President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan won't beg for a summit meeting with Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee in New York. Nevertheless, the General would like to build on from the wreckage of Agra. But as of now, the Indian prime minister does not have anything particular to talk with his desperate neighbour. That is understandable. Chanting Kashmir has become Musharraf's favourite national service since September 11. Whenever he is with a visiting dignitary 'Pakistan is a favoured destination for quite a few these days' the K word makes a conspicuous appearance in his peacespeak. Kashmir for Musharraf is the site of a freedom struggle where India is the oppressor. The only truth in this ridiculous position is: there is a struggle through which Musharraf, not Kashmir, is seeking freedom. So he has to talk Kashmir.
For India, talking with Musharraf makes no sense in the absence of any diplomatic preparations. The General talks of summits as if they are the natural way of communication between adversaries. Agra was India's invited embarrassment. Vajpayee's invitation to Musharraf was a grand gesture, like his bus journey to Lahore. On both occasions the message was: India is a confident nation and we will give you a chance. Agra collapsed for two reasons: it was a summit without a substructure; and for Musharraf it was nothing more than a propaganda platform. A summit is a formal ceremony of historic handshakes and photo ops, the grand finale after diplomatic breakthroughs. Agra had a context but no agenda. Still, Musharraf won the propaganda war, partly due to his Indian counterpart's diminished eloquence.
Obviously Musharraf wants to make New York an extension of Agra, and he badly needs this opportunity in the backdrop of the American war on terrorism. Going by the current international morality, Kashmir is certainly worthy of an Indian war on the authors of subcontinental terrorism. But Musharraf wants to win another propaganda war, he wants to play the peacenik while being the sponsor of terrorism. India should not fall into the trap. That doesn't mean it should not be on talking terms with its neighbour, no matter how untrustworthy that neighbour is. Talks without an agenda or diplomatic groundwork can't progress into a dialogue. They can only be fodder for the General's propaganda.
Editorial of TNTNews paper
|
|