ISLAMABAD: When the India-Pakistan peace dialogue resumes following the Havana agreement, Pakistan will expect it to yield results on substantive issues, most importantly on the issue of Kashmir, said analysts and observers here.

Quoting diplomatic sources, the official Associated Press of Pakistan reported from New York, where President Pervez Musharraf went after Havana, that the Foreign Secretaries would meet to review the third round of the composite dialogue process that ended in June, as early as next month. The meeting was to have taken place in July but India postponed it in the wake of the July 11 Mumbai blasts.

A good thing

"It is a good thing if the Indian leadership has also realised that dialogue is necessary," said Shireen Mazari, head of the Institute of Strategic Studies, a think-tank of the Pakistan Foreign Ministry. "But there has to be some substantive movement on Kashmir. You cannot sustain the dialogue on atmospherics alone," she said.

The joint statement in Havana says the leaders "decided to continue the search for mutually acceptable options for a peaceful negotiated settlement of all issues between India and Pakistan, including the issue of Jammu and Kashmir, in a sincere and purposeful manner."

APP reported that in remarks to Pakistani journalists soon after arriving in New York, President Musharraf said the joint statement issued after talks was to the satisfaction of both sides.

"We agreed to narrow down the divergences and strengthen convergences. The road forward is the willingness to discuss and resolve the Jammu and Kashmir dispute," Gen. Musharraf said, adding that he and Dr. Singh did not discuss any specifics of a solution.

Tanvir Ahmed Khan, former Foreign Secretary who writes on strategic affairs, said it would be unwise to expect dramatic progress after the resumption of the dialogue. According to him, it would have to be "energised" by top-level political engagement, making extremely important a proposed visit by the Indian Prime Minister, an invitation for which was reiterated by Gen. Musharraf.

But, Mr. Khan said, a reference in the joint statement to finding a solution to the Kashmir issue and the mention that "useful discussions" on Kashmir had taken place, were positive signals.

The Havana agreement has its share of sceptics such as the influential Dawn columnist Ayaz Amir, who said to describe it as a breakthrough was "to stretch the resources of the English language."

"When you revive a meaningless process, where is the breakthrough? The main thing is to inject meaning into the process," he said.

The joint mechanism to combat terror that the two sides have agreed to set up would be seen in Pakistan "when the Pakistani press wakes up to it" as another concession by President Musharraf to Indian concerns, he added. "The Indian spin on terrorism is different from our take on terrorism."

But by and large, the agreement on the joint mechanism has raised the hope that dialogue between the two countries will no more be hostage to terror attacks.

"I think it's a good idea. We have lots of apprehensions and suspicions about India's role in Balochistan. And after what happened in Mumbai and Delhi, and then Malegoan, it is in the interests of both countries to have a joint mechanism in which we can bring up our concerns, instead of raising them through the media, which is what India has been doing," said Ms. Mazari.

Mr. Khan said the proposed joint mechanism was important as the two countries had to move forward on cooperative security.

"If there were external links to [the bomb attacks in] Delhi and Mumbai, the underlying motive was to derail the peace process. That by itself should bring Pakistan and India together on combating terrorism."

He acknowledged that under the joint mechanism India could push for extradition of suspects that it alleged were in Pakistan, but it would have to be part of a "gradually broadening cooperation".

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