SRI LANKA MULLS POLITICAL REFORMS AS IT WRITES A NEW CONSTITUTION

Sri Lanka’s reformist President Maithripala Sirisena has lived up to his election promise as he has proposed a new constitution aimed at devolving power, a long-pending demand of the country’s minorities, including the Tamils. One hopes the constitution, once adopted, will genuinely usher in national unity in the country, which was torn apart by the 26-year-long armed conflict between security forces and the Tamil Tiger rebels. Even after the end of the fierce conflict in 2009, the island nation has been struggling to establish bonafide democracy and restore fundamental rights to all its citizens.  President Sirisena should be lauded as he is making an honest attempt to put an end to ethnic tensions that led to a long and bitter civil war in which more than 100,000 people were killed.

The new constitution seeks to guarantee fundamental rights and freedoms that assure human dignity and promote responsible and accountable government. It is a bold statement which attempts to take reconciliatory steps to reach out to all communities. 

President Sirisena’s comments that the constitution must “suit the needs of the 21^st century and make sure all communities live in harmony” are aimed at addressing the concerns of Tamil minority, which felt alienated in the previous set-ups.

The proposed constitution also seeks to overhaul the present electoral system which many considered flawed and non-representative. There is a proposal to increase the seats in the country’s parliament from 225 seats to 237. Besides 145 elected representatives, it seeks to select 55 representatives on a proportional representation basis keeping in mind the interests of all the communities. Another 37 representatives will come from a national list of candidates. The proposed changes make the political system more transparent and inclusive. The thrust is to unify different ethnic communities by giving them proportionate representation, something which was missing in the constitution since the country gained independence from Britain in 1948. The successive governments always bowed to the pressures from the powerful majority ethnic Sinhala community which was against any power-sharing deal with the minority ethnic Tamils.

Another major contentious issue has been the denial of higher government positions to the ethnic Tamils by the successive governments after the independence. During the British regime, the local Tamils were favoured for key government positions over the Sinhalese. Tamils’ alienation grew into frustration as the governments started ignoring their interests and pandering to the majority Sinhalese population.  This led to the creation of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam or LTTE which waged an armed struggle against the government for the creation of an independent state for the country’s minority Tamils.

The seriousness of the new government in carrying out political reforms is beyond doubt as it agreed to investigate alleged war crime allegations against government troops and LTTE rebels only a few months ago. The government has pledged a truth and reconciliation commission to investigate the charges, which, however, falls short of the demands for an internationally-backed judicial   inquiry. A United Nations report estimates that at least 40,000 Tamil civilians may have been killed in the final months of the civil war when the then government of President Mahinda Rajapaksa launched a massive military operation to crush the separatist LTTE and reclaim the areas controlled by it.

Sadly, the proposed reforms, which have far reaching consequences, are being fiercely opposed by some disgruntled elements led by the former President Rajapaksa who have accused the government of kowtowing to the western nations. Attempts are also being made to fan communal tensions by opponents who say the new government is diluting the main religion, Buddhism. Rajapaksa and his family, which had completely monopolized the power, are opposing the proposal to abolish the Executive Presidency for political motives only. The draconian powers of the Executive Presidency were first introduced by the then President J. R. Jayewardene in 1978 weakening the authority and supremacy of parliament.  No government had misused the Executive Presidency as much as President Rajapaksa did.

The challenges are too many for President Sirisena who is seeking to restore the credibility of parliament and address the genuine concerns of the Tamils within the framework of the constitution. There is no doubt that Sri Lanka desperately needs a new constitution which seeks to democratize the existing institutions and establish the rule of law. Sirisena was voted to power on these twin promises. Now that the people have given him a mandate, no attempt should be made to weaken that mandate. 

DELHI SETS AN EXAMPLE TO CURB POLLUTION, IT’S NOW INDIA’S TURN

Chaos will return to roads of Delhi from January 16 as Transport Minister Gopal Rai announced an end to road rationing experiment. What was proving to be a game changer should not have been discontinued so abruptly. Even the government, which introduced the plan on a trial basis, must have been surprised by the positive outcome.

