Alert Sign Dear reader, online ads enable us to deliver the journalism you value. Please support us by taking a moment to turn off Adblock on

Alert Sign Dear reader, please upgrade to the latest version of IE to have a better reading experience


Promise of peace?


Your Name:

Recipient Email:

BY a tragic coincidence, President Zardari left for New Delhi just as a wave of grief over the horrific loss of life caused by a mighty avalanche in the army’s encampment in the dizzying heights of Siachen swept across Pakistan.

Zardari had conferred with Gen Kayani the evening before and, in an appropriate division of labour, the general headed for Skardu to take stock of the relief operation under way in the Gayari sub-sector while Zardari went on a journey that highlighted the imperative of peace with India.

The tragedy in Siachen was a reminder that confrontations between the two effectively stalemated South Asian neighbours have been futile. It is a pity that the Indian army blocks the implementation of the Rajiv Gandhi-Benazir Bhutto accord on disengagement in Siachen. By now, the need for deploying substantial forces in that snow-covered wasteland would have disappeared to mutual advantage.

It is probably academic whether President Zardari’s primary motivation came from the declared intention of prayers and thanksgiving at the shrine of Khawaja Moinuddin Chishti or from his perception that, for a whole range of reasons embedded in the state of bilateral relations as well as in his domestic political needs, a conversation with Manmohan Singh could not be delayed further. We know from the past international initiatives of our president that public and private concerns coexist and mingle effortlessly in his case.

In the history of ‘accidental’ summits between India and Pakistan, President Zardari might have done better than the erstwhile leaders of Pakistan. I accompanied Gen Ziaul Haq during his visit to India, undertaken to defuse the crisis on the borders created by Gen Sunderji’s massive Exercise Brass-tacks.

We watched cricket in the Jaipur stadium, went to the same hallowed dargah in Ajmer and, in between, experienced anguished uncertainty if a meeting with Rajiv Gandhi would at all materialise. It did and a revealing comparing of notes by the two leaders, of which I am the sole witness, helped reverse the momentum towards an armed conflict.

The meeting did not, however, open any new doors for enduring reconciliation. As unilateral gestures go, Gen Musharraf’s dash to the rostrum with an outstretched palm to shake the Indian prime minister by hand at a multilateral conference is mostly remembered for its amateurish nature. Zardari’s pilgrimage may produce better results.

Zardari chose Ajmer Sharif as the focal point of his visit to India, a city known for the inclusive magic of a hallowed shrine that is revered by followers of all religions and that permits saints and sinners alike to connect with its abiding spirituality.

One does not know what Manmohan Singh made of Zardari’s Sufi longings but he would not have turned his face away from the secular potential of his presence on the Indian soil.

He organised a warm welcome followed by a lunch in the style of the Great Mughals, even as millions literally starve in the two countries, spoke amiably of the exclusive meeting with the guest, accepted an invitation, for the nth time, to visit Pakistan and generally indulged the Pakistani president in his desire to introduce his own emerging dynasty to the Indian dynasty that created modern India, got interrupted occasionally and now seeks a renewal of its long rule across the bridge provided by his stint as prime minister under Sonia Gandhi’s oversight.

In Pakistan’s fractious political culture, opinions about the dynamics of Zardari’s approach to India will continue to differ. But his readiness to walk an extra mile to replace decades of hostility by an era of cooperation is sound and timely.

The Indian foreign secretary was quick on April 8 to reassure Indian hawks that Manmohan Singh had, indeed, raised the question of Hafiz Saeed; he also clarified that his prime minister would visit Pakistan at a “convenient” time, a formulation that deserves the riposte that problems of bilateral relations, the complexity of the regional situation, the uncertainties of the endgame in Afghanistan and the interplay of regional politics with that of global powers warrant that the Indian prime minister should make it convenient to continue the dialogue in Pakistan itself.

We have also been informed that, on his part, Zardari talked of Kashmir, Siachen and Sir Creek.

