Fernandes were able to make a difference because they created a perception that they were leading a serious political initiative backed by the highest political authority in the land. Can the present panel claim to have such a carte blanche?

Indeed even the mandate of the panel has been defined in the most non-anodyne terms. The home ministry's press release says it all: "The three interlocutors appointed by the Govt. have been entrusted with the responsibility of undertaking a sustained dialogue with the people of Jammu & Kashmir to understand their problems and chart a course for the future."

But all is not lost, it may still be possible to save the initiative by broadening its membership and defining its mandate in more specific terms. Inclusion of a seasoned political leader, or leaders, is a must, even if it means that the home ministry may have to stop pretending that it is like Delphi, the oracle of all wisdom.

Similarly, it must be stated clearly that the panel has been entrusted with the task of entering into an unconditional political dialogue with all political sections to arrive at a clear framework for the settlement of the problems of Jammu and Kashmir.

In an earlier meeting, the CCS had referred provocatively but rightly to the trust and governance deficit that exists within the state. Unfortunately, nothing has been done to substantively reduce these deficits save the removal of some security bunkers, many of them lying in disuse.

Little has also been done to address the mal-governance that has contributed to the present crisis. A paralysed state administration led by an ineffective chief secretary needs to be made accountable in tangible terms.

A reminder of the grim state of affairs was revealed during the proceedings of the state legislative assembly. While the state is facing curfews and hartals, and the education system has practically collapsed, the assembly passed a private member's bill approving the creation of a Transworld Muslim University to be run by Jamiat Ahle Hadith.

Although cynics viewed this as a ploy by some to cut into the constituency of the Jamaat-e-Islami, in a real sense it is symbolic of the bizarre state of affairs prevailing in the state, given a free run by the state and central government.

It is time for Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and chairperson of the UPA, Sonia Gandhi, both of whom understand the gravity of the situation, to take firm charge before all is lost. It needs to be recognised that claims of a 'near-normalcy' on the streets of the Valley may only be a lull before the next storm, which could be overwhelming.

(Source:Hindustan Times)

Saving Kashmir

The visit of the all-party delegation to Jammu & Kashmir has generated hope and the expectation that it may still be possible to redeem the situation. The immediate task is now for New Delhi to move from the symbolic to the substantive, utilising the opportunity provided by the delegation’s visit. And as the central government reaches out to build trust and confidence, it is essential that this is matched by the people and their leaders in the state, in word and deed.

Even cynics will admit that the all-party delegation’s visit demonstrated the human and, arguably, the best face of Indian democracy. Nearly 40 seasoned leaders, representing virtually every ideological hue, stepped out from their routine programme to try and reach out to even those demonised by the Indian establishment.

In an ideal world, the exercise would have been more laissez-faire, but given the situation in the Valley, the political establishment performed, minor hiccups notwithstanding, with grace and imagination. Images of Sushma Swaraj praying at the Hazratbal shrine; Sitaram Yechury’s surprisingly chaste Hyderabadi Urdu chat with Ali Shah Geelani; P Chidambaram engaging the victims of the Tangmarg fire; Ram Vilas Paswan breaking down – all this represented a collage we should have witnessed at least two months ago, but it still made a difference! The visit has opened a window – albeit slightly – which was on the verge of being closed and bolted. Only an immediate initiative by New Delhi can ensure that goodwill generated by the visit will translate into real change on the ground. Acting now will not be seen as capitulating to street protests, but as demonstrating sensitivity and statesmanship.

Remember the one ordinary Kashmiri who confronted the home minister with a simple question: “If we are citizens of India, why are you spraying bullets on us?” And another who asked: “If you say Kashmir is atoot ang of India, then why are
you putting your own ang into the frying pan?”

The prime minister must, having obtained feedback from members of the delegation, act on a variety of fronts, including the humanitarian, the political and the social. As a humanitarian gesture, all those jailed over the last three months for stone-pelting must be released, as must political detainees against whom there is no charge of committing any heinous crime. It is critical, hence forth, that no civilian is killed by the police and the curfew is lifted. It is also critical to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the stakeholders (especially the youth) in each district of the Valley. Based on this, confidence- and trustbuilding measures that will have maximum impact must be implemented unilaterally.

The prime minister must also announce the formation of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Several commissions like this have been formed throughout the world; the best and most successful was established under the chairmanship of Archbishop Desmund Tutu in South Africa. A commission like this is not about fixing blame, but about accepting the tragic events of the past, bringing the past to a closure and moving together into a better future. It is about recognising the tragedy of two decades, of those who disappeared or who were killed, or the tragic displacement of Kashmiri Pandits. A commission like this can also be mandated to bring about a reconciliation between communities and regions; an accommodation between Kashmiri Pandits and Muslims as well as between the Valley, Jammu and Ladakh.

