Life is a journey without maps. So is diplomacy. No diplomatic pharmacopoeia exists. One has to proceed empirically. Diplomacy does not promise moksha. It provides hope. Even modest progress is worthy of respect.
While negotiating with Pakistan, three facts must be borne in mind. One, the future of Indo-Pak relations lies in the past. Two, India-Pakistan relations are accident prone. And three, Kashmir is a permanent impediment to having good neighbourly relations with so fractured a country as Pakistan.
I served as ambassador of India to Pakistan 30 years ago and have followed developments there with sustained interest. The last time I paid a formal visit to Pakistan was in 2005 as external affairs minister. I was received with both respect and warmth. I have, in my small way, made a modest contribution to the improvement and strengthening of our bilateral relations. Hence I welcome Manmohan Singh’s decision to resume talks with Pakistan. He is, by temperament, not a risk-taker. Here he has taken a big one.
The recent announcement regarding the talks between the foreign secretaries of the two countries came as a surprise to almost everyone. This was so because until a few weeks ago, the decision of the government was not to resume talks with Pakistan until we received satisfaction on two vital counts. One, 26/11. Two, terrorism. These decisions were taken at the highest level. Then came the U-turn (it is a dreadful phrase, but we are stuck with it). Is there concrete evidence that Pakistan has satisfactorily delivered on both counts?
We are a long-suffering people and take the verbal incontinence of the leaders of Pakistan in our stride. The latest outburst of the Cambridge- (same college as mine) educated foreign minister, Mr Qureshi, has not rebounded to his credit. Regardless of what some political parties say, the talks must not be called off. The US and the Vietnamese were talking to each other at the height of the Vietnam War. The Americans were talking to the Chinese in Warsaw even when America did not recognise the People’s Republic of China.
It is in the very nature of our governmental structure that on all important foreign policy issues, the prime minister calls the shots, unless there is a forceful individual sitting on the chair of the minister for external affairs. The NDA government injected a new entity in our well-established policy-making establishment — the National Security Advisor (NSA). We did very well without one for over 55 years. The fact that the NSA sits in the Prime Minister’s Office and meets the PM several times a day gives him a larger-than-life persona. The present incumbent is God’s own good man, but his job has the elements of the devil in it. He will be doing a lot of back-seat driving during the forthcoming talks.
The talks are being held in Hyderabad House, an architectural freak, if there was one (No wonder, the Nizam spent only one night in it). It is pretentiously protoclair, exudes the stale air of pomposity and functional long windedness. Next, there is the ubiquitous media. TV diplomacy needs very specialised skills. Instant diplomacy is a hazard. I wish the gentle, decent and experienced Nirupama Rao all luck. She will need it.
In foreign policy, atmospherics are important and so are perceptions. The diplomatic weather in Pakistan may have temporarily changed but the diplomatic climate has not.
Is there an agreed agenda or are the talks open ended? One reality stares us in the face. Kashmir will be brought up by the Pakistani team, regardless of the agenda. The Pakistani water problem too can come up. Our intention to build a dam on the Chenab has caused Pakistan much worry. The 1960 Indus Water Treaty has stood the test of time and can’t be played about with. On terrorism Pakistan is belligerent, on Kashmir it is bellicose, on water it will have to come to terms with India. We should, in this regard, be generous but Pakistan will have to abjure terrorism.
If our Pakistani friends are serious, the outcome of the talks could be positive. I for one hope that good sense will prevail and the old mindset will be discarded. India can sit it out. Pakistan can’t. It doesn’t have the wherewithal.
Tailpiece
In September 1957, Vice President Radhakrishnan came on an official visit to Peking. He called on Chairman Mao at his residence. After shaking hands, Dr Radhakrishnan patted Mao on the cheek. Mao was taken aback. He was not used to such informality. Dr Radhakrishnan saved the situation, saying: “Mr Chairman, don’t be alarmed. I did the same thing to Stalin and the Pope.”
The author is a diplomat, writer and former foreign minister
