Another summit, another promise of further talks

By Shujaat Bukhari

AGRA, JULY 18. As soon as I arrived here, I was reminded of the Tashkent and Shimla agreements between India and Pakistan. It looked almost certain that another declaration would be added to these. Hundreds of people, mostly journalists, had converged here to watch how the agreement, if any, would be reached on Kashmir, which has been the cause of bitter relations between the two neighbours for the last five decades.

History repeats itself and in the case of Kashmir as I have understood, the saying holds true. Whether we call it sabotage or the pursuance of one's goals, since 1947 the ``fate'' of Kashmir has never been allowed to be decided.

Agra held no attraction for me; I was just going there to witness how a mechanism may be evolved to, at least, ease the violence in Jammu and Kashmir with a ``sincere objective'' of saving lives.

When it became known that the talks had proved inconclusive, my memory, gathered largely from books, went back to the situation in 1947. The tribal raid that year forced the partition of the State, something its people were not ready for. The situation opened a new chapter of trauma and agony for them.

According to historians, before the then Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri and Gen. Ayub Khan could discuss the Kashmir issue in Tashkent, Shastri passed away. Same was the case earlier when Sheikh Abdullah was sent as an emissary by Jawaharlal Nehru to Pakistan to negotiate with Gen. Ayub Khan. Both ``agreed'' on something, but Nehru breathed his last before giving a ``go ahead''. The situation in Shimla was different and the agreement was implemented, but what was not ``announced'' again, according to historians, was the ``final'' solution to the Kashmir issue.

In Agra, the summit-level talks were seen as a ``golden opportunity'' to pick up the threads. The high expectations of the Kashmiris, which had increased to an unimaginative level, lurked in my mind when the talks began. What was happening inside, no one knew but the rumour mills were working overtime. ``The agreement is in the final stages'', ``there will be working groups on Kashmir'', ``Gen. Musharraf has not insisted on Kashmir to pave the way for future dialogue'', ``both leaders will announce the Kashmir package'' - all this created different feelings in me, a Kashmiri. The two leaders were talking one to one and the hopes of an agreement were increasing. I was thinking of the many steps the leaders could take to ease the tensions.

I was reminded of the euphoria in Uri, through which passes the Srinagar-Muzaffarbad road. People were enthusiastic on seeing it open and were welcoming their relatives from across the border.

One sad case also came to my mind. It was of one Yasin Malik, a youth from Baramulla who was put behind bars in Amritsar for six months after the authorities mistook him for being the Hurriyat leader. He was going to meet his uncle in Pakistan- occupied Kashmir. No one cared to verify his antecedents; he continues to run from pillar to post to get acquitted. There could have been a solution to overcome such nightmares faced by the people.

I was asked about my views on the failure of the talks. ``It gives another lease of life to bloodshed and slams the door on peace, tranquility and prosperity. But still the tendency of taking the dialogue ahead has not vanished,'' I replied.

Kashmir, for many years to come, will continue to remain in the news and attract the attention of many more journalists, who will still report the killings, but will the Kashmiris have any sympathiser who will not treat the issue as one of territory but of people. The Agra failure is a setback, which the people of Kashmir had not hoped for. Is it not?

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Previous : Arrest of Rajaji
Next     : A proposal for peace