The prime minister must draw upon the delegation and create a team of political interlocutors. They will represent, symbolically, the collective voice of the nation. It is only the collective political leadership of the country that can genuinely reach out, engage and resolve the problems of Jammu & Kashmir. Restoration of peace in J&K and a roadmap should not be influenced by national vote-bank politics and the rest of India must be educated about the importance of building peace in Kashmir.

And if New Delhi continues to act in good faith, it is incumbent on the part of the people of the state, and especially the Valley, to respond meaningfully. While peaceful protests are part of the space that any democracy should offer its people, there is no scope for violence. The people of Kashmir have suffered and been traumatised over the lost decades and lived in uncertainty for the last six decades. Clarity of thinking is not easy in these times, but it is critical to move forward. It is time that the people and the leaders stop living under the illusion of a utopian dream. The reality is that the people must look for pragmatic ways to ensure the honour, dignity and the empowerment of the people in this globalised world. Running after the mirage of a distant paradise will only create conditions for greater suffering. And they must give dialogue and peace a chance.

There is an India beyond bunkers, security forces and corrupt politics; it is the vibrant India of entrepreneurs, professionals, civil society activists, the robust and free media, and the political delegation that visited the Valley. More and more Kashmiris must discover this India and build a coalition with it. That is the best guarantee against the other India which they witness in the Valley.

(Source: The Times of India)

This is not a lost cause. For those with the inclination, here is a plan for Kashmir

IS THERE a way out of the anarchy in Kashmir? Is it possible to create an opportunity out of this grave crisis? Can the conditions for sustainable peace still be created? What can New Delhi, the state government and the people of Kashmir do, unilaterally or collectively, to build a ‘Naya’ Jammu & Kashmir symbolised by peace, prosperity and people’s power? Here are 10 Commandments to save Jammu & Kashmir.

FOR NEW DELHI

---

1} Do not live in denial: accept that there is an uprising, and admit your mistakes

One of the biggest hurdles in the way of any meaningful initiative is that New Delhi often becomes a prisoner of its own rhetoric. Let’s face it: there is a virtual revolt on the streets of the Kashmir Valley. Enraged young men and increasingly women are leading an uprising against the State and the central government and we just hope and (often believe) that it is all a Pakistani plot.

This is a generation born in conflict which has only seen the ugly face of India. This is a politically conscious generation that may not be able to take a long-term view of issues, but is hardly enamoured by Pakistan, nor can it easily be manipulated by the ISI. Understanding the anatomy of this new ‘movement’ alone will help to craft policies that can really deliver results on the ground.

This reality must be accepted as must be the admission of mistakes. This is the first step towards restoring trust between New Delhi and the people of Kashmir. Over the years, the Centre has made a number of appalling mistakes in Kashmir. Promises of dialogue have not been kept, several elections have been rigged, genuinely elected governments dismissed, puppet leaders installed — and, in the last two decades, the ordinary Kashmiri has faced harassment from security forces.

Some of these mistakes were avoidable; others inevitable given the complex situation on the ground, and others have been corrected. Facing up to this reality is essential. Admission of these mistakes will not be construed as an expression of guilt, but will signal recognition that fresh initiatives towards Kashmir will be based on an awareness of past mistakes and a genuine desire not to see them repeated. Sonia Gandhi, in her speech to the all-party meeting, came closest to accepting this reality.

2} Understand what the youth want: conduct a stakeholder analysis and build trust

It will be impossible to reach out to these young men and women unless there is a clear understanding of what they want. While the uprising may have a single anti- India focus, a variety of factors have coalesced to generate these protests. The all-party delegation that visits the Valley must be tasked to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the stakeholders (especially the youth) in each district of the Valley. Based on this, implement unilaterally confidence and trust-building measures that will have maximum impact, including release of young men in jails and political detainees immediately.

3} Create the conditions for an ‘uninterrupted’ sustained dialogue

Once the CBMs are in place, it is essential to appoint a team of political interlocutors who will carry credibility. Make the dialogue unconditional and as inclusive as possible. The dialogue must be based on a two-year time-table and weekly meetings. While there may be few takers in the beginning, once it is recognised that New Delhi is acting in good faith, Kashmiris themselves will force their leaders to join the negotiating table. All those part of the dialogue must be exposed to the lessons from peace processes across the world by experts in conflict resolution.

4} Recognise that autonomy or self-governance in J&K will not balkanise India

Separatism grows when people feel disconnected from the structures of power and the process of policy formulation; in contrast, devolution ensures popular participation in the running of the polity. Bluntly put, autonomy and self-governance is the only recipe for the 21st century. If autonomy weakened states, the United States of America would have disintegrated many decades ago. If this balance is struck, Jammu and Kashmir could become a model of ‘cooperative federalism’, a special model that could be gradually applied to other states in the union.

