Jammu and Kashmir is a virtual chessboard between the two nuclear powers. It symbolises a synchronized game of time control and calculated movements of pawns. The imbroglio has cost people their lives, aspirations, and sanity. In this war of supremacy of both the nations maintaining the status quo, a population is living on the edge with a fragile political atmosphere where there is no assurance of durability peace. However, the recent tilt-shift in New Delhi’s Kashmir policy is something that carries a bleak ray of hope provided it is dealt with honesty and a great deal of flexibility. A telephone conversation in cold of November 2003 between the two DGMOs that positively impacted the bruised psyche of the people of Jammu and Kashmir was a move ahead in ensuring the political health of Jammu and Kashmir. Followed by a sustained composite dialogue process, it bridged the gap between the people and leadership to some extent.
Today when Jammu and Kashmir is witnessing climacteric diplomatic relationships between the neighbors with a discontented civil population and surge in militant recruitments, the state ought to move in some direction, giving up its policy of status quo. So far a bundle of confidence-building measures including the recent pact between the DGMOs and previously Non-Initiation of Combat Operations – also called the Ramzan ceasefire, the appointment of an authorized representative for talks, amnesty to stone pelters, have failed to show their potency on the ground where the discontent is overgrowing.
Much ironically we were to see the longevity of the pact, less than four days. Historically, written ceasefire agreements endure longer than unwritten ones. That’s because the former carries an inbuilt mechanism to ensure compliance and even verification. Especially countries sharing contested boundaries that are engaged in protracted conflicts and territorial disputes need to document such development. Therefore to legitimize this pact between the two nations and to assure the Valley of lasting peace, this pact needs to be documented. Internally, to get the Valley back to normalcy, diplomatic initiatives need to be unleashed at multiple levels, followed by a composite dialogue between political leaders. The 2003 Ceasefire Agreement, which held a strong durability for almost five years, had its foundations in a composite dialogue process between India and Pakistan, in particular on the Kashmir issue. Therefore arguably, a political dialogue increases the durability of such CFAs also conversely, a breakdown in the dialogue, or even the absence of one, carries the propensity to trigger unrest, as witnessed daily on the streets of Kashmir.
As Pakistan will head toward general elections in August 2018 followed by the general elections in India in 2019, this can be an opportune time to initiate a political process backed with credibility for peace in J&K as national elections require political energy to be directed internally, and calm on the borders becomes a necessity. However, this cannot happen unless New Delhi shows flexibility in providing an honorable platform to all shades of opinion, including the Hurriyat to sit across the table. Other groups armed, unarmed also need to be recognized with a space for talks, so that root of this boldly visible disenchantment is addressed.
Tail Piece: Earlier we have seen the productivity of combination of Doval – Modi doctrine of iron fist response that led to holding back talks and delaying the political process, causing an irreparable loss to the dividends of trust already gained. The broader canvas of this Gordian Knot lies in the relations between India and Pakistan and dialogue alone is the gateway to that assurance. The cross L.o.C leadership meet, bilateral trade and commerce and also civil society exchanges can pave way for a broader understanding and can provide a vacuum to the youth who has been disillusioned due to the decade-long diplomatic stalemate and a timid polity.
(The author is a Srinagar based practicing lawyer)