Back
National
End of road for Indo-Pak. dialogue?
By Amit Baruah
Bilateralism, the much-touted public principle that India has long propounded, is almost dead given that there are no high-level communicators or messengers left in New Delhi or Islamabad. Willy-nilly, India has created a situation where there is no scope for a bilateral dialogue.
The Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee, and the Pakistan President, Pervez Musharraf, may be present in Kuala Lumpur for the Non-Aligned Movement summit later this month, but no meeting seems to be in sight.
In December 2001, India recalled its High Commissioner, shut down all transport links (air services, the Samjhauta Express and the Delhi-Lahore bus), reduced staff in the respective High Commissions by 50 per cent and mobilised its troops in response to the attack on Parliament.
In May 2002, India asked Pakistan to withdraw its High Commissioner, Ashraf Jehangir Qazi, after the Kaluchak massacre, making it clear that Pakistan was not doing enough to combat cross-border terrorism. In October 2002, India and Pakistan pulled back their troops from their borders, and it looked as if the High Commissioners may be back in place in New Delhi and Islamabad. But, in January, India and Pakistan expelled Counsellor-level officers and then came yesterday's action when Jalil Abbas Jilani and Sudhir Vyas were sent packing.
All the bilateral instruments put in place between India and Pakistan — the Shimla Agreement and the Lahore resolution — are in grave danger of being rendered ineffective if New Delhi insists on going down the path it has chosen. Next time there is a crisis — and there is a good possibility of that happening given the tense relationship between the two countries — no senior diplomats will be available to play any kind of fire-fighting role.
Terrorism cannot be condoned, but India closing down the possibility of diplomatic contact with Pakistan is a dangerous development. The hard-line approach adopted since the December 2001 Parliament attack has not yielded anything tangible to New Delhi.
And, what about the other job that diplomats perform? Of sending informed assessments of important developments in their country of accreditation back home?
In a country like Pakistan, where information and access is limited, seasoned diplomats play an important role in sending inputs on the basis of which policy decisions are made. For the assessments to be informed, debate and discussion among diplomatic officers on the ground is essential. This facility is no longer available to New Delhi. Here, it may be stressed that, at the best of times, India's information on Pakistan and its policies is relatively poor. India is ensuring that third parties such as the United States will have a prominent role to play the next time a crisis breaks out with Pakistan.
The days when countries could bottle up their crises and reject outside intervention are over — the sooner India realises that, the better.
If New Delhi is serious about not down-grading its diplomatic relations with Pakistan further, as officially announced yesterday, then a visa must be immediately and unilaterally issued to Islamabad's Munawar Saeed Bhatty, who Pakistan wants in the place of Mr. Jilani. India must send out the signal that it is not waiting for T.C.A. Raghavan to be given a visa to replace Mr. Vyas in Islamabad if the announcement is to have any meaning.
The words used by the Foreign Office spokesman bear repetition: "It was also conveyed that the Government of India did not intend any down-gradation in the level of representation of the CDA and would be ready to give a visa at the earliest to his replacement.''
According to New Delhi, Mr. Jilani was expelled because his activities were "not in keeping with his diplomatic status." That, however, should not stand in the way of the next man being given a visa.
© Copyright 2000 - 2009 The Hindu