Mushy with Musharraf

Whatever the country expected from Havana, it was not "mohabbat zindabad". Manmohan Singh's latest move on Pakistan is either a bold experiment that could lead to path-breaking steps further down the road, and even an "acceptable solution" to the Kashmir dispute (as Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf told the UN General Assembly a couple of days ago), or a serious miscalculation that boomerangs on the country and the Prime Minister. Cops don't gang up with robbers any more than victims of terrorism team up with the principal perpetrator of terror. So the bet must be that something big is in the works; and the underlying assumption is that Mr Musharraf has convinced the Prime Minister that he had nothing to do with the Mumbai train blasts and will no longer sponsor acts of terror or export terrorists.

The question now is whether the renewed buzz on the back-channel circuits will once again come to nought if and when the next terrorist attack takes place. Or when President Musharraf makes the next statement about the Kashmiri right to self-determination. Remember that when the bomb blasts in Mumbai trains killed 187 people on July 11, India decided to call off all talks since it believed (and stated) that Pakistan-based groups were behind the terror attacks. But the Prime Minister then went out of his way to say that Pakistan was also a victim of terror (getting the BJP mightily upset), so it would appear that he is working hard to get some real traction in the engagement with Pakistan. As with his immediate predecessor, Dr Singh too seems to have set his sights on an agreement on Kashmir; coming along with an Indo-US nuclear deal (which the Senate may vote on as early as Friday), it would seal his place in history.

It would be wise, though, to be wary of quick fixes. Those chasing headlines and deadlines should know that diplomacy usually makes progress steadily and not in giant leaps""as Mr Vajpayee's Lahore bus ride showed. The nature of the Pakistan state has not changed, nor does the Pakistan army have a stake in peace since its pre-eminence in the country depends on continuing hostility with India. The uncharitable would suggest that it is a combination of events in Baluchistan and US pressure that have brought about the change of stance. If so, it could turn out to be a tactical rather than a strategic move by Pakistan.

As for the immediate time-table, one question will be how much to pin on the so-called Joint Control Mechanism and joint sharing of intelligence, in terms of achieving real results. For instance, will Pakistan share intelligence on Dawood Ibrahim? Another test will be whether agreement can be reached on issues like Siachen and the Sir Creek, not to mention the Baglihar dam, which is now complete, and the rocky issue of Pakistan honouring its WTO obligation by giving India most favoured nation status. Going beyond these, if India's stand is going to be similar to that in the past""keep them engaged in dialogue without giving up anything""it is certain the truce will be temporary. And the fundamental problem remains: nothing has been done in either country to prepare public opinion for a real shift in national positions to the degree required for agreement on anything substantive.