The Hindu : Sinha takes the stage

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Monday, Aug 26, 2002

Opinion

Opinion - Leader Page Articles

Sinha takes the stage

By K.K. Katyal

To refer to the new style of the new Foreign Minister is not to suggest a sudden easing of tension with Pakistan but to draw attention to the possible opening of a tiny window.

THE STYLE of the new External Affairs Minister, Yashwant Sinha, has revealed itself sooner than one would have expected — and in areas that are of crucial importance to India. In two cases — dealings with Pakistan and with the rest of the neighbourhood — there is a welcome departure from the past, giving rise to hopes that substantive steps in the new direction may be taken soon. The approach to the relationship with the U.S. will continue to be positive, aimed at building upon the positive orientation given by the Bush administration — but with stress on mutuality and on a healthy balance.

It is fashionable for the political heads and senior officials of the External Affairs Ministry to declare from time to time that India's foreign policy would not be Pakistan-centric. That is unexceptionable. In practice, however, they find it hard to reduce their occupation with this issue even by a fraction. For good or for bad, we would be stuck with the Pakistan problem for quite some time and, as such, it remains a top priority. Mr. Sinha's handling will, therefore, be watched with considerable interest.

So deep had been the freeze in the ties between New Delhi and Islamabad that a mere hand-shake by the heads of their foreign policy establishments, Mr. Sinha and Pakistan's Minister of State, Inam-ul-Haq, last week in Kathmandu set cameras clicking briskly — and the event became major news. Think of the previous two encounters, at the summit level first in Kathmandu in January and later in Almaty and the significance of the handshake, and of the formal words uttered on the occasion will be clear. In January, the Pakistan President, Pervez Musharraf, imparted a theatrical touch to bilateral dealings when, at the plenary of the SAARC leaders, he walked up to the Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee, to demonstrably shake hands and to repeat his offer of a dialogue (at any place, any time) to resolve bilateral issues. India regarded it as an act of gimmickry while the reaction of others in South Asia was mixed — some thought it was a cheap act while others seemed impressed. The fact that bilateral relations remained deadlocked since then confirmed the hollowness of the General's gesture. In Almaty, the two heads, attending a multilateral conference devoted to the affairs of the extended region, took care to avoid even eye contact. The India-Pakistan problem did figure on the sidelines of the conference. But, given the attitude of their top leaders, a forward movement was out of the question. Last week's hand-shake may well be a prelude to a less unhappy phase in the bilateral field. Mr. Sinha set the right note when he said, "civility is a sign of culture and there is no reason to depart from it". Sadly, this civility had been missing in the past with results that are far too clear.

There were no talks between India and Pakistan last week on the occasion of the SAARC ministerial meeting. The association's forum, in any case, was not meant to be used for discussing bilateral matters — in terms of its charter. There were no substantive exchanges, even outside the conference — such contacts were not intended nor were there any preparations. But the informal utterances of Mr. Sinha and Mr. Haq virtually added up to talks about talks. For instance, when Mr. Haq said his Government was examining the situation in the wake of New Delhi's action to lift the embargo on the flights of Pakistani planes over Indian territory and expressed his Government's readiness for the exchange of High Commissioners, he may well have set the agenda for a round of preliminary bilateral contacts. For some inexplicable reason, Pakistan chose not to respond to the two gestures. On the contrary, it dismissed the Indian move on flights as of no consequence, intended to bail New Delhi out of a difficult situation — a larger number of Indian planes, it was stated, had to make detours because of the corresponding Pakistani ban than the Pakistani flights affected by New Delhi's action. It was forgotten that Indian planes had to make much smaller diversions as against the Pakistani planes which had to avoid the entire Indian land mass. This apart, the Indian gesture needed to be reciprocated — not spurned — in the interest of the wider objective of restoring amity between the two countries. Mr. Haq's reference to the subject seemed promising.

The same was the case with his reaction to the Indian proposal for joint patrolling of the Line of Control. When first mooted by Mr. Vajpayee, it was rejected out of hand. But now, while sticking to his preference for a neutral mechanism, Mr. Haq indicated Pakistan's willingness to consider the Indian suggestion, of course, with a caveat — "when mutual confidence was restored". Quite a change. Statements of India and Pakistan on infiltration, though sharply conflicting, could be reconciled with some effort.

As seen by New Delhi, the flow of militancy continues till this day, though there have been fluctuations from time to time. At one stage, India found a marked decline only to see a sudden subsequent spurt. India wanted Pakistan to concede the inherent difficulties in fully controlling the infiltration — and, perhaps its inability to do so. Such an approach aroused resistance from the other side.

Instead of each side raising some inconvenient point or the other, ways could be evolved or instrumentalities devised to deal with the situation. Not long ago, Pakistanis used to make fun of New Delhi's talk of continued infiltration. "With a massive build-up on the LoC, even a bird can't cross" — that used to be Islamabad's reaction to India's complaint. It is wiser now.

Mr. Sinha did well in dispelling the impression created by official utterances that Mr. Vajpayee may not make it to Islamabad for next year's SAARC summit. In the first place, it was inappropriate to strike such a negative note months before the event. This could seal, in advance, the fact of initiatives that may be taken between now and January-February next year. Particularly significant was Mr. Sinha's formulation against mixing the SAARC and India-Pakistan problems. Unfortunately, the two get intertwined because of India's policy after the military coup in Pakistan. For long, New Delhi did not want the SAARC summit to be convened because of its opposition to the presence of a "usurper" among the heads. Late last year that stand was reversed. Barring this interlude, New Delhi had firmly stuck to its opposition to importing bilateral wrangles in the SAARC forum. Actually, it was Pakistan which wanted Kashmir and related matters to be taken up by the regional heads — and was supported by some others.

To refer to the new style of the new Foreign Minister is not to suggest a sudden easing of tension with Pakistan but to draw attention to the possible opening of a tiny window that could be used constructively. The change of style does not mean the change of the substantive portion which is decided upon by the Government as a whole. Then, it takes two to tango and whether there is a similar change in Islamabad, from Abdul Sattar to Mr. Haq is a material factor.

As for the U.S., Mr. Sinha's absence from New Delhi during the latest visit of the U.S. Deputy Secretary of State, Richard Armitage, speaks for itself. Could one have imagined the former External Affairs Minister, Jaswant Singh, to be out of the Capital during the stay here of Strobe Talbott, Mr. Armitage's predecessor?

There will be no change in India's stand in building a strategic partnership with the U.S. But Mr. Sinha may not go overboard as was the case with Mr. Singh — for instance, in endorsing the controversial U.S. move on missile defence or in unilaterally offering India's facilities after 9/11. There may be greater stress on reciprocity — on understanding Indian concerns in the three-way diplomacy, involving Pakistan and of India's defensive requirements.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

Stories in this Section

Critical issues

A complete dictatorial dispensation

Sinha takes the stage

Corporate fraud

Reputation on the line

Too little, too late, Mr. Vajpayee