Autonomy and self-rule are about empowering people, making them feel that they belong, and about increasing the accountability of public institutions and services. It is synonymous with decentralisation and devolution of power, phrases that have been on the charter of virtually every political party in India. In Jammu and Kashmir, autonomy carries tremendous resonance with the people because puppet leaders from the state colluded with the central leadership and gradually eroded the autonomy promised by the Constitution. There is no contradiction between wanting Kashmir to be part of the national mainstream and the state’s desire for autonomous self-governance.

5} Create a Truth and Reconciliation Commission

A commission like this is not about fixing blame, but about accepting the tragic events of the past and moving together into a better future. It is about recognising the tragedy of two decades, of those who disappeared or were killed, or the tragic displacement of Kashmiri Pandits. Such a Commission would be best served by respected jurists who carry credibility with Indian civil society as well as the people of the state.

FOR THE STATE GOVERNMENT

---

6} Create the conditions for an internal reconciliation

Today, Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh are polarised, with their differences being exploited by sectarian groups. There are powerful forces demanding a trifurcation of the main regions of the state – Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh – into separate administrative units.

Posing as an imaginative solution, this demand, if conceded, could lead to violent social disruptions in the state and create a communal polarisation that would not just irretrievably destroy the cultural and social fabric of the state, but have perilous consequences for communal relations in the rest of India. In addition, trifurcation would forever end the possibilities of reviving the plural traditions of communal harmony in the state that had once made it a symbol of the very idea of India: unity in diversity. It is important that the state government work, along with civil society, to create the conditions for reconciliation amongst the three regions and the different ethnic groups, that will also make it possible for Kashmir’s Hindus to honourably return to the valley.

7} Reach out to the Opposition and the young

It is important for Omar Abdullah reach out to everyone. A politician is one who only thinks of the next election; a statesman is one who thinks of the next generation. Bury the past, forget the bitterness of yesterday, and try and create a new way in politics. Meet young people, as many as you can, every day. And call on your political opponents (drop by at Fairview to see the Muftis, Mirwaiz Umar Farooq at Nageen and even Syed Ali Shah Geelani at Hyderpora) and seek their support in the crisis. Generosity in politics will never be seen as a weakness. Political leaders who demonstrate humility in crisis always emerge stronger.

8} Recognise your failures, don’t always blame Delhi

The state government has found it easy to blame the central government for all the problems of the state. It is time that it accepted that the administration had virtually collapsed in the last three months. Most deaths on the streets were during firing — not by the Indian army, but by the J&K police or the CRPF aiding the state police. J&K is believed to be the second most corrupt state in India with good reason. Delivery of public services is abysmal, and there is no scheme for generating employment other than as white collar workers in the government. This needs to change. The youth of Kashmir have to be given hope for the future and this can only happen if the local government delivers on multiple fronts.

FOR THE PEOPLE OF KASHMIR

---

9} Recognise the limits of the possible

The people of Kashmir have suffered and been traumatised over the lost decades and lived in uncertainty for the last six decades. Clarity of thinking is not easy in these times, but it is critical to move forward. It is time that the people and the leaders stop living under the illusion of a utopian dream. The reality is that the people must look for pragmatic ways to ensure the honour, dignity and the empowerment of the people in this globalised world. Running after the mirage of a distant paradise will only create the conditions for greater suffering.

10} Discover the other India and utilise its opportunity

There is an India beyond bunkers, security forces and corrupt and corrupted politicians. It is the vibrant India of entrepreneurs, professionals, activists, civil society activists and the robust and free media, among others. More and more Kashmiris must discover this India and build a coalition with it. That is the best guarantee against the other India which we witness in the Valley.

(Source: Tehelka)

Kashmir Crisis: What is the state of affairs in the valley?

As the crisis in Kashmir starts to create a sense of panic in the capital, the Centre is looking at all possible options to restore law and order in an already torn land. Facing the ire from opposition parties for its handling of the current crisis in in the valley, the Prime Minister has again requested the people to return to the negotiating table and begin dialogues to end the crisis and restore peace.

Prof. Amitabh Mattoo, the Chief Information Commissioner, Wajahat Habibullah; the Vice Chancellor of Islamic University of Kashmir, Siddiq Wahid and the Author of the well-known book Curfewed Night, Basharat Peer were interviewed by CNBC-TV18's KaraN Thapar who asked them what is it that governments in Srinagar and Delhi must do to calm the situation and regain control.

