Goodwill hunting

IN war both interests and ideas are pushed aside; hence, as an exception to the rule, the great individuals then triumph. This is the essence of what has gone on in the subcontinent since Independence. Enough is enough. That’s the common refrain in private and public discussions. More than a week ago, we had a taste of the people’s sentiments in Agra. Talking to people who came to the dhaba next to a graveyard on Fatehbad Road, the road leading to Amar Vilas Hotel, I found the non-elitist segments of our society much less susceptible to sabre-rattling. Two young graduates and an office clerk working in Amar Hotel expressed their yearning for peace and an immediate end to conflict. It reminded me of Ali Sardar Jafri’s moving lines — Khuda kare ke ye shabnam yuhi barasti rahe/ zameen hamesha lahu ke liye tarasti rahe (may it become the Earth’s lot to be wet with dew/ by denying it human blood forever).

Why just the men at the dhaba? Indians and Pakistanis expressed similar sentiments at the people’s summit at Delhi’s India International Centre. This is not all. Amongst the 170-odd guests at the Taj Palace Hotel on Saturday, I noticed a glimmer of hope and optimism. Faces lit up as Dilip Kumar broke the ice, so to speak. My bonus was sharing a table with Shahrukh Khan and getting his autograph for a non-existent autograph book.

The prime minister seemed calm and relaxed as he left the banquet hall with his guest. He had reasons to feel that way. Having realised long ago that the RSS dream of an Akhand Bharat was long outmoded, he is the one who had set the tone for a dialogue with Pakistan. He invited Pakistan’s president and hoped by goodwill on his side to encourage goodwill in others — a hope fulfilled. Despite the criticisms of the diplomatic muddles during the bus ride to Lahore, the Kargil war and Sushma Swaraj’s faux pas at Agra, he is the one who has most certainly turned the president’s visit into a major event. The two leaders met without breaking the impasse. But, then, why get upset by their failure to produce a joint declaration? Why get unduly perturbed by the intransigence of some politicians and bureaucrats? It takes time to resolve issues of war and peace. It takes time to size up friends and foes.

The silver lining is that the peace process initiated by the prime minister and his foreign minister, who are unfairly placed in the dock by self-appointed guardians of our national interest, is irreversible. They and their Pakistani counterparts will meet again not to thrash out the terms of a Versailles or Sevres-like treaty, but to negotiate the subcontinent’s future on equal terms. When that happens, it will be time to keep one’s fingers crossed. Never before in South Asian history has the fate of so many rested in the hands of so few. President K.R. Narayanan is wise and sagacious. He put across this idea elegantly. ‘‘Tomorrow,’’ he told the Pakistani president, ‘‘when you and the prime minister of India sit together in Agra, I hope the face of the poorest person in the subcontinent will be before you.’’

Whatever the implications of the Agra summit — no prizes for guessing at this stage — Vajpayee and Musharraf have been assured their respective places in history. Compared to what they have accomplished, the efforts of the architects of the Shimla accord fade into insignificance. In 1971, India was flushed with victory. Pakistan’s prestige, on the other hand, was at its lowest ebb. Z.A. Bhutto bought peace to gain mileage back home; a weary Indira Gandhi obliged. All said and done, the clouds of war have dispersed. For a variety of reasons, the American pressure being one of them, the climate is much more conducive for a dialogue on a variety of thorny issues that have bedevilled Indo-Pak relations. This opportunity must not be allowed to be frittered away. The steady men of solid principle and mind, wrote British historian A.J.P. Taylor years ago, are the ones who achieve effective success. At Rajghat, Musharraf extolled Mahatma Gandhi’s devotion to non-violence and peace. ‘‘Never has the requirement of these ideals been more severely felt than today, especially in the context of Pakistan-India relations.’’ Recognising this painful reality, howsoever belatedly, augurs well for the future of India-Pakistan talks.

As a footnote, let me add that never before did any Pakistani head of state express such warm sentiments for the Father of the Nation. Let me also add that he struck the right note by ruling out a military solution to the vexed Kashmir issue. It was also politically correct to invoke M.A. Jinnah’s vision of fostering good neighbourly relations. Yes Sir, we must overcome the burden of history. Others have done it. Yes, Mr President, we too must do so. You and our prime minister!

Our prime minister has conducted himself in a statesmanlike manner, shown magnanimity towards Pakistan, and revived the eclectic spirit of the Mahatma and Jawaharlal Nehru, a spirit that has remai- ned dormant for decades. Once the exponent of India’s strength — hence the nuclear explosion at Pokharan — he has proved to be too strong a character, though enfeebled by two recent operations, to be swamped by cantankerous patriotism even in old age. Although some of his belligerent and irrepressible BJP colleagues have not been reined in on vital domestic issues, it is quite clear that he, as the leader of an otherwise unwieldy coalition, does not want to look back to the past but anticipate the future. On the issue of forging friendly ties with Pakistan, in particular, he has shown himself to be too individual, too full of personality to be fitted into a party-pattern.

Today, the key issue is to sustain the momentum gathered by Musharraf’s visit. Raking up old issues will not do; a change in mutual perceptions is required. Making political capital out of who was invited where and for what reason will not cut much ice. Believe me, the presence of Hurriyat leaders at the Pakistan high commissioner’s tea party was a non-event. We hardly noticed their entry and exit. Yet, it is silly to leave them out in the cold. India’s options have been narrowed by the ill-advised government moves in the past that led to the political death of the JKLF and other secular forces in Kashmir. Having created spaces for the Hurriyat men to garner support, they have become the guarantors of peace in the Valley. Talk, or isolate them politically.

Earlier Columns