Govt blames Pak for derailing truce

While the blame game was to be expected, two things were clear from the statement. One, that the Government intended to persevere with its Kashmir initiative with any group that is willing to play ball. This was evident from the last but one paragraph which stated, “India remains firmly committed to the peace process and calls on all those who have taken to arms to return to the path of peace.”

Two, it is holding out on its refusal to enter into a tripartite dialogue despite the pressure that Pakistan is trying to build through the Hizbul’s brinkmanship over its ceasefire offer. “Pakistan’s object has been to derail the peace process by seeking to involve itself as a party in the discussions between India and the Hizbul Mujahideen,” the Government statement said. “The question of a dialogue with Pakistan is a separate matter. India is willing to talk with Pakistan on all matters of bilateral concern when Pakistan puts an end to cross-border terrorism.”

The emphasis is on the word “bilateral”. In other words, the Government wants to keep any initiative it may start with Kashmiri groups separate from the dialogue it may resume with Pakistan at a future date provided Islamabad adheres to New Delhi’s terms.

There were indications here that Government was not entirely surprised by the Hizbul’s decision to call off the ceasefire. Official circles pointed out that this was the reason why the negotiating team which was to go to Srinagar yesterday for the second round of talks, never left.

As of now, the Government has few options left unless the Hizbul does another somersault with a little help from Washington. It can of course continue its efforts to wean away Abdul Majid Dar from his bosses in Pakistan and Home Ministry sources suggested that interlocutors in Srinagar were working on this.

Dar has gone underground and so have the persons he had nominated to discuss ceasefire modalities with the Government. However, Home Ministry sources said the channels of communication established with Dar and his associates were still alive.

The Government can also look at other options in Kashmir as its statement suggested it may do in the coming days. For instance, it can revive its dialogue offer to the Hurriyat Conference which has been feeling ignored in the flurry of activity with the Hizbul. Except for one initial positive statement, Hurriyat leaders have been dismissive of the Hizbul’s ceasefire offer.

However, this option will have to balanced with Farooq Abdullah’s interests. The Hurriyat is a political threat to the National Conference which the Hizbul, being a militant outfit, was not. This probably explains why Abdullah welcomed the ceasefire talks.

Official circles feel in hindsight that the ceasefire offer from the Hizbul in Pakistan was probably a pressure tactic for a tripartite dialogue. And they are convinced that this pressure will only mount in the runup to the United Nations General Assembly Meet in September.

The view here is that a tripartite dialogue will put the clock back to 1947 and bring into question the accession of Kashmir to the Indian Union. This is why the Indian position has all along been on a bilateral process to resolve the Kashmir dispute with Pakistan.