Click on the link to watch this India Tonight episode...

http://www.moneycontrol.com/video/special-videos/kashmir-crisis-what-isstateaffairsthe-valley_484832.html?utm_source=Article_Vid

It's Now or Never

The grave crisis in Jammu and Kashmir demands a collective national response, and the all-party meeting today is a forum that must help devise a comprehensive consensual strategy for the state, even if anarchy seems to be the defining feature of the Valley’s polity at the moment. This can happen only if there is a minimum agreement on at least three issues.

First, it must be recognised that today almost the entire Valley has been overwhelmed by a collective expression of rage, led by the youth who were born or grew up during the years of militancy and who are driven by a sense of hopelessness. This is a product largely of our own follies, and our inability to translate the gains of the election in 2008, the most inclusive in J&K’s history, into long-term dividends, and these mistakes have been compounded over the past few months. Consider this: nearly 90 civilians have been killed since June and not one national leader — outside Prakash Karat of the CPI (M) — has thought it fit to visit the state. Under these circumstances, it would be too much to expect Pakistan, and other anti-India forces not to fish in these troubled waters.

But it’s equally important to realise that the pro-Pakistan constituency in the Valley, before the present troubles, had shrunk dramatically. After all, the political and social conditions in Pakistan had not gone unnoticed in the Valley. Second, the ‘fire’ in Kashmir can only be doused by a multi-track approach that targets and addresses the people of the state, not individual leaders or parties (separatist or mainstream). This approach should have only one goal: the political, social and cultural empowerment of the people and a real abiding assurance of security for every citizen. This can be achieved by a systematic, imaginative and continuously monitored plan of action devised in close coordination with the government by the leaders of the major political parties.

Third, it is essential that we accept that J&K is unique and must be dealt with specially. Its uniqueness is obvious for a variety of historical reasons recognised even by the Supreme Court. In 1984, in Khazan Chand vs the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the court unambiguously held that the state holds “a special place in the constitutional set up of the country”. Earlier, the 1983 Srinagar Declaration adopted by the Opposition conclave that included Jyoti Basu, I.K. Gujral, Chandra Shekhar and Parkash Singh Badal, stated that “the special constitutional status of J&K should be preserved and protected in letter and spirit”. More important, however, is Kashmir’s singular importance to the very idea of India, which is often forgotten. A Muslim majority state that voluntarily acceded to India in 1947 lent tremendous strength to the construction of India as a vibrant, secular and pluralistic State.

The battle, therefore, to win back the hearts and minds of the Kashmiris is critical not just for the strengthening of the ideals that inspired Indian nationhood, but is also central to the war against obscurantism and extremism. In other words, J&K must no longer be dealt with the kind of political ineptitude and bureaucratic inertia that has often characterised the Centre’s policies towards many other states. This requires the necessity of rising above partisan considerations. This fact is clearly understood by the UPA and the NDA leaderships.

If there is acceptance of the above, the all-party meeting must consider the following three-point plan of action. First, an all-party parliamentary delegation must visit the state at the earliest to carry an on-spot assessment of the situation and meet with as many ‘ordinary’ Kashmiris as possible as well as political leaders, in Srinagar and the countryside. Political leaders have an intuitive ability to a do a quick stakeholder analysis and they must be tasked with working out confidence- and trust-building measures that must be unilaterally implemented by New Delhi.

Second, a special task force must be immediately constituted by the prime minister and dedicated full-time to J&K (headed by a Cabinet minister or by the PM himself). It must be made responsible for monitoring, on a daily basis, the situation in the state, and assisting in governance and developmental activities and other pressing problems in the state and to reduce the ‘trust’ and ‘governance’ deficits.

Third, the all-party meeting must demand that UPA leadership and the government appoint a credible team of negotiators to conduct a political dialogue between the Centre and the people of the state. The dialogue should be as inclusive as possible, and no group or individual must be considered untouchable. No conditions must be attached at the beginning of a dialogue. It is quite obvious that any negotiations the Centre conducts can, in no way, compromise the unity and integrity of India. Even separatists realise this. But any explicit conditionalities make it difficult for many to take the initial leap from the streets to the negotiating table. The people of the state must be made to see that the genius of the Constitution is such that it can be made to accommodate the most robust aspirations of even the most disempowered or marginal group.

When the rest of the nation demonstrates its good faith towards the people of J&K, it should be possible to redeem the situation. The people of J&K, even at the worst of times, have almost always demonstrated reasonableness. They are naturally inclined to travel along the path that leads to peace, prosperity and people’s power. The time has come for our political representatives to remove all the hurdles on this path. Collectively, the Indian nation is indeed capable of achieving what might today seem an impossible task.

(Source: Hindustan Times)

An insider’s take on the mystery of Kashmir’s conflict.

Kashmir has been fought over by India, Pakistan, and to a lesser known extent, China, since the partition of 1947 that divided the subcontinent. Since then innumerable splinter groups, often backed by outside parties, have negotiated ceasefires, broken then, come to the peace table or stalked off. The majority of Kashmiris call for independence, but it’s clear that neither India nor Pakistan are ready to make any big concessions.

