'New era'

If the "new era" that the foreign ministers of Pakistan and India claim to have ushered in by meeting in New Delhi on Wednesday, is the right description of the evolving relationship between the two countries, then over half a century-old Kashmir dispute should be seen to be laid to rest. Of the ten issues that according to the joint statement came under discussion in their talks, Kashmir is the ninth, with counter-terrorism at the top, followed by narcotics control and myriad other issues, which more or less tend to uphold the status quo.
On Jammu and Kashmir, the two of them "agreed to the need for continued discussions in a purposeful and forward-looking manner, with a view to finding a peaceful solution by narrowing divergences and building convergence's" - as if all these years there were no talks on the dispute. The so-called confidence-building measures, with a view to increasing cross-border travel and trade are not much when juxtaposed with the Kashmiris' right of self-determination.
In fact, the phraseology employed in the joint statement heralding the dawn of the so-called new era should leave no one in doubt about New Delhi's determined effort to secure Pakistan government's endorsement of its illegal occupation of that land. India's inflexibility was amply reflected from its reaction to Foreign Minister Hina Khar's meeting with the Hurriyat leaders 'ahead of her meeting with Foreign Minister Krishna'.
Were India really interested in productive talks with Pakistan's new foreign minister, it could have taken some steps - like reducing its military presence in the occupied territory, repeal of draconian laws, release of political prisoners, and punishing forces involved in kidnappings, murders and rapes. But none of it, not even as a symbolic token happened.
But that was expected, given that Pakistan is presently beset with myriad problems of its own that would tend to undercut its negotiating clout with India, which is presently moving along an ascending trajectory, especially under American patronage as a strategic partner in the region. Any one having some knowledge of inter-state relationships would have advised a wait-and-watch strategy to the Pakistani authorities. But, perhaps, the talks had become unavoidable, given the American perspective that India pretends to be peaceful to secure Pakistan's undivided attention to its counter-terror drive on the western border.
No surprise then the focal point of the foreign ministers' meeting was not Kashmir - it was mentioned only in passing - but the Pak-India ties and that too in a far more relaxed and laid-back atmosphere, unlike the meeting in Islamabad last year, when the talks collapsed as the interlocutors' were overtaken by their nationalistic positions. That the Indian media was more interested in how Hina Khar looked and what she was wearing than what she said - suggests that our foreign minister was cast more in the frame of a celebrity than a hard-nosed top diplomat from Pakistan.
The bitterness that besets the two countries is too deeply entrenched to be wished away by any number of cosmetic layers. In terms of real progress the talks between Hina and Krishna were not very different from in the past and the talks remained just that talks. Without India conceding, clearly and openly, some of the issues on the table, there would be no normalisation of relations between these two nuclear rivals. Of course, a number of working groups would be set up to resolve various issues but that's in the unknown future.
What is possible in the present is not being done. For instance, there could be an announcement on the Siachin issue, but the Indian military is said to be standing in the way, forcing a stalemate on this problem. The joint statement amply suggests that India is interested only in projecting itself as a peace-loving neighbour of Pakistan and would be quite forthcoming in resolving peripheral issues like cross-border trade and travel in Kashmir, but beyond that it would not budge an inch.
The Pakistan government should see through this deception, and if there has to be another round of foreign ministers talks next year, these must proceed from some concrete progress on issues that were part of the erstwhile Composite Dialogue. Since all the differences and disputes between Pakistan and India stem from the Kashmir dispute, there is no point in talking about Kashmir without the Kashmiri leadership being the part of Pak-India talks.