The doomsayers were proved wrong. Delhiites should be patted for their overwhelming response to the government’s odd-even car policy on alternate days. None had expected that the policy would be a runaway success given the huge opposition to the proposal. It was a bold idea whose success depended largely on the compliance of the people. Such a radical decision could not be enforced through the rule of law only. But what appeared to be a herculean task has been made easier by the people of Delhi. It proves that the people are aware of the dangers of pollution levels which had crossed manifold beyond the permissible limits. Delhi earning the sobriquet of the most polluted city of the world was something that had started troubling the conscience of the people. The common man was worried. The courts were disturbed. Environmentalists were red-flagging the issue. Enough is enough, remarked the National Green Tribunal (NGT) as it banned all vehicles older than 15 years from the roads of Delhi. The aggrieved rushed to the courts against the order. Gladly, the Supreme Court trashed the petitions and lauded the efforts of NGT.

But the NGT order was not enough in arresting the galloping pollution levels of Delhi. The order, which comes into effect from April 1 this year, will bar a third of an estimated 8.4 million vehicles, including motorbikes, trucks, cars and three-wheelers. It needed to be supplemented with more harsh measures in a city where 1,500 new vehicles are added on to the roads every day. The Arvind Kejriwal government then decided to bite the bullet. An idea, which was doing the rounds for the last several years but was deemed unenforceable and impractical, was put into practice on a trial method for a fortnight. 

The government decided to implement the stringent measure to allow vehicles with licence plate numbers ending in an odd or even number to ply on alternate days. It was an idea which critics gave thumbs down even before it was put in place. It was also supposed to ruffle the feathers of many who were loath to the idea of using public transport.

But Delhiites had made up their mind. It’s now or never. The idea was a success from day one. All of a sudden, Delhi resembled a new city. Roads looked wider. Commuting became hassle-free. The average speed of a vehicle almost doubled. The travel time got reduced significantly. There was peace of mind. No more unnecessary and irritating honking. Road rage appeared to be a thing of the past.  And there was a sharp drop in the number of road accidents. Nobody was complaining. A city re-born!

Experts said there was drastic fall in pollution levels, even up to 30 percent.  Had the weather not played spoilsport, there would have been tell-tale signs of results.

But such positive developments did not cheer car-makers and petrol pump dealers. The gas stations registered a sharp drop in the daily sales of petrol and diesel. If some reports are to be believed, petrol and diesel sales registered a drastic fall of 30 to 35 percent in Delhi. That itself is a proof of the success of the car rationing policy. The lesser usage of fuel means lesser pollution. Nevertheless, the car makers approached the Supreme Court again to lift the ban it had imposed on fresh registration of diesel vehicles with at least 2,000 cc engines in Delhi and National Capital Region till April 1. But the Apex court stood its ground and refused to amend its earlier order.

It is sad that some lobbies are active again and pressuring courts and the Delhi government to abandon the path-breaking initiative. Are commercial considerations bigger than the health of Delhi which is gasping for breath? The newborns of Delhi are battling severe allergies and asthma. Don’t we have any responsibility towards them?

Delhi has set a wonderful example. The 12 other cities of India out of a list of the world’s 20 most polluted cities named by the World Health Organisation should replicate Delhi’s campaign to improve air quality for a clean environment for their citizens. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who has announced several campaigns, should also pitch in his efforts as his government has undertaken to develop 98 smart cities. No city can be smart as long as its air is dirty. The challenge for Delhi was huge as it has the highest number of vehicles in the country, more than three other metros -- Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai -- put together. When Delhi can do it, so can any other Indian city. 

PING PONG INDO-PAK TALKS NEED A PAUSE

An attack on an airbase in the border town of Pathankot by Pakistan-based terrorists poses a serious challenge to immediate engagement between New Delhi and Islamabad. The siege, which continued for more than 72 hours, left seven Indian soldiers dead and scores others injured. The January 15 foreign secretary level talks seem to be in jeopardy. That National Security Advisor Ajit Doval was forced to put off his scheduled meeting with his Chinese interlocutor this week sums up the mood of Prime Minister Narendra Modi government. For Modi, who had invested so much in Pakistan by making a surprise and unscheduled meeting with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on the Christmas Day last year, the attack is a personal loss of face.

