Nor on a Monday

In his typical nimble-footed way General Musharraf, in an interview to Newsweek, confirmed that he had assured President Bush that no moveme...

In his typical nimble-footed way General Musharraf, in an interview to Newsweek, confirmed that he had assured President Bush that no movement of jehadis across the LoC was taking place. The effect of this, only time will tell. More significantly, he asserted, 8216;8216;I am not going to give you an assurance that for years nothing will happen.8217;8217; But this is not such a fundamental policy pronouncement as it may appear to be at first glance. His statement is even understandable since, barring a unique set of developments, he is unlikely to be in power 8216;8216;for years8217;8217;. In fact he may be building a case for shifting the responsibility for an inevitable change in Kashmir policy, including a realistic reversal, to the civilian government, once it takes over after the proposed October election.

We, therefore, need not look for long term promises from a temporary incumbent. In any case, as India stated on Sunday, 8216;8216;to anger born of frustration, we do not respond on a Sunday8217;8217;. Indeed, we must not respond on a Monday either. We must monitor his actions instead. The more important point is that the US, at the highest levels, has assured India that cross-border terrorism will be terminated 8216;8216;permanently8217;8217; by Pakistan. Thus it is essentially Washington that should weigh the General8217;s statement for its consistency to commitments given to it, and its own consequent assurances to New Delhi. The US in turn 8212; and indeed India 8212; must take into account General Musharraf8217;s unambiguous statement that the LoC is not acceptable as an international border since Pakistan had initiated and fought wars for the whole of Kashmir. But Musharraf must also understand that no solution to the Kashmir issue that is in conflict with the Simla Agreement is possible. Islamabad8217;s intransigence, in fact, may leave New Delhi with no option but to start reclaiming the whole state.

General Musharraf 8212; who controls nuclear weapons, conventional forces and everything else 8212; appears to have come full circle within a month when he stated that a war was averted not by Pakistan8217;s nuclear deterrent but by its conventional military capability. If this was so then logically Pakistan does not require nuclear weapons. Or, if it feels it requires them to deter Indian nuclear weapons, then it should have no hesitation in committing itself to a no-first-use doctrine and strategy of nuclear weapons. This would at least bring greater stability in the region rather than the gimmick of denuclearising South Asia. More likely he was only trying to reassure American audiences of the benign nature of his regime and support for apparent non-proliferation measures while building a case for the US supporting an enhancement of Pakistan8217;s conventional military capability.