The part of the bilateral spectrum that can and may be lit up soon is represented by trade. There is by now a genuine possibility that it can be substantially built up without stoking fears of the exploitation of the vulnerabilities of either side, a consideration more applicable to Pakistan’s weaker economy than to India.

Pakistan can expand commerce and India can adjust its infamous non-tariff barriers with considerable assurance that the consequence would be mutually beneficial. It will probably be some time before Islamabad can convince New Delhi that it would be similarly advantageous to resolve more contentious issues and that, in the long run, the two countries should find a settlement in Jammu and Kashmir in close consultation with its long-suffering people.

President Zardari is usually too preoccupied with personal gain to be a political visionary. He has, however, taken an initiative that can energise the lacklustre process of normalisation of relations between Pakistan and India. Paradoxical as it may seem, he is today in a better position to deliver than Manmohan Singh.

The conversation held on April 8 would have better traction if the two leaders make it easier for the other side to move forward. Pakistan has yet to overcome the dark forces of terror that have claimed 35,000 Pakistani lives; this fact of the Pakistani situation warrants that India should not feel threatened from the Pakistani soil.

Building peace with neighbours is not a game; it is an undeniable demand of our times. If the interlocutors of April 8 dedicate themselves to this task, they would find the saint of Ajmer Sharif on their side. An accidental summit may become an important milestone in the quest for peace and progress in our blighted region.

The writer is a former foreign secretary.

The views expressed by this writer and commenters below do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Dawn Media Group.

Comments (7) Closed

shankar Apr 10, 2012 05:28pm
Our prayers for the souls of the departed brave soldiers. But the reality is that there is so much mistrust in India about Pakistan's intentions that any sensible reconcialation will take a long time. Unfortunately for us new wounds are opened up by vested interests before old wounds get time to heal.
Anuj Apr 10, 2012 02:35pm
It was a very nice article written by what we suppose, is a "player" who was close to the game, as he himself states by name dropping. Interesting and insightful. The only issue I have , however, is that the writer's erudity masks a clear finger being pointed at the other side as being the obdurate one, with no reference to the issues that the neighbour may differently feel. Diplomacy may have been the writer's job; doesn't seem however he understood the requirements behind the job - of seeing things :in balance", perhaps?
NASAH (USA) Apr 10, 2012 03:08pm
I wholeheartedly agree with the former foreign secretary of Pakistan that despite very tragic circumstances, there could not be a better time to discuss with the Indians - Siachin the merciless torturer and killer of hapless soldiers on both sides. Why the two countries are engaged in a meaningless fight -- not with each other -- but the brutal nature at 22 thousand feet up in the mountains -- and dying like flies -- buried under the unforgiving avalanches -- as if not enough leveled plains are available for their war insanities. It is high time that some humanity with lots of common sense prevailed between Delhi and Islamabad in declaring Siachin as a no man's 'land' -- which in reality it is -- no place for a man or woman -- it is a killer mountain with no patriotic conscience -- equally brutal to both friend or foe. It is time both countries came DOWN from that insanely murderous utterly useless pedestal.
G.a Apr 11, 2012 01:46am
@Shankar - I assure you the feeling is mutual.
Virat Apr 11, 2012 06:56am
The Siachen issue can be resolved within half an hour. All Pakistan has to do is authenticate AGPL and give up its claim to Siachen. Indian soldiers will be down from their positions in a heartbeat. Its that easy. Any takers from our partners in Peace
Sajjad May 22, 2012 07:08am
Sorry that is one sided and only reiterates your Indian postition, grabingn as much as you can. Peace will not come to the subcontinent without mutual trust and resolution of all outstanding issues. On Pakistan's part it will have to throw away the fanatic sword of Islam and accept Hinduism as a great religion and the fact that it is the religion of our forefathers, along with Buddhism and also respect the minority Hindus and Sikhs in the country with fullest citizen rights. Then peace will come and prevail.
indian May 23, 2012 06:19am
What is this....