Ambassador Sherry Rehman of Pakistan
has averred that Pakistan
needs ‘strategic space’ , sympathy and not calls to do more. She made these
assertions at a 50 member caucus in the United States House of Representatives.
She, according the Dawn newspaper, said that ‘there was a clear strategic shift
in Pakistan’s
calculus in the region with proactive diplomatic engagement on both sides of
the border as well as with all other regional countries’. Ambassador Rehman
also emphasized Pakistan’s
reorientation towards economic opportunities in the region and attempts to
maximize the country’s trade and investment opportunities focus on stability in
the region.
These assertions and
statements come in the wake of the Indian Foreign Minister, S.M Krishna’s visit
to Pakistan,
the successful conclusion of the same and the relaxation of visa and investment
rules. Concomitantly, Pakistan’s
domestic politics is also undergoing a bit of a churn. Imran Khan-the celebrity
cricketer turned politician- is pulling and drawing crowds and he may occupy
Pakistan’s highest office in due course of time, shunting and marginalizing the
well known traditional political players.(Imran at this point in time , however, is not doing
well in polls). The logical inference to draw from these developments and
statements is that the Pakistani state is undergoing a review. Instead of being
a ‘spoiler state’ in the region and beyond, the country appears to be embarking
on a bold and beautiful path-that of peace, prosperity, positive engagement and
development. The approach adopted by Pakistan
is a cautious and gradualist one. It is not easy to wind or roll back
ideologies and institutions that have become entrenched and path dependent over
time.
All there are positive
developments and bode well for peace of the subcontinent and perhaps even the
world at large. Pakistan,
at peace with itself and the world, can only be a positive and a good thing.
However, the question is where this leave does Kashmir
and the Kashmiris-the real sticking point and bone of contention between the
two nuclear armed neighbors? Should Kashmiris accept the unfurling amity,
cordial and normal relations between India
and Pakistan?
Should they continue to resist? Or should there be a realignment of the
strategy and bring the strategy in like with regional and global political
developments? What implications would this realignment have on both mainstream
and separatist politics?
The natural and logical
consequence of improved relations and bonhomie between India
on Kashmir is that the dispute over Kashmir
will gradually whittle away as the core sticking point between the two
countries. This is both a good and a bad development. Good because it
potentially means the resolution of a complex dispute that has defied
resolution for six decades or so. And it accords both countries to focus on
more pressing and urgent concerns and priorities. It is bad because core grouse
of Kashmiris-the ability to decide for themselves their future-remains
unaddressed. This is potentially alarming because this means that the
psychological dimension of the dispute remains and Kashmiris , by omission,
cannot obtain closure. This , in turn means, that Kashmir
will remain on the boil and can potentially erupt again. The question is how
can this possibility and scenario be pre empted?
There are no easy answers to
this question. However, the watch word should be prudence by/on part of all
stakeholders to the dispute- Kashmiris, India
and Pakistan.
What does this mean specifically? This has different implications for each
stakeholder. For India,
this means reaching out to Kashmiris in an idiom informed by sincerity and
magnanimity in accord with its emerging power status. For Pakistan,
it means getting rid of the ideological baggage that informs its foreign
policy. This has two prongs: first, forging a new consensus over the nature of Pakistan
amongst its elite and, second, educating its society about the nature of the
naya(new) Pakistan
and the perils of continuing on the same ,old path. Most important, and for the
most pivotal and significant stakeholder- Kashmiris- prudence means review and
introspection and eking out room and space for maneuver in the new or the
emerging political equations. This has implications for both the mainstream and
separatist spectrum of Kashmir’s
politics. The essence of this should be to eke out honorable space for Kashmir
and Kashmiri’s in the interstices of the emerging configurations.
This rather broad and vague
prescription may mean forging a consensus over the political future of Kashmir
and crafting a strategy that factors in the new developments and the thrust of
international politics. This could then be presented to both powers that be in India
and Pakistan
for serious consideration. This may satisfy Kashmiris’ need for inclusion in
the rapprochement between India
and Pakistan
and above all accord them voice in an issue that has a direct bearing on their
future. It is to this that the political leadership of Kashmir-mainstream and
separatist-should devote themselves to. Protesting against the rapprochement,
or staying silent over it because of structural factors, or just latching onto
it is not helpful to either Kashmir
or the politics of the subcontinent. Proactive politics is the need of hour. It
is about time that all sections and strata of Kashmir’s
politics gird their loins and focus their energies on endeavors that have a
chance of success.
No comments:
Post a Comment