After a couple of years of seeming normalcy, trouble flared up again this summer. Young protestors have taken to the streets, often throwing stones at the large numbers of security forces deployed around the valley. The police and army have declared curfews that have all but shut down the region, crippling local businesses but having little effect in stopping the protests.

Dheera Sujan of South Asia Wired interviewed Prof. Mattoo for an insider’s take on the underlying causes of the current violence that’s taking such a deadly toll in Kashmir.

Click on the following link to listen to the podcast of his interview on Radio Netherlands.

http://content1c.omroep.nl/774da27220b8db0cd37806b6412c133e/4c87a27c/rnw/partners/smac/englishgeneral/copy_of_south_asia_wired_2010_09_02_09_08_44_1kHz.mp3

Prof. Amitabh Mattoo at the India-Pakistan Chaophraya Dialogue

INDIA PAKISTAN CHAOPHRAYA DIALOGUE 5

28-30 August 2010

Leading opinion makers from India and Pakistan met at Bangkok for the 5th round of the Chaophraya Dialogue from 28-30 August 2010. They began their deliberations by observing a minute of silence to commiserate with the victims of the recent floods in Pakistan that have caused a grave humanitarian crisis in the country. The Indian participants collectively voiced their support for and solidarity with the people of Pakistan at this challenging time. The Pakistani participants welcomed the offer of Indian humanitarian aid. All the participants hoped that this crisis will lead to greater cooperation between the two countries.

INDIA PAKISTAN DIALOGUE

1. The participants emphasized the need for continued bilateral engagement especially at official and functional levels. They hoped that the dialogue can be sustained until there is a satisfactory resolution of all outstanding issues.

2. They welcomed the forthcoming meeting of the foreign ministers and expressed the hope that this would take the dialogue process forward.

3. The participants felt that the two sides need to agree upon the form and structure of the dialogue.

4. They noted that decisions already taken in earlier rounds of talks needed to be implemented fully. Other issues on which there is convergence must be brought to an early conclusion.

5. To facilitate people-to-people exchanges, the participants felt that there was a need to relax visa restrictions particularly for artistes, media, academics, business persons, students and civil society organizations.

6. To build trust and confidence, they recommended exchanges of visits by military delegations especially at the level of service chiefs, and similar exchanges between intelligence agencies.

7. The two governments should urgently take up the humanitarian issue of fishermen and other prisoners languishing in each others’ jails and find workable compassionate solutions.

JAMMU AND KASHMIR

1. The participants strongly supported a comprehensive process to build sustained peace and reconciliation between India and Pakistan.

2. They believed that a sustained dialogue between New Delhi and Islamabad, including on Jammu and Kashmir, was required to ensure lasting peace.

3. They recommended that New Delhi and Islamabad should facilitate a dialogue between representatives from all parts of Jammu and Kashmir, reflecting all shades of political opinion.

4. The participants suggested that to complement the bilateral dialogue, inter and intra-Jammu and Kashmir dialogue, New Delhi and Islamabad should consider activating the back-channel on Jammu and Kashmir.

5. They called upon New Delhi and Islamabad to implement, in letter and spirit, the series of existing CBMs, particularly those relating to easing travel and trade between the two sides of the Line of Control.

6. They also appealed to New Delhi and Islamabad to urgently initiate measures to build trust and confidence amongst the people of Jammu and Kashmir.

7. The participants believed that progress made on various tracks of the dialogue must be shared with the principal stakeholders within India and Pakistan, including the major political parties.

AFGHANISTAN

1. The participants recognized that instability in Afghanistan would have serious implications for both Pakistan and India. Hence it was important for both countries to support reconciliation in Afghanistan which was essential for stability in the country and the region.

2. They agreed that the future of Afghanistan should be the exclusive domain of the people of Afghanistan. It was recommended that all other countries refrain from interfering in the internal affairs of Afghanistan.

3. It was agreed that the only solution to the Afghan problem is a political one. There can be no military solution.

4. The participants felt that the aspirations of the Afghan people for stability and sovereignty should be fulfilled as early as possible within an Afghan-owned multi-ethnic and broad-based framework.

5. It was also agreed that a stable and peaceful Afghanistan has the potential of leading to greater cooperation between India and Pakistan. The absence of cooperation between the two countries carries the danger of aggravating bilateral tensions.

6. The participants further suggested that India and Pakistan should look for specific avenues of cooperation. It was noted that cooperation among India, Pakistan and Afghanistan has great potential. All three countries are members of SAARC, and should, therefore, be encouraged to consult one another on issues of mutual concern and economic development. The three countries should explore potential areas of cooperation which could include joint investment, energy cooperation, infrastructure development and trade, among others.

