Winds of change or a false dawn over Kashmir?

President Musharraf had displayed a great deal of courage and indeed put his own future at risk when he deviated from the long standing Pakistan position on Kashmir by propounding what has come to be known as the "Musharraf formula." Consequently, he evoked criticism at home for his stance and all manners of motivations were attributed to his new position on Kashmir.

The Pakistan president has proposed a three-stage formula to bring about a "change of status" for Kashmir. He also said Pakistan would consider dropping its demand for a UN plebiscite on the region's future. "Change in status could be independent status, condominium, which includes joint control, it can be UN mandate also," he said. "I strongly believe there are options and there is a solution. For the first time we see light at the end of the tunnel."

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

To international observers it seemed that the Pakistan president had stolen the thunder, for he had broached solutions to the longest running international dispute that has the prospect of Pakistan losing on tactical and strategic grounds if it were to be accepted by India.

Although his position on plebiscite in Kashmir is not new, President Musharraf's remarks that the disputed territory might become independent, be subject to an Indian/Pakistani condominium, or be placed under a United Nations mandate, had caught India off guard, for a while at least.

The point that catches the imagination of observers in the new Musharraf formulation is the suggestion that seeks to accord full independence to Kashmir.

What then is President Musharraf's main motivation in propounding the new formula, if any?

Is it fatigue that is sapping the potential of Pakistan, and any further continuation of the status quo, i.e. providing "moral" support to the Kashmiri Mujahedeens might eat further into Pakistan's already exhausted capability? Has the military establishment come to realise, at long last, that in accommodation rather than confrontation lies the solution to the Kashmir problem?

Or is it because Pakistan is coming under increasing pressure from the United States to disassociate from the current insurgent activity in Jammu and Kashmir that is primarily waged from the territory of Pakistan held Kashmir?

Or is it, as some critics aver, only to divert attention from internal political developments in Pakistan that are unfavourable to Musharraf, and to keep the anti-Musharraf elements occupied with an emotional issue, which Kashmir is?

Or is it a ploy, as some in India contend, of President Musharraf, that "having failed to stake a claim on the state of the J&K, he has now made a direct claim over areas of the state that are legally and constitutionally an integral part of the Indian Union."

Or perhaps the Pakistan president is moulding public opinion at home to new and changed circumstances that demand a shift from their long-standing position on Kashmir?

Whatever be his compulsions, President Musharraf has put his presidency and indeed his future on the line. He is either very brave or very imprudent, but, whatever be the disposition of his personality, his formulations deserve a second look.

In fact, one was heartened by the fact that even the guarded initial response to the proposal that emanated from the Indian official channel gave one the impression that India was not about to discard the latest Pakistani idea out of hand. The Indian State Minister for Home Affairs (J&K Affairs) expressed India's readiness to discuss the formula if formally presented, although asserting at the same time India's preference for the LoC formula. Salman Khursheed, a general-secretary of India's governing Congress Party, went even further by suggesting that there was a need for India and Pakistan to start talking on Kashmir and Musharraf had given some "very positive indications."

Even more heartening was the Indian plan to withdraw troops from Jammu and Kashmir. Although it would be naive to think that the withdrawal is a consequence of Pakistan's demand for demilitarisation of the area, the announcements and the timing of the withdrawal indicated an attitudinal change on the part of the Indian government towards any Pakistani proposal on Kashmir.

However, in his remarks at the inaugural session of the 4th SAFMA (South Asian Free Media Association) Conference on Media and Reconciliation, President Musharraf said that as far as the Kashmir issue was concerned, Pakistan stood at its original position of the UN resolutions passed in 1948, unless India showed some flexibility and moved forward from its present stance. And at the time of going to press nothing more than the restatement of both sides of their commitment to dialogue over the troubled region of Kashmir has become known. But reports prior to the arrival of the Pakistani Prime Minister from India had suggested that the Musharraf proposal was likely to be shot down formally during the meeting of the two Prime Ministers on November, if presented formally to India.

What then is the future dénouement of Kashmir?

During his recent visit to the valley, the Indian prime minister had said that the government of India would not allow any partition within its territory.

According to Arun Rajnath of the South Asia Tribune, India is seriously considering proposing to Pakistan to accept the Line of Control (LoC) in Kashmir as the international border. Under this proposal some areas of the Western Indian border region could be conceded to Pakistan, especially the areas a substantial portion of which are already under Pakistani control. Such areas fall under Rajauri, Chamb Juriyan, Swarankot, Mandi, Kupwara, and Uri sectors. Furthermore: "Indian officials are preparing a blueprint in this regard for serious discussions with Pakistan as part of the composite dialogue which is underway between the two countries."

The opposition in India and the hawks in the Congress party are loathe to entertain any suggestion that seeks to "redraw" the map of Jammu and Kashmir. Some in India also take recourse to the resolution passed in the Indian Parliament on Kashmir, according to which the J&K is the atoot ang (integral part) of India, in rejecting the Musharraf formula.

The Indian preference of the LoC as the permanent border does not find favour with Pakistan; at least that is the official position in Pakistan. However, there are mixed responses to the LoC formula among the various Kashmiri factions.

Shift in Pakistan position is noticeable. And by India's own admission there has been a reduction in separatists' activities in the valley. No doubt there are new signals on Kashmir. The positive indications emanating from both sides must be exploited. This is only possible through boldness and statesmanship on the part of the leadership of both the countries.

Any solution of Kashmir dispute would require purging the long-held positions of the parties. Fixation to old position will continue to hurt more than help the peoples of the two countries.

We would like to believe that it is the winds of change rather than false dawn that will suffuse the skies over Kashmir.

The author is Editor, Defence and Strategic Affairs, The Daily Star.