A region without borders

In the face of improving relations, the attempt on the life of Musharraf is not difficult to comprehend. True, the Al-Qaida has felt let down because it has seen the Musharraf government changing sides on Afghanistan which the Taliban want back. But lately they are not too unhappy after the secret support they are getting despite Washington's harsh words to Islamabad. They could not have gone to the extent of eliminating Musharraf. The blast, a minute after Musharraf's motorcade passed, is the handiwork of such powerful forces that are opposed to the conciliation between New Delhi and Islamabad. They seem determined to sabotage the talks between Vajpayee and Musharraf even before the date is finalised.

Who are they? They may be the Pakistani Islamic militant groups or the disgruntled elements in different agencies, including the ISI and the army. Even some religious parties cannot be ruled out because they want to entrench themselves after they have come to occupy space in the absence of free political activity. They have their own agenda which does not tally with that of the forces wanting to move closer to India.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

What has really upset the anti-India elements is the growing strength of people-to-people contacts. Road, air and other links are not just accidental. They are the result of relentless pressure by teams of parliamentarians, businessmen, artists, journalists and others. Even the two governments which want more and more links at popular level have acknowledged their contribution. In a way, the role of the people is seen integral to the efforts towards sorting out things.

This recognition must have irritated the anti-conciliation lobby. Some positive speeches made at a seminar in New Delhi a few days ago would have only unnerved it. Vajpayee outlined the contours of tomorrow's South Asia, with "open borders and even a single currency."

Conscious of the mischief the anti-India forces could create, Vajpayee said in the same speech "as we develop greater economic stakes in each other, we can put aside distrust and dispel unwarranted suspicion."

It was a welcome development that Pakistan's Foreign Office reacted favourably. It did not take the suggestion as something amiss. Quite rightly, it pointed out how difficult was the path and how it "demanded hard work, firm resolve and sincerity." Nobody doubts that. What it means is that both New Delhi and Islamabad have to patiently and persistently find a solution to the problems confronting them. The dream of South Asia is dependent on how soon they shed their suspicion and distrust.

If South Asia is to become a reality, New Delhi should be willing to make concessions unilaterally. It is bigger in size and larger in resources. Other countries in the region -- Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal -- are developing economies compared to India which is a developed country. Until they have a feeling of equality, they will not be forthcoming in cooperation -- whether in trade, travel or economy. European Union (EU) is an example. Both France and Germany, the two big economies in EU, had to bear greater burden so that smaller countries could feel that they were not inferior. The growth rate, the size of economy, GDP and such other things of member-countries were taken into consideration -- they are assessed all the time -- for EU to fructify. One currency, Euro, was introduced after every country in EU felt that it would not be under disadvantage in any way. India would have to take such steps which would give confidence to the rest that joining hands with it would benefit them.

Pakistan's real fears are on Kashmir. Prime Minister Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali has said categorically that Kashmir needs to be solved before opening borders or introducing one currency. But India is not running away from the problem. Even after winning the Bangladesh war, it said in the Shimla Agreement more than 30 years ago that the two sides would meet subsequently to take up the question of "a final settlement on Jammu and Kashmir" for durable pace and normalisation.

It has taken a long time for Pakistan to appreciate India's difficulties. Nawaz Sharif admitted before Inder Gujral at the Prime Ministers' summit in Male: "We cannot get Kashmir from you forcibly and you cannot give it to us on a platter." That was the reason why Sharif and Vajpayee had agreed at Lahore to hold talks till a solution was found. But they had also vowed to go ahead in other fields in the meanwhile.

Benazir Bhutto's suggestion at the seminar where Vajpayee spoke is probably the best one for the time being. She said: "Kashmir could be separated" from efforts towards normalisation. "China and India," she said, "have a border dispute but they do not threaten each other with war." New Delhi and Islamabad should move ahead despite their differences over Kashmir. Benazir herself proposed soft borders. What all it meant was that people of the two countries would be free to travel from one place to another and go around without the police bothering them and the authorities checking their credentials all the time. Travelling freely, Benazir said, meant doing away with borders. This is true of the countries in EU. They have joined hands for economic development. Naturally, visas have to go first. From the meetings of industrialists and businessmen in the region I have attended, one thing that comes out loud and clear is that they want to work in tandem to develop and benefit. But all eyes are fixed on India.

South Asian Economic Union -- I shall include Afghanistan and Myanmar in it -- does not undo Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka or Nepal. It strengthens their economy. After some time they themselves will come to develop a vested interest in the entire region. The subcontinent can find its own destiny according to its own genius if left alone. Together the countries can work for the welfare of all South Asians. But fanatics and extremists must be dealt with severely because they are pushing people in the wrong direction.

The region has been so riven with religious, social and economic differences that it has to rise above them to make the common man's life meaningful and secure. You may be anything -- Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan or Nepalese. You may be Hindu, Muslim, Christian or Buddhist. These are your own beliefs and they must be respected. But you have to imbibe a South Asian temperament and outlook. All dissensions and quarrels over territories -- be it Kashmir or northern Sri Lanka -- will dissolve in the togetherness of South Asian entity.

Kuldip Nayar is an eminent Indian columnist.