TERRORISM

1. Participants agreed that terrorism was a common enemy and the comprehensive defeat of terrorism should guide the policies of the governments of India and Pakistan. Pakistan, today, faces, an existential threat from terrorist organizations, while the memory of various terrorist attacks still affects public opinion in India.

2. They recognized that terrorism was a common threat to both countries and must be dealt with vigorously in all its aspects.

3. They felt there was a need for institutionalized and regular interaction between the heads of the intelligence agencies outside public glare.

4. They recommended that those involved in prosecution of terrorist cases common to both countries should meet often to expedite disposal of cases.

5. Both sides must actively collaborate to facilitate the prosecution of terrorists being tried for acts of terrorism.

6. It was suggested that civil society organizations should build public awareness of their respective national commitments to combat terrorism under the relevant United Nations conventions and binding resolutions.

7. The participants also proposed that both countries must respect each other’s territorial integrity, sovereignty, and refrain from interference in each other’s internal affairs.

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

PAKISTAN

Sherry Rehman (President, Jinnah Institute, member of the National Security Committee of the National Assembly of Pakistan), Ejaz Haider (contributing editor, Friday Times, and former executive editor, Daily Times), Aziz Ahmad Khan (former High Commissioner to India), Najmuddin Shaikh (former Foreign Secretary), Ahmer Bilal Soofi (President, Research Society of International Law), Talat Masood (Lt Gen, former Secretary, Ministry of Defence), Humayun Khan (former Foreign Secretary), Syed Rifaat Hussain (Professor and Chair, Department of Defence and Strategic Studies, Quaid-i-Azam University), Shahzad Chaudhry (former DG, Air Force Strategic Command), Nasim Zehra (Director, Current Affairs, Dunya Television), Sehar Tariq (Program Manager, Jinnah Institute)

INDIA

Amitabh Mattoo (Professor, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University), Lalit Mansingh (former Foreign Secretary), Raja Menon (Rear Admiral, Chairman, Net Assessment and Simulation, National Security Council), Happymon Jacob (Assistant Professor, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University), G Parthasarathy (former High Commissioner to Pakistan), Dipankar Banerjee (Maj. Gen., Director, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies), Siddharth Varadarajan (Strategic Affairs Editor, The Hindu), Praveen Swami (Associate Editor, The Hindu), AS Dulat (former Director, Research and Analysis Wing), Barkha Dutt (Group Editor, NDTV), Indrani Bagchi (Senior Editor, The Times of India), Mallika Joseph (Deputy Director, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies)

All is not lost yet as Govt fights the fire in Kashmir

ALMOST every crisis in Jammu and Kashmir also has a hidden opportunity that we have consistently missed. The present uprising of the young in the Valley threatens to overwhelm all the gains made over the past years. And yet, it is possible to redeem the situation even now. But for this, New Delhi and Srinagar have to act not just in synergy, but demonstrate the imagination, creativity, and, above all, the determination necessary to gain the trust of a generation whose anger has been visible on the streets of Kashmir over the past few months.

For New Delhi, it is critical to once again recognise that Jammu and Kashmir, for a variety of reasons, is not just another state of the Union. It cannot be dealt with the kind of political inertia and bureaucratic ineptitude that the Centre can afford in its relations with other states without any dangerous consequences. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh (and I am sure so does Sonia Gandhi) understands this clearly. But this has to be immediately appreciated by all those in North Block in charge of Jammu and Kashmir. In any case, it is critical that the PM, who still enjoys great credibility and goodwill in the Valley, personally appeals for peace within the next few days.

Based on this understanding, New Delhi must immediately act on three fronts. First, appoint a special representative for Jammu and Kashmir. Ever since N. N. Vohra was appointed the governor of the state in 2008, there has been no designated interlocutor for talks. The appointment of an interlocutor right away will not be seen as a sign of weakness; rather it will signal the sensitivity of New Delhi to the voices of dissent and anger that are still alive in the Valley. But the appointment of a serving or a retired bureaucrat would be a mistake, given their training and attitude. A political heavyweight like, say, former chief minister of Madhya Pradesh Digvijay Singh, or any other person who enjoys the confidence of 7, Race Course Road, and 10, Janpath, would indicate the importance that New Delhi accords to a dialogue.

SECOND, the Centre must appoint an expert committee to consider, afresh, the recommendations made by the Prime Minister’s working groups on governance, confidence building measures ( CBMs) — both internal and those across the Line of Control ( LoC) — economic reconstruction and Centre-state relations. Several key recommendations, particularly those given by the working group on internal CBMs (chaired by Hamid Ansari) have either not been implemented or have been taken up half- heartedly. Their effective implementation would be a trust- building measure of great significance. Unfortunately, the report of the working group on Centre-state relations has led to discord rather than furthering an understanding.

