It is known that India and Pakistan have had a very difficult relationship for the last 50 years. We have gone through full-scale wars, smaller battles, ongoing conflict over the status of Kashmir, economic disputes, and a great psychological divide. Some time or other, some one or either must take lead, to turn the wheel of time. For too long we have been trapped in the past. It’s more than urgent to begin the future.

Of late many concerned citizens in India and Pakistan have made contributions towards new thinking about resolving conflicts and promoting co-operation between the two countries. Our institutes have participated in the processes in different ways. We are now excited to come together to jointly suggest a road map to begin the future.

We hope that this paper will make a positive contribution to the present debate in our countries. We dedicate this paper to goodwill and wisdom, which we believe exist in our countries but are presently latent. It’s time to activate ourselves in sincerity and good faith. It’s time to begin the future.
 

THE BEGINNING OF THE FUTURE

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this joint endeavour is to seek a viable basis for peace, friendship, and co-operation between India and Pakistan. We do not intend to offer any solution. We intend to suggest ways and means of defusing tension, creating an atmosphere of mutual trust, and moving towards purposeful and conclusive negotiations for a lasting peace settlement. 

In this paper, we have concentrated only on forward-looking ideas. We understand that there are several different interpretations of the history of relations between India and Pakistan. We believe that the observers of the situation in and between the two countries are familiar with these various interpretations of history. We do not wish to contribute to a debate on the past. Rather, we would like to focus on tomorrow and contribute thoughts and ideas for a better future for the people of India and Pakistan.

In a subsequent section, we have suggested the outline of a process to break the stalemate in India-Pakistan ties and to set the tone for conclusive talks on all issues of discord, including Kashmir. The order of various phases and steps suggested in the process is not sacrosanct and should not stand in the way of facilitating the ultimate objective of sustainable peace. To ward off the apprehension that the preliminaries may go on indefinitely without making any tangible progress, it may be appropriate to telescope the process, set a timeframe for each phase, and simultaneously launch some of the steps. It is important that the relevant decision-makers are sincerely committed to the objective of sustainable peace as early as feasible. It is with the assumption of good faith on part of those leaders who matter that we have outlined the process below.

HYPOTHESIS

The paper is based on the hypothesis that India and Pakistan ought to improve their relations, resolve all outstanding conflicts including the issue of Jammu & Kashmir, and formulate policies which commit national energy and resources to the welfare of their people.

It is imperative for India and Pakistan to make a fundamental reassessment of their approaches to bilateral relations.

Since both countries have failed to attain a high level of human development as indicated by their position below 125 in the UNDP Human Development Index.

Since a state of confrontation between two countries armed with nuclear arms poses a risk not only to almost 1.5 billion people living in South Asia – one-fourth of the world population – but also to people elsewhere in the world.

Since continual confrontation has contributed to religious extremism, social intolerance, terrorism and crime, undermining the moral fabric of societies within the two countries.

Since both countries have abundant natural resources, as well as talented human resources which should be harnessed with single-minded determination in the interest of the masses.

Since many countries in the world, such as Israel-Palestine, North-South Koreas, Northern Ireland and Guatemala have actively sought to establish peace in recent years creating a positive trend for civilised societies.

The rulers of India and Pakistan have failed to establish good neighbourly relations between the two countries. Enduring distrust and acrimony have given rise to different forms of confrontation. Now that both India and Pakistan have become nuclear-power states, they have a moral obligation to their people to outgrow the bitterness of the past fifty years and negotiate a quid pro quo settlement for peaceful coexistence.

We believe that it is essential to address the Kashmir question – the core issue of discord between India and Pakistan – in order to move towards a durable peace accord in the region. While India must sincerely acknowledge the existence of Kashmir as a dispute and refrain from calling the status of Jammu and Kashmir a settled matter, Pakistan should reaffirm its commitment to abstain from use of force in order to secure a solution to the Kashmir problem.

