Opinion - Editorials

A GOOD START

THE FIRST MEETING between the Deputy Prime Minister, L.K. Advani, and leaders of the All Parties Hurriyat Conference was designed to kickstart the process of dialogue rather than make substantive progress in the search for a solution to the Kashmir problem. Therefore, the success of the meeting is better assessed by the overall mood and ambience that prevailed rather than by examining the fine print of the official statement released after the discussions. From all accounts, the meeting took place in an atmosphere of considerable — even surprising — warmth and cordiality. But such a good beginning is the easiest part of a dialogue process that will have to tackle a range of thorny issues once it gets down to substantive business in late March. How the completely disparate positions held by the Centre and this separatist amalgam on the Kashmir issue can be reconciled is not clear. But given this yawning gulf, the dialogue structure that has been agreed upon — one that proceeds "step-by-step" — is possibly the only way forward.

What are the next steps in this incremental process? The Centre has promised to conduct a "rapid review" of the cases of detenus lodged in the prisons of Jammu and Kashmir as well as to step up the investigations of cases where there are alleged human rights violations by the security forces. These assurances need to be fulfilled quickly since the Hurriyat leadership is bound to want some concrete concessions — something it can hold up as a success to its political constituency — before it returns to the discussion table. There is considerable speculation that the Centre may declare a `ceasefire' — that is, refrain from initiating combat operations against Kashmiri militants — to coincide with Id next month. The relative lull in militant activity, the process of re-engagement with Pakistan and the recent successes of the security forces against the Hizb-ul-Mujahideen could well persuade the Centre to experiment with a second `ceasefire', the first having been declared three years ago with far from positive results.

For its part, the APHC leadership has not made a sticking point of its demand that it be allowed to travel to Pakistan to talk to the militant leaders there. While the issue was raised during the talks, the APHC refrained from making this a pre-condition for taking the dialogue further, apparently satisfied with the promise that the demand would be considered at the appropriate time. The Hurriyat leadership has also endorsed the idea, to quote from the official statement, that the "dialogue process" should be enlarged "to cover all regions of Jammu and Kashmir and all communities". In this context, enlargement refers to the inclusion of the Hindus, particularly the displaced Kashmiri Pandit community, but the Centre should also be thinking of ways to engage, or more correctly re-engage, the Hizb-ul-Mujahideen in some kind of a dialogue in its search for a "durable solution" to the Kashmir issue. A slew of factors, including the fear of being marginalised and Islamabad's decision to support the rival APHC led by Islamist hardliners, are behind the Hurriyat's decision to talk to the Centre. It was only in May last year that the then Chairman of the APHC, Abdul Ghani Bhat, rejected Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's offer of talks by quipping: "Why indulge in fishing in a desert?" On Friday, the present Chairman, Maulvi Abbas Ansari, said he could not wait to meet Mr. Vajpayee, whom he described as "an apostle of peace". Surely, if nothing else, this signals a radical change in attitude.

© Copyright 2000 - 2009 The Hindu