Another urgent necessity is an empowered task force of experts that examines the report and its detailed annexures, consults with stakeholders and arrives at a consensus that would, more or less, satisfy most shades of opinion.

Third, the government must reach out to the angry youth, especially the unemployed, through all the resources that India can bring to bear through the public and the private sector. The youth can become the state’s greatest strength — its soft power — in the years to come, if we immediately give their development our highest priority.

The challenge for the Omar Abdullah government is even greater. This is unlikely to be the only crisis that the CM will face in his political career, but it is easily his worst so far.

The credibility of his government, the party and of his chief ministership has been severely dented. There are no magical mantras for gaining popularity, but acting on the following three fronts will go a long way in reestablishing his authority.

FIRST, FIX blame and take action. The impression that there is administrative anarchy must be corrected. The government must “mean business” and must be seen as taking action against those responsible for the present crisis. This is not to recommend finding scapegoats. But it is essential for some officials to be punished if the faith of the people has to be restored in the system and if the bureaucrats are to take the political leadership seriously.

Second, reach out to everyone. A politician is one who only thinks of the next election; a statesman is one who thinks of the next generation. Bury the past, forget the bitterness of yesterday, and try and create a new way in politics. Meet young people, as many as you can, every day. And call on your political opponents (drop by at Fairview to see the Muftis and Mirwaiz Umar Farooq at Nageen) and seek their support in the crisis.

Generosity in politics will never be seen as a weakness. Political leaders who demonstrate humility in crisis always emerge stronger at the end of the day. Form a Council of Elders, drawing on the great strength of the state’s civil society, and meet them regularly taking their counsel and support.

Finally, prevent violence and killings. This is easier said than done. But let the police understand that there will be costs if there are any fatalities, and take immediate action when there is even a reported abuse of authority. Strengthen the human rights commission, give it greater authority and let it become a credible institution in the eyes of the people.

This is an agenda for just a month; much more will need to be done if Jammu and Kashmir is to have durable peace.

(Source: Mail Today)

The Way Forward in Kashmir- The Big Fight @ NDTV

Answer is as Complex as the Situation

WHENEVER there is a crisis in Jammu & Kashmir, we like to find a scapegoat. This is an easy escape route that unfortunately prevents us from taking a comprehensive view of the complexity of the problems impacting the state. Consider the history of the problems. In 1953, Sheikh Abdullah was dismissed after it was believed that he was part of an Anglo-American plot to wrest the Valley from India. In 1964, Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad was the scapegoat after massive protests that followed the theft of the holy relic. The pattern continued through subsequent decades.
Today, there is rage among the youth of the state. It is anger that stems from two decades of conflict, the violence, curfews, killings and a near-total breakdown of the system. This angst, disillusionment, frustration — call it what you will — demands attention and sensitivity from the Indian nation: from the government of India, from civil society, from corporate houses, and especially from the media. Every Kashmiri young man and woman needs to be given a vision of the future, a vision full of opportunity and where he or she feels secure in every sense of the term. And that vision has to be translated into reality. This requires a detailed roadmap, out-of-the-box thinking, and a willingness to reach out at every level.
It is often asked why J&K should be considered a special case. Kashmir’s singular importance to the very idea of India is often forgotten. A Muslim-majority state that voluntarily acceded to India in 1947 lent tremendous strength to the construction of India as a vibrant, secular and pluralistic state. The battle, therefore, to win back the hearts and minds of the Kashmiri youth is critical not just for strengthening the ideals that inspired Indian nationhood, but is central to the war against extremism and fundamentalism. In other words, Kashmir must no longer be dealt with the kind of political ineptitude and bureaucratic inertia that has often characterised the Centre’s policies towards many other states. And let me say this clearly: it is not just the youth in the Valley but the Dogra youth of Jammu and the Kashmir Pundit youth in migrant camps that demand equal attention.

(Source: The Economic Times)

Bringing Stability to J&K @ IBNLive Chat

Q: Sir, In your opinion who is responsible for the current scenario in the state of Jammu and Kashmir?

"...this radicalization has been caused by multiple factors, but above all by a sense of hopelessness. This is a generation that has seen suffering, killings, political uncertainty, and has had to remain sequestered in their homes for great lengths of time. A generation that has witnessed often a daily tragedy, seen no light at the end of tunnel, often endured harassment, and which has been distrusted by sections of the Indian establishment, is consequently simmering with deep discontent and angst. And yet these young men and women are not at an age where they can introspect and take a long-term of view of matters."

