Nov 16, 1998
|
|
|
|
INDO-PAK TALKS All talk No Action Even after 50 years of negotiations the two neighbours aren't close to resolving their disputes as major issues like Kashmir and terrorist activity mar any progress. By Manoj Joshi
In 1992, the two nations actually arrived at an understanding to implement their 1989 agreement to resolve the vexed Siachen dispute by withdrawing their forces to mutually agreed locations away from the glacier. A joint mechanism to verify the agreement was on the cards. For two years officers from the armed forces of both sides conducted intense negotiations, but it all came to nought. Last week, when delegations from India and Pakistan met in Delhi, they seemed to have forgotten the past agreement and began negotiations afresh. In October 1992, after three days of talks in Islamabad between the water resources secretaries of the two countries, the Indian delegation led by M.A. Chitale was able to overcome all the objections of its Pakistani counterpart. "We had come to an agreement that the project was feasible and all that remained was the ironing out of the details," reminisces Chitale, who is now chairman of the non-governmental South Asia Technical Advisory Committee for Global Water Partnership headquartered in Aurangabad. However, on the last day when the time came to sign on the dotted line, the Pakistanis backed out saying that more political discussions were needed. Last week, too, according to India's Water Resources Secretary Z. Hassan, Pakistan's "political constraints" seemed to have prevailed over technical issues. The agenda for the November 9 talks included the more intractable Sir Creek problem. At the western extremity of the Rann of Kutch this stream flows through a swamp to the sea and has changed its course several times. India's long-standing proposal is that the dividing line be along "the centre of the navigable channel". This follows international law and is in consonance with the 1914 decision of the commissioner of Sind. Pakistan, which bases its case on the map that accompanied the decision, says that the dispute could be settled by marking the terminal point of the creek at the sea first and then moving inland following the centre of the channel. Since the creek ends in the sea, the maritime boundary remains to be worked out as well. One negative fallout of this has been the periodic arrest of scores of straying Indian and Pakistani fishermen by the authorities on both sides. Later in the week, officials of the two countries will talk on ways to counter terrorism and drug trafficking. Surprisingly, and somewhat paradoxically, India and Pakistan do manage some cooperation in countering narcotics smuggling. But on terrorism they are at daggers drawn. India has long felt the lash of Pakistan-supported terrorist activity, first in Punjab and Kashmir and now in other parts of the country. Evidence of this has been provided to Pakistani and US officials, but the only response has been silence and at times a counter-accusation that India has supported terrorist activity in Pakistan. Economic and commercial relations between the two countries, the subject of talks on November 10, would not have come in the category of disputes were it not for the peculiar dynamics of Indo-Pakistan relations. Both countries are members of the World Trade Organisation and supposed to offer preferential tariff for each other's goods. But that is only in theory. In practice, India provides Most Favoured Nation status to Pakistani goods, while Pakistan has a "negative list" of Indian goods that cannot be freely traded. Says T.K. Bhowmick, senior adviser (policy), Confederation of Indian Industry: "This constitutes a major barrier for free trade between the two countries." There are all manners of complementalities in textiles and agro-business as well as cooperation in infrastructure ranging from roads, ports and railways. In fact, the southern corridor of the escap Trans-Asian Railroad and Asian Highway has been held up for decades because of the Indo-Pakistan problems. Opening trade would be a "win-win" situation, say officials, pointing out that Indian sugar exports stabilised prices in Pakistan last year and prices at home this year are being kept in control by a reverse flow from Pakistan Alarmingly, there seems to be a retrograde trend in some areas. A case in point is Siachen. In a dangerous move, the Pakistani Army launched a series of attacks on the glacier from October 23. These assaults on Indian posts were aimed at getting Pakistan a foothold in the region. For the past 14 years the Pakistani government has misled the public by claiming that it has positions on the glacier. This is untrue and the reason why the 1989 agreement failed was because it required the two sides to withdraw after recording their posts on a mutually agreed map. Now, even Indian officials refuse to confirm or deny the 1989 agreement, choosing to enigmatically declare, "We do not resile from agreements." The Indian effort, says Foreign Secretary K. Raghunath, is to resolve disputes the way they are done elsewhere by "moving from the easier to the difficult". But the Pakistanis have a different idea: resolve the most contentious, Kashmir, and presto, all problems will vanish. For the near future at least, it seems, Indian and Pakistani officials will remain destined to keep pushing rocks up the hill. |
|
Issue Contents | Write to us | Subscriptions | Syndication BUSINESS TODAY | INDIA TODAY PLUS | COMPUTERS TODAY © Living Media India Ltd |
 |
 |
In Greek mythology, the punishment of
Sisyphus stands out for its excruciating poignancy. For having tried to cheat the god of
death, Sisyphus must push a rock up to the top of a mountain. But the moment he reaches
his goal, the rock rolls down, the task begins anew and continues for eternity. Indian and
Pakistani negotiators can be excused if they similarly perceive their task. Last week,
after a gap of six years, they began the eighth set of talks on disputes over the Siachen
Glacier, Sir Creek, Tulbul Navigation Project and economic cooperation. 
