INDO-PAK JOINT STATEMENT

M K Narayanan: Security Advisor or Insecurity Advisor

By: Hari Om

The Kashmiri separatists, with the exception of those belong to the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), are feeling jubilant. The ruling National Conference (NC) too is feeling very happy. The mood of the Pakistani journalists, diplomats and think-tanks is no different. The Pakistani political establishment led by Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani is also in a jubilant mood. In fact, everyone who wants segregation of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) from India is in a cheerful mood.
What is it that has so suddenly changed the mood of the desperate, out-on-the-limb and defeated separatists, religious bigots and almost everyone in Pakistan and made them believe that it is a win, win situation for those seeking disintegration of India as well as separation of J&K from India? And, what is it that has dumbfounded and alarmed the friends and well-wishers of India or unnerved the Indian nation as a whole? The answer obviously is: The Sharm-el-Sheikh July 18 joint statement issued by none other than the Indian Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh, and his Pakistani counterpart, Yousuf Raza Gilani.
On July 18, this writer described in these columns the outcome of the summit between the two Prime Ministers in Egypt as a “spectacular diplomatic victory of Islamabad over New Delhi”, saying that India has virtually acknowledged its involvement in the subversive activities in Baluchistan and some other tribal areas of Pakistan; that the Congress-led UPA Government has softened its stand on the perpetrators of 26/11 Mumbai terrorist attack by suggesting that “action on terrorism should not be linked to the composite dialogue process and these should not be bracketed”; and that our Prime Minister has gone back on his solemn commitment that New Delhi would enter into dialogue with Islamabad only after the latter punished the dreaded terrorists, including Hafiz Saeed of Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT), who masterminded war on Mumbai, which led to the gruesome killing of hundreds of civilians, including some foreigners. LeT is, it needs to be underlined, is an “unofficial extension of Pakistani Army without uniform” and, hence, it can be legitimately said that the Mumbai attack was the handiwork of the Pakistani Army and the dreaded Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI).
This writer was not the only one who expressed the view that the Indian Prime Minister and his team of advisors, particularly his National Security Advisor (NSA) M.K. Narayanan and Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon, have harmed the sovereign interests of the country in their desperate bid to placate the aggressor Pakistan and its Kashmir-based agents. Almost everyone, even the ultra liberals and the Leftists, expressed similar views. In fact, the keen students of diplomacy and friends of India denounced the Prime Minister in downright language and accused him of jeopardizing the country’s sovereign interests and enabling Islamabad to weaken the Indian position by including the issue of terrorism in Baluchistan and other areas of Pakistan in the joint statement.
It is now obvious that our Prime Minister compromised the country’s declared stand at the behest of the American administration, which has been pursuing the governments of India and Pakistan since 2007 to accept the “roadmap agreed in secret two years ago – which only really came to light this year – as probably the best model around for a peace deal”. The model evolved by the Indian Prime Minister and former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, according to authentic reports, reads like this: “While there is to be no exchange of territory, borders are to be made irrelevant by encouraging the movement of people and trade across the Line of Control which divided J&K” and “a join mechanism would be set up which would allow both countries (India and Pakistan) to supervise the affairs of J&K”. To be more precise, the Americans and other western countries want the Government of India to share sovereignty with Pakistan in J&K.
As per Bruce Riedel, who reviewed “strategy in Afghanistan and Pakistan” for the US President, Barack Hussain Obama, only recently and who is right now associated with Brookings Institution think tank in Washington, “western diplomats would like to see them getting back into the position they reached in 2007”. The complete U-turn that our Prime Minister took at Sharm-el-Sheikh, which has been described by one leading political commentator as “Sharm-el-Sheikh’s Shame”, needs to be viewed in the light of the tremendous pressure from the United States, which wants India to create an environment that enables Pakistan to launch a full-scale operation against Taliban and Al-Qaida, which are active not only in Afghanistan but also in the tribal areas of Pakistan.
And, who drafted or first approved the joint-statement? It can be said with some confidence that either NSA M.K. Narayanan or he and Foreign Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon did the dirty job. One can understand the reasons behind the dubious role of Narayanan because he has not only bungled several times in the past, but also indicated his preference for greater autonomy for J&K. Those who have read his columns in The Asian Age would agree with this writer that Narayanan has on occasions more than one suggested pre-1953 position as a solution to the Kashmir problem. Hence, to expect sound advice from Narayanan would be to cross the line. He is not NSA. He is National Insecurity Advisor. Is it not a fact that the Mumbai terrorist attack was his personal failure? It is a different story that the Indian political establishment made Chief Minister Bilasrao Deshmukh to resign and took no action against Narayanan, who is not accountable to the nation. His retention in the Prime Minister’s Office raises lot of questions.
As pointed out, one could understand the line of Narayanan. But one simply cannot comprehend why did the Foreign Secretary follow the suicidal path? He is accountable. He has worked with the foreign office for decades and also served as the Indian High Commissioner to Pakistan. He is on the verge of superannuation. He should have made the Prime Minister aware of the grave evils that would follow on the declaration of the joint statement. It appears that the Prime Minister, the Foreign Minister, the NSA and the Foreign Secretary worked in unison and hit India below the belt. His July 21 clarification that the drafting of the joint statement could be “bad”, that “there could be no compromise on terrorism” and that “India is not discussing with Pakistan the territorial status of J&K” needs to be dismissed as an exercise in futility. The statement he made during his interaction with members of Parliament on July 21 that India and Pakistan did discuss ways and means aimed at “making the Line of Control fluid” should clear all the cobwebs of confusion and establish beyond any shadow of doubt that the Congress-led UPA Government has made up its mind to tinker with the Indian sovereignty.
It is good that the entire opposition has taken the Prime Minister to task for his diplomatic blunder. But this is just not enough. It should ask the Prime Minister to explain his stand on J&K, on his non-territorial Kashmir solution and on his concept of Indian sovereignty. In case it fails to take on the Prime Minister on these issues, it shall be presumed that it also stands for an out-of-box solution, shared sovereignty and irrelevant or porous borders. It would do well to realize that a vast majority of people in J&K does not endorse any unsettling, divisive and communal formulation. It stands for the unity and integrity of India, as also for a reform that frees it from the cruel clutches of the Kashmiri leaders of all shades of opinion.