At the same time it is necessary to take other steps to restore and foster mutual trust, reduce tension, and resolve other differences between India and Pakistan. The resolution of the Kashmir conflict and restoration and development of mutual trust are interdependent processes. It is impossible to resolve the Kashmir conflict unless the two sides trust each other. It is impossible to restore trust unless the two sides are committed to resolving the Kashmir conflict.

Any search for a solution to the Kashmir conflict must be based on mutual respect by the states of Pakistan and India for each other and dignity of the entire people of Jammu and Kashmir. India must respect the fact that it is in India’s interest to have a stable, secure and prosperous Pakistan. Similarly, Pakistan must respect the fact that a stable, secure and prosperous India is in Pakistan’s interest.

Any future search for a solution to the Kashmir conflict must be predicated on the basis of peace. There should be no violence or threat of violence. In particular, the two countries should not threaten to use nuclear weapons. In the end, principles of peace and justice should prevail over the principles of violence and intimidation. The victory of the principles of peace and justice should be the real objective of the final solution. Territorial and political compromises should be a mere means to serve this end.

Both India and Pakistan should agree that the people of Jammu and Kashmir are the principal party to the dispute; and whatever solution of the problem is sought should not only be fair and just, but also in accordance with the wishes of the Kashmiris. In determining the wishes of the Kashmiris, representatives of all different constituents and faiths of the people of Jammu and Kashmir should be consulted.

While the two countries must pledge to initiate purposeful negotiations on Kashmir and not stop short of reaching a settlement, they should first agree to take reciprocal measures to create an environment conducive to talks. What is required is to comprehensively bring home the message that the two sides are not playing a zero-sum game, but really mean business.

The pursuit of a Kashmir settlement should pre-suppose that there can be no accord without the spirit of give and take. Both sides should be willing to accept a compromise that offers an honourable way out of their mutually exclusive official stances. The negotiations should not be seen as a substitute for the battlefield, with either victory or defeat being the logical conclusion. On the contrary, they should aim at harmonising divergent interests in order to find a viable and mutually acceptable solution. The solution to the Kashmir conflict should be based on the premise that dignity and security of India, Pakistan and the people of Jammu and Kashmir must be ensured.

The negotiation process should not remain a hostage to the parameters set by the two sides in their official stances. A fresh and pragmatic approach is called for to negotiate on a different wavelength, free from the constraints of the past and capable of breaking the 50-year stalemate. There should be no room for diplomatic jargon, or legal hair-splitting to forestall free and open discussion that takes into account all the available options.

Once the process of de-escalation of hostilities begins in right earnest, and both governments are prepared to de-link Kashmir from their point-scoring domestic agendas, it will be easier to work out the parameters of give and take. If the leaders are ready to take hard decisions, they should have little problem rallying public support.

 

Phase 1: Preparing the Ground

Part I

Declaration by the Governments of India and Pakistan of the renewal of their commitment to resolve all conflicts and issues, particularly that of Jammu and Kashmir, through peaceful negotiations. In their declaration, they will formally renounce the use and threat of the use of force. They will affirm their respect for the Line of Control (LoC) until negotiations are concluded.

End to firing, if any, across LoC.

Commitment by the Governments of India and Pakistan to stop hostile propaganda in the government-owned media and also consultations with private media by the governments in their respective countries to stop such propaganda.

Commitment by the two governments not to undertake military exercises of specified level within mutually identified zones near the LoC and International Border (IB), and notification of military exercises of specified level anywhere else near the LoC and IB.

Commitment not to violate airspace across the LoC or IB and consultations if an intrusion takes place.

Commitment by both governments to prevent any acts detrimental to peace and tranquillity across LoC

– unofficial channels to conceptualise and define such acts and measures to implement their prevention, eventually to pave the way for a group of diplomatic/military experts to negotiate formal agreements.
 
 

Part II

Release of all Kashmiri political prisoners held without trial by the Government of India (GOI).

