The Hindu : THE SECOND ROUND

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Apr 02, 2004

Opinion

Opinion - Editorials

THE SECOND ROUND

ONE ACADEMIC DEFINITION of war is a conflict that claims over 1,000 battlefield fatalities a year. According to Union Ministry of Home Affairs data, 2,711 people were killed in violence in Jammu and Kashmir in 2003 — a figure that illustrates in stark relief just why the peace process in the State must succeed. Although little of substance may seem to have emerged from the second round of dialogue between the Maulvi Abbas Ansari-led centrist faction of the All Parties Hurriyat Conference and Union Home Minister L.K. Advani, the real gain is that it took place at all. Almost derailed by the furore following the killing of five Bandipora residents put in harm's way by the Indian Army and by factional feuds within the APHC, the peace process has passed its first serious test. In the coming weeks, the Home Ministry may meet some of the APHC centrists' demands, including limited prisoner releases, while the secessionists may in turn not call on voters to boycott the Lok Sabha elections. The next round of dialogue is scheduled to address more substantive issues. There are reasons for hope - and, equally, reasons for caution.

Both parties to the ongoing dialogue have good reason to push ahead with it. Many in New Delhi believe that Pakistan will, in the coming months, demand significant concessions from India in return for the recent de-escalation of its sub-conventional warfare against India. Given that the United States has, for a variety of political and strategic reasons, chosen to throw its weight behind Pakistan, it seems possible that intense diplomatic pressure to pay Islamabad an unacceptable price could be brought on New Delhi in the not-too-distant future. India's best chance to resist such pressure is to have a vibrant domestic peace process in place. The APHC centrists, in turn, are threatened by marginalisation. Mainstream political parties like the People's Democratic Party and the National Conference have appropriated much of their traditional agenda, notably human rights issues and questions of ethnic-Kashmiri identity. On the other hand, the Islamist faction of Syed Ali Shah Geelani has robbed the APHC of its position as the sole representative of secessionist opinion in Jammu and Kashmir. If the APHC centrists are to survive, they desperately need a deal that allows them to show they can deliver what mainstream parties cannot — although just what this might be is still far from clear.

It is important to remember, though, that any number of events could occur in the coming months with the potential to derail the ongoing talks. Violence, for one, could escalate to unacceptable levels in the course of this summer. The available data suggest that, despite the India-Pakistan bonhomie, levels of violence so far in 2004 are only marginally lower than in recent years, and some within the Indian security establishment fear that the recent concessions made by the U.S. to Pakistan will be interpreted in that country as an opportunity to increase cross-border infiltration. Secondly, while efforts are being made to minimise human rights violations in military action, it is unlikely they will reach zero given ground realities. Such incidents can make it difficult for the APHC centrists to continue engaging the Indian Government in dialogue. Thirdly, the assassination of leaders or crisis-inducing terrorist attacks are always a possibility in Jammu and Kashmir. For the dialogue to succeed, both New Delhi and the APHC centrists must understand that dialogue is a process, and does not guarantee outcomes. The success of the peace process will depend on the faith of participants in the process even when the outcomes do not seem fruitful.

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

Opinion

News Update

Stories in this Section

A TEST OF CHARACTER

THE SECOND ROUND

Election without discipline

Towards export-oriented growth

Beware of negative ads