J&K ceasefire extended by another month

By Harish Khare

NEW DELHI, JAN. 23. Displaying boldness and self-assurance, India today decided to extend by another month the ceasefire in Jammu and Kashmir, despite the militant groups' unrelenting resort to violence and terrorism. The rationale for the decision is stated to be the belief that ``violence must be ended and peace, which has been welcomed by the people of Jammu and Kashmir, be given every chance.''

The primary consideration - and expectation - within the Government is that Pakistan would respond positively and constructively, and would rein in various militant groups. The Prime Minister, Mr. Atal Behari Vajpayee, said, ``it is now the responsibility of Pakistan to see to it that terrorists acts in Jammu and Kashmir are stopped and there is an end to the killings of the innocent people.''

The decision to extend the ceasefire was taken at a formal meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Security. Besides Mr. Vajpayee, who presided, the meeting was attended by the Home Minister, Mr. L. K. Advani, the Defence Minister, Mr. George Fernandes, the External Affairs Minister, Mr. Jaswant Singh, the Finance Minister, Mr. Yashwant Sinha, the Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission, Mr. K. C. Pant, the Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister, Mr. Brajesh Mishra, the Chief of the Army Staff, Gen. S. Padmanabhan, and other senior officials. The views of Dr. Farooq Abdullah were also inputs in the final decision.

Consensus decision

It was a difficult decision for the CCS to take, given the recent stepped-up terrorists attacks, which in turn generated a negative political reaction. Though the consensus was in favour of a second extension of the ceasefire (first announced on November 19, and later extended for a month till the Republic Day), there was a difference in perspectives. One view was that the Government should bluntly state what it expected from Pakistan. However, the final formulation stopped short of positing a linkage. It is believed that Mr. Singh and Mr. Mishra were the principal advocates of the extension, while Mr. Fernandes, Mr. Advani and Mr. Pant did not press their point of view.

The statement merely noted that ``it is regrettable that Pakistan has not recognised the demand of time for peace and continues to promote, encourage and abet cross-border terrorism. This must cease and the activities of organisations such as the Lashkar-e- Taiba and the Jaish-e-Mohammad must be curbed and controlled by Pakistan.''

Later in the evening, the Prime Minister reiterated that India was prepared for talks with Pakistan ``as quickly as possible'', but he pointed out that ``for the success of the talks a conducive atmosphere has to be first created. There is no use having talks even as violence continues.''

Briefing reporters after the meeting, Mr. Singh articulated the Government's judgment that Pakistan's military regime remained fully in control of the militant groups and, therefore, the onus was on Islamabad to control these outfits. ``We do not buy Pakistan's argument that it has no control over these groups. They are controlled and directed by Pakistan.''

Kashmiris convinced

The argument that tilted the scale in favour of extending the ceasefire was the view that the Prime Minister's peace initiative did make an impact on the State's people, who were reasonably convinced of the Vajpayee government's desire for peace. It was noted, for example, that the militant groups were now targeting civilians and civilian casualties had gone up considerably, and this was bound to make the people in the Kashmir Valley realise the militants' lack of interest in peace. It was also noted that the international community had appreciated India's willingness to give peace a chance, and that the new administration in Washington would get enough time to lend a helping hand.

The calculation now is that the military regime would be constrained to reconsider its ``play tough'' stance. The officials are happy with the initial response from the Valley to the Government's decision.

Hizb, Lashkar reject ceasefire

The Hizb-ul-Mujahideen and the Lashkar-e-Taiba, which have claimed responsibility for a majority of incidents in the ceasefire period, alleged that India's announcement was meant to ``mislead'' the international community and divert attention from ``its failure to suppress the Kashmir movement.''

The Hizb spokesman, Mr. Salim Hashmi, said the ceasefire had changed nothing on the ground for the people of Kashmir and the military and para-military forces were continuing their search and seize operations.

If India was sincere in resolving the Kashmir issue it should accept the three conditions laid down by his outfit; end `atrocities' against the people of Kashmir, concede Kashmir as a disputed territory and agree for a tripartite dialogue.

Mr. Hashmi alleged that the Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister, Dr. Farooq Abdullah, had given orders to the State police to shoot those opposed to the Indian `occupation' as there was no space in the jails.``What is the big deal about the ceasefire when you have the head of the State talking on these lines?''

The Lashkar chief, Prof. Hafez Mohammad Saeed, dubbed the ceasefire a `fraud and deception' and said if India was sincere in finding a solution to the conflict, it should recall its forces from the Valley.

``Since Indian atrocities have continued unabated, we declare that we reject the latest Indian offer and will carry on attacks on military targets and personnel. India must quit Kashmir, otherwise it will be exposed to disintegration.''

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Front Page
Next     : Security girdle for Punjab