Daggers would be out if the Modi government were to proceed with the proposed talks given the hard line position that his administration had maintained throughout last year before the unexpected somersault. Modi faces opposition not only from rival parties but his main ally, the Hindu hardline Shiv Sena, which has been scornful in its statements since he undertook the impromptu visit to Lahore to mend ties with the estranged neighbour.

India should satisfy itself first about Pakistan’s response to the latest attack. Condemnation is fine but it should be reciprocated with some visible concrete action. Initial investigations point fingers at Jaish-e-Mohammed, which had earlier carried out several terrorist attacks on India, including the deadly December 13, 2001 attack on our parliament, which brought the two countries to the brink of war. Its founder Maulana Masood Azhar, who formed Jaish-e-Mohammed soon after his release in December 1999 from an Indian prison in exchange of passengers of a hijacked Indian Airlines plane in Kandahar, continues to be a free man despite the government banning his organization. Nowhere in the world does it happen that a country, which bans a terrorist group, allows its leaders to remain in the loose. Pakistan banned Jaish-e-Mohammed in 2002 after it was designated as a terrorist organization by dozens of countries, including the United States, but has fought shy of putting Azhar behind bars.

New Delhi has already shared some facts with Islamabad in the Pathankot attack case. The sincerity of Nawaz Sharif will be tested in the coming days. Whether his government acknowledges those evidences and takes some concrete action will decide the future course of talks between the two countries. Sharif can’t just afford to parrot the same old line that this is the handiwork of non-state actors and that his government has no control over them. The fact that these terrorists, in thousands, continue to enjoy the hospitality of Pakistan is something which is known to the entire world. Pakistan can’t escape the responsibility of their actions. It will have to demonstrate not only to New Delhi but to the entire world what it proposes to do with them. Not taking any military action against them would be seen as Pakistan’s complicity with terror groups. Here in lies the problem with Sharif. His hands are tied. He is incapable of taking an independent line against the wishes of his masters in Pakistan army and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) who dictate the country’s foreign policy.

Pakistan’s army and the ISI have invested decades in creating various terrorist groups as assets, keeping the global community on the tenterhooks, pocketing billions of dollars by switching off the tap of terrorism periodically and unleashing them again to further their diabolic designs. And the relationship between the two has deepened so much that it will not be that easy for Pakistan to get rid of terrorists so easily. Any military action against its guest terrorists is bound to have major implications for Pakistan which may not come out unscathed.

As long as Pakistan’s two powerful institutions are not on board, there is very little possibility of India-Pakistan talks making any meaningful headway. One need not dig deep to understand this challenge. The then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s widely-appreciated 1998 “Lahore Yatra” on bus was met with Kargil a few months later in 1999. India had to pay the heavy price by losing its 530 soldiers during the Kargil war. Mr. Sharif, who was the prime minister of Pakistan then, made a silly statement that he was not in the know of the operation. Hard to digest!

Mr. Vajpayee again extended the hand of friendship to General Musharraf, who had by then usurped power by overthrowing Sharif and packing him off to Saudi Arabia, and hosted him in Agra in 2001. Pakistan’s response? There was a ghastly attack on the assembly of Jammu and Kashmir in Srinagar to be followed with the deadliest attack on Parliament. The attacks led to the massive military standoff between the two countries resulting in the massing of troops on the border and the line of control in Kashmir for about a year. India claimed that the attacks were carried out by two Pakistan-based terror groups, the Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad, a charge that Pakistan denied. In between, India was rocked by 2006 Mumbai trains blasts and the 26/11 terror attacks in 2008 which led New Delhi to stop all diplomatic engagements with Islamabad. And now we have Pathankot within a week of Modi’s trip to Lahore, not to mention the attack on Dina Nagar police station in Gurdaspur district of Punjab in July 2015 days after Modi and Sharif signed an agreement in the Russian city of Ufa.

There is no doubt that there is a section within Pakistan establishment which does not want better relationship between the two countries. India’s experiments with both the civilian as well military leaderships have been frustrating. There were high hopes when President Musharraf was at the helm. It was widely expected that he had the unflinching support of the army and the ISI. But the subsequent actions belied those expectations.

