The Hindu : De-escalation: when and how?

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Monday, Feb 18, 2002

Opinion

Opinion - News Analysis

De-escalation: when and how?
By K.K. Katyal

Those who had thought that the diplomatic and military steps taken by India after the December 13 attack on Parliament House were primarily prompted by political factors related to Assembly elections will have to revise their opinion if the de-escalation does not begin after the end of polling. The drive against terrorism figured but marginally in the election rhetoric, dominated as it was by caste, communal and local issues. The Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee, and others of the BJP did focus on the Government's resolve to fight terrorism. But that was about all.

Maintaining that the de-escalation was linked to improvement in the ground reality in Jammu and Kashmir and perceptible movement with regard to the list of 20 terrorists given by New Delhi to Islamabad, highly-placed sources specified the manner in which the process could forge ahead. As for the list, India, it is pointed out, would respond positively, if Pakistan initiated talks for the deportation of the 14 Indians out of the 20. Though there would be no change in New Delhi's stand on the remaining six, the Pakistani nationals (who Islamabad insists are to be governed by the Pakistan law), it would not make an issue of it for the process of de-escalation.

Pakistani action on the 14 would pave for the reversal of the diplomatic and non-military steps taken by India - leading to the despatch of the Indian High Commissioner to Islamabad (of course, Vijay Nambiar, who was recalled, would not go back because of his new assignment, announced long ago, but a new appointee, Harsh Bhasin, would be sent). It could also lead to the resumption of the Samjhauta Express and the bus service between New Delhi and Lahore and the end of the embargo on the flights of Pakistan planes over the Indian territory.

For the reversal of the build-up on the border (and movement of the Indian forces back to peace-time locations) New Delhi will wait for a marked decline in infiltration and in cross-border terrorism. As seen by New Delhi, it is not difficult to ascertain the progress in this regard - the comparative analysis of the incidents now and the corresponding period last year could be one criterion, action by the Pakistani authorities, in pursuance of their President, Pervez Musharraf's package of January 12 could be another, and interaction between the Directors General of Military Operations could be the third one.

The statements of world leaders, notably from the U.S., Russia, France and the U.K., have been carefully scrutinised by the Prime Minister's Office and the External Affairs Ministry. While the emphasis on the urgency for de- escalation and resumption of dialogue has been noted, highly- placed sources also find support for the Indian emphasis on translation into reality of Gen. Musharraf's anti-terrorism package. For instance, the U.S. Secretary of State, Colin Powell, in his testimony before a Senate committee on February 5, while praising Gen. Musharraf for showing ``great courage and foresight in sending such a decisive message to his country, and by extension, the Islamic world at large'', was categorical that ``now he (the General) must show equal courage in implementing his concepts in Pakistan''.

Of course, New Delhi could not but take into account the other points made by Mr. Powell. Like this one, for instance: ``Both New Delhi and Islamabad have indicated that they want to avoid war, that they are desirous of resolving the stand-off through political and diplomatic means. Now as we are seeing and as we are hoping, events seem to be moving in that end. We will continue monitoring the situation, urging restraint and dialogue and helping where and when we can''.

Some of the U.S. formulations, during the recent meeting of Gen. Musharraf with the U.S. President, George W. Bush, too, have not gone unnoticed here. For instance, the two leaders called for resolution of all outstanding issues between India and Pakistan ``including Kashmir'', a formulation not very different from India's plea for a composite dialogue. Then there was that reference by Mr. Bush to ``terrorists operating in Pakistan'', who kidnapped the American journalist, Daniel Pearl. While it did show Mr. Bush's gratitude to the General for his assistance and work on securing Mr. Pearl's release, it was clear that the U.S. was alive to the continued terrorist operations within Pakistan and counted on the government's action.

Presumably this subject was discussed at some length between the two leaders. Presumably, they also devoted some time on the widely-held belief that the bulk of the Taliban cadres were in tact and were in Pakistan - a matter of concern to the U.S. That is India's major worry too. How this shared concern (of India and U.S) is addressed by Washington and how Pakistan responds to American exhortations will be important. The U.S. has a stake in completing the unfinished part of the anti-terrorist drive. Any movement in that direction is certain to weigh with New Delhi in planning the de-escalation.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

Stories in this Section

Public-private partnership

A dictator on trial

The main task lies at home

Burgeoning ties with Israel

De-escalation: when and how?