Setting thaw through ‘Kitty-Party’ Initative

PUNCHLINE

‘Kitty Party’ Initiative

Z.G. Muhammad

All is not well between India and Pakistan. If the recent statements of Defence Minister, Manohar Parrikar and Home Minister Raj Nath Singh during their visit to Srinagar and Jammu are indicators the two countries are on a collision course. The optimisms, for good relation spawned    one year back during a meeting between Narendra Modi and Nawaz Sharif did not last long- it in fact crashed immediately. Sharif had travelled to New Delhi to participate in oath taking ceremony of new Indian Prime Minister.   However the flicker of hope persisted.  Sharif taking a departure from the stated position of his country had exhibited extraordinary enthusiasm for improving trade links with India.

The statement by the two ministers did not stir much of a serious reaction from Pakistan except “condemnation” by the Pakistan Senate Standing Committee on Defence. The Committee also adopted a resolution terming the ministers’ statement as ‘provocative and irresponsible’. It impressed upon Nawaz Sharif to take up the issue with the United Nations Security Council. Of late New Delhi also has been contemplating to lodge once again a complaint against Pakistan in the Security Council- this time about activities of Hizbul Mujahedeen Chief Syed Saladin. First, India had complained against tribal ‘invasion’ in 1948. It is a separate subject that could make an interesting copy and could be talked about in a different column.

Many in the two countries and also in the region fully well understand that peace in South-Asia hinges on relations between the two nuclear powers and key players of the region. ‘All people of goodwill desire peace between the two’. Given their historical animosity over the Kashmir Dispute there can be no denying ‘a close relationship is probably unachievable in the near future. But, as rightly pointed out by Munir Akram, a former representative of Pakistan to UN “a ‘cold peace’, which does not eliminate their fundamental differences but enables coexistence and cooperation, is possible.”

In the given scenario when even ‘the ‘cold peace’ is denied space.  Improving relation between the two neighbours seems difficult task. That too when  one year old Modi government is no mood even to pick up threads for amicable settlement of Kashmir where these were left by former Prime Minister of Vajpayee.  It is not also ready to buy much hyped ‘creative solution’ for Kashmir by some Indian an international think tanks. Or those emerging out of track two diplomacy.  Instead, implicitly it is focussed on continuing what has come to be known as “wars in shadow”.

In this stifled diplomatic and political atmosphere, it seemed a strange development, when newspapers reported arrival of a group of elite women from Muzaffarabad   in Srinagar through Uri-Muzaffarabad road. That too when GOI had  made three departures for them from the existing travel procedures, one, granting permission for thirty days instead of fifteen days, two, exemption from reporting to police on arrival and third, allowing visit  to those state subjects also who have no relatives on this side. Much is not known about engagements of these   women in the summer capital except that they had meeting with    wives of some former senior bureaucrats and women activists largely subscribing to the ‘dominant discourse’. And some tourism operators hosting luncheons and dinners for some of them.

The visit had been ostensibly organized by a New Delhi based NGO that during past few years has succeeded in Kashmir in having its finger in many pies. What was objective behind the move that has come to be known as “kitty party initiative”?  From conversation of a friend with one of his relatives in the group it seems the objective behind the trip was to debrief this elite group about the situation as obtaining in Kashmir. ‘She strongly contested statement of his relation that seven lakh troops were stationed in Kashmir. And asserted that we were informed that there are one lakh troops only stationed in the state – both Pakistan and Geelani are exaggerating the figures.’

There is nothing new about debriefing of Pakistan elite during their visits to Srinagar. One of classical example of this debriefing was conversation of a senior Pakistan journalist Najam Sethi with MERC students on Oct 28, 2007, at a five star hotel in Srinagar when he told them to ‘reconcile to the status quo’ and forget about the UN resolutions etc. Journalist and his wife during his two day stay was a state guest.

Notwithstanding, debriefing of these elite women, the ‘Kitty Party initiative’ provided not confined to select group of “ beneficiary women” and those subscribing to the dominant discourse but widened by involving voices of dissent  could perhaps help  for setting a thaw in the ‘frozen dialogue’  on Kashmir.

The elite women group calling themselves peaceniks could not have been in Srinagar without consent from Government of Pakistan or approval from various agencies of GOI including MEA. Some years back when elite women from this side travelled to the other side of the line, one lady professor, heading an advocacy group and another important activist was not cleared by GOI for travel to Muzaffarabad.

It seems the “kitty party” enjoys goodwill on both the sides.  Let it throw up some ‘formula’ based on fair play and justice recognizing historicity of the ‘Dispute’. That could possibly set ball rolling that could ultimately lead to resumption of Kashmir centric dialogue.

Here, I am reminded of a question answer session on 4pt formula in London between Lord Nazir Ahmed and General Musharraf on 13 September 2006.  Lord Nazir asked General Musharraf, “Your Excellency, I am pleased that you said that the resolution which is acceptable to Kashmiri people has to come first before it is acceptable to India and Pakistan and you talk about out of box and also moving from stated position…..position of Indians hasn’t changed, does it not make position of Kashmiris weak?” General Musharraf in his very long answer talked about stalemate over Kashmir and how his out of box formula actually initiated international debate on Kashmir and how it made to move India from status quoist mind set. He told Lord Nazir, “ I would agree never play your hand before enemy and let enemy play first but here the situation demanded that we play the card, see response then take it forward.’

If there is a sincerity of purpose, even a small move can take one to a big goal. Nevertheless, if such initiatives are aimed at creating an alternative discourse to corrupt the main Kashmir narrative, these are bound to crumble under their own weight.

Published in Greater Kashmir on 1-6-2015