Talks between GOI and All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC), besides other Kashmiri groups, with a limited and clearly spelt out agenda as suggested here: (1) to discuss the process and not substance of resolving the Kashmir conflict; (2) to discuss possible co-operation by GOI to facilitate talks between Kashmiri groups on both sides of LoC; (3) to establish a working channel of communication only for the limited purpose of ensuring human rights and mitigating violence by all sides against innocent people until a solution is found. Pakistan to declare its moral support for these talks.

Leaders of various Kashmiri groups representing different sections of population, faiths and political views from both sides of the LoC to initiate dialogue about their views on the future of Kashmir at a feasible time and location.

The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan to use their influence to ensure the personal safety of the Kashmiri leaders participating in any of the talks as a part of this phase.

The Government of India to direct security forces and advise the state government to respond with humane and fair conduct and suspend operations against any groups that may announce a cease-fire. The Government of Pakistan to use its influence to encourage various groups operating from its territory to stop acts of violence anywhere across and beyond LoC.

Unofficial channel endorsed by the two governments to pave way for official level talks between India and Pakistan on Kashmir in its entirety. 

Phase 2: Initial Official Contact

Once the ground is well prepared through two sets of unofficial dialogues, the two foreign secretaries or foreign ministers should meet on the fringes of a multilateral meeting to discuss modalities of official and periodical dialogue, which should happen at least once every few weeks irrespective of the state of bilateral relations.

Phase 3: Official Dialogue

Composite dialogues on the lines of the talks conducted in Islamabad/New Delhi in October-November 1998 should be launched with each round having two components: Component 1 to discuss Kashmir and peace and security issues; Component 2 to discuss other issues.

Commitment should be made for a regular dialogue proposed above to be held at least thrice, but ideally more often, a year like the foreign secretary level talks of 1990.

There should be a commitment for the renunciation of violence, support for terrorism and firing across the LoC until the talks reach their logical conclusion. Any infringement of this understanding should be subject of Component 1 of the dialogue.

Phase 4: Groundwork for Political Breakthrough

Once adequate progress is made on all fronts in the official dialogue, the Heads of Government should appoint special envoys to prepare for a summit meeting.

The Heads of Government should open dialogue with the main opposition parties and groups in their respective countries. In particular, the governments should enter into dialogue with parties and groups of religious-political nature to seek their support and the support of various organisations having rapport with such religious parties and groups.

Multi-party groups from the two countries should join advanced meetings of special envoys.

There should be substantial increase in the exchange of media persons, civil society groups and business delegations.

Military commanders of India and Pakistan should meet and explore the reduction of troops from J&K, AJK and NT. Parallel meetings between the heads of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) should take place to ensure peace in areas of their jurisdiction.

Phase 5: Summit Meeting

Once adequate preparation is made, on the five parameters to be addressed in Phase 4, the Heads of Government of India and Pakistan should meet. They should specifically explore a political solution to all outstanding conflicts, in particular Jammu and Kashmir, and work out a compromise solution in the interest of the security of India and Pakistan and honour and justice for the Kashmiri people.

India and Pakistan have completed 53 years of independence in August this year. During this period they have had many achievements but the people of the two countries deserve much more than the standard of living, technological progress and harmony they have obtained. The forward-looking sections of global society are looking into the future. Efforts are being made to explore the establishment of human civilisation on other planets, construct the fundamental units of life, and break the speed of light. If India and Pakistan want to be in a position to catch up with the enlightened parts of the world, they must shed the burden of the past. The progressive nations of the world have given up the historical practice of settling disputes through wars. Whether it is the unification of Germany or the division of Czechoslovakia, reconciliation between the two Koreas or disengagement of Russia from Ukraine and Central Asia, a new framework is being adopted by those countries that wish to move ahead. There are, of course, other countries that have chosen to be caught up in the rivalries of the past, but the choices made by them have resulted in misery for the people of Congo and Ethiopia, Bosnia and Georgia. The difference between Germany and Bosnia, The Czech Republic and Croatia, South Africa and Ethiopia is the difference between a choice in favour of the future and choice in favour of the past.