For the complete transcript of the chat click on the following link:

http://ibnlive.in.com/chat/view/469.html

Rebels with a Cause

The deployment of the Indian Army on the streets of Srinagar to enforce a curfew is a grim reminder that the state has descended into a deep crisis once again. Unlike in the past, the writ of the state is not being challenged primarily by a popular insurgency or by militant organisations or even by a separatist cartel. Instead, it’s the anger of a new generation of young men and women who have grown up in these two decades of conflict, which is translating into resilient protests in many parts of the Kashmir valley. And tragically, most of those killed over the last weeks have been young people, often in the prime of their life. The irony is that at a time when Pakistan is in internal turmoil, and its leadership is still reluctant to talk meaningfully on Kashmir, our own follies have, once again, derailed Jammu and Kashmir’s journey back to stability. In any case, what is immediately required is for New Delhi and Srinagar to fully understand the anatomy of the uprising and then craft policies that can quell this rage.

Four important features of the protests need to be highlighted. First, while this rebellious urge may have been sparked off by specific incidents of violence and killings, it’s a larger expression of anger, disillusionment and frustration. While it’s tempting to reduce the protests to indoctrination by extremist Islamic groups, Pakistan’s machinations or the influence of other vested interests, the reality is that this radicalisation has been caused by multiple factors, but above all by a sense of hopelessness. This is a generation that has seen suffering, killings, political uncertainty, and has had to remain sequestered in their homes for great lengths of time. A generation that has witnessed often a daily tragedy, seen no light at the end of tunnel, often endured harassment, and which has been distrusted by sections of the Indian establishment, is consequently simmering with deep discontent and angst. And yet is not at an age where it can introspect and take a long-term view of matters.

Second, this is also a generation, somewhat paradoxically, that’s been empowered by technology. The internet, as we know, is a powerful instrument of social communication. But it’s an equally powerful instrument of radicalisation and political mobilisation. One has to conduct only a sample survey of the Kashmiri lists on, say, Facebook to witness the anger, the appeal of the ‘stone pelters’ as well as the collective expression of rebellion.

Third, unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be a leader, or leaders, who is either inspiring these protests or directing them. There may be those who are ideologically or logistically guiding these protests. But there’s no mainstream or separatist leader who can legitimately be blamed (or claim credit) for the street protests. Finally, this rage of the young is built on the larger and longer sense of Kashmiri victimhood, injustice and insecurity about their identity. Therefore, in addition to long-term political prescriptions, three immediate initiatives need to be taken.

One, it is vital to end this cycle of protest-violence-protest. Surely, in the 21st century it should be possible to control protesters, armed only with stones, without having to kill young men and women. It’s not surprising that the average Kashmiri finds it disturbing that while Kashmiri protests lead to deaths, protests during the Bharat bandh, for instance, lead to no such violence. Zero-tolerance of human rights abuse can’t remain a slogan; it must be translated into reality with immediate effect.

Two, it is vital to engage these young men and women or at least sections of them. This has to be done not just by the government alone, but in partnership with civil society. The state government must also bring all the stakeholders together, including parties in opposition. In addition, there are men and women of unimpeachable integrity who can be called upon to form a Council of Elders who can work with Mohalla and Village elders and the imams of local masjids to restore peace. G.Q. Allaqaband, Nighat Shafi, Girija Dhar and Agha Ashraf Ali are some of the eminent individuals who immediately come to mind.

Three, Kashmir has, of course, been flooded by schemes and packages, but this is the time and place for one more scheme. The prime minster must announce a new Youth Empowerment Scheme (YES) for Jammu and Kashmir, which would, in partnership and consultation with the state government, seek to ensure that every Kashmiri young man and woman will be provided the opportunities that ensure that s/he becomes an empowered stakeholder in the future of the state. YES should make interventions wherever needed to provide access to the best quality of training, coaching, counselling and guidance available in the country. And YES should do everything necessary to ensure that every Kashmiri young person can be secure of his/her future.

Let us also realise that the understanding of Kashmir, despite all these years of problems, remains shallow in the corridors of power. When Kashmiris, who took to the streets in a similar uprising in 2008 over the Amarnath land controversy, turned out in even larger numbers to vote in the state elections last year, this was mistakenly seen as evidence of Kashmiri fickleness. It was a mistake to view the elections as signaling a return to ‘business as usual’ in the politics of the state and as obviating the need for a special and more imaginative approach. The triumph of democracy shouldn’t have been a moment of triumphalism.

In fact, by acting in a statesmanlike fashion on a variety of issues, New Delhi would have demonstrated a willingness to reward participation in the democratic process and not be seen as capitulating to extra-constitutional pressure. This unique opportunity was missed. But all is still not lost. Much, as has been indicated, can be done unilaterally and immediately to respond to the deep yearning of the young people of the state for security in all its dimensions: that is freedom from fear in the physical, political, economic and cultural spheres.

(Source: Hindustan Times)