Therefore, Prime Minister Modi will have to tread with caution. The attack is a major setback personally for Modi who took the audacious gamble of re-engaging with Pakistan after a series of massive ceasefire violations on the border and line of control, and a number of daring terrorist attacks last year.

India should put off the January 15 foreign secretary-level talks with Pakistan and instead press for National Security Advisor-level talks where terror should be the only agenda. Pakistan, which has condemned the Pathankot attack, has said in a statement that it remains committed to partner with India to completely eradicate the menace of terrorism afflicting South Asian region. Let it prove its sincerity. Pakistan should demonstrate through its action that it stands with India and the global community as far as the war against terrorism is concerned. Its time Pakistan matches its words with action. Talks can follow later. 

NO LESSONS LEARNT, INTELLIGENCE FAILS AGAIN

  

While Indian government may be self congratulating itself for containing the terror attack in Pathankot and securing assets in the air base, it can be accused of glossing over intelligence failure. Authorities had prior information of such an attack. An alert had already been sounded. Then on Friday, the terrorists infiltrated into India before striking at two different places in Pathankot. They first killed a 40-year-old Sikh man before decamping with his Innova car. Later they seized an official car of Gurdaspur Superintendent of Police (headquarters) Salwinder Singh on the Pathankot highway before driving down from the border to the heavily fortified strategic air base, about 25 kilometres away. The terrorists were on the loose from Friday till early Saturday when the first contact with them was made at 3.30 a.m. at the air base. And mind you, they were heavily armed, had assault rifles and grenades. And still they could not be spotted.

Two important questions arise here? Firstly, security agencies had specific intelligence about the terror attack at least four to five days in advance.  Secondly, the Gurdaspur SP had alerted Punjab police about the incident and the presence of five terrorists on Friday itself after his car was waylaid. Still the security agencies could not locate them. In fact, there was a delay of full 12 hours before the agencies began probing the terror angle despite being told by Salwinder Singh. The terrorists themselves announced their arrival at the air base after they opened fire at security forces. If this is not intelligence failure, then what will you call it? Their main aim was to carry out a spectacular attack and they succeeded partly in their mission. If our security agencies could not track them despite having specific intelligence information, then something is wrong somewhere. But we won’t own it.

The government and security agencies are still unsure about the number of terrorists. It’s four, perhaps six or more. We don’t know yet. As the siege dragged on, it became clear that there were certainly more than four terrorists. Home Minister Rajnath Singh, who was quick to announce the end of operation by commenting that all five terrorists were killed, was forced to delete his twitter after it became known that only four terrorists were neutralized and there were reports of fresh firing. Was the Home Minister in the dark or he jumped the gun? It clearly shows there is no coordination among various agencies. That the operation is going on for the last four days does not reflect well on our security preparedness.

Nobody has answers yet as to how many vehicles did the terrorists use? Some reports suggest two teams may have entered the airbase using two different vehicles. If it is true, then where is the second vehicle? Did somebody drop the second team of terrorists near the air base? It’s all speculation. We don’t know yet.

And it is less said the better as far as monitoring of the international border with Pakistan is concerned. There are reports suggesting that the terrorists might have crossed the border from the same point from where terrorists from Pakistan had infiltrated before carrying out a daring attack on Gurdaspur police station in July last year in which 10 people were killed. We were told that more troops were sent to the border after the Gurdaspur terror attack. But still they could not notice the movement of terrorists? How does one explain this? Clearly, the Border Security Force is inattentive and did shoddy work in guarding the international border.

The fact of the matter is that we have not learnt any lessons from previous attacks. Why is it that terrorists succeed in carrying out the attacks whenever they wish to? We just respond to the attacks by eliminating the terrorists and pay a heavy price by losing our brave hearts. There is something seriously amiss in our intelligence gathering and sharing. It is high time we strengthen our intelligence network so that the terrorists are either arrested or neutralized before they dare to attack our country. Hope, it is not a wishful thinking. 

SHOULD POLLUTED DELHI BE ALLOWED TO SLIP INTO COMA?

Here are some frightening facts on pollution. Air pollution kills more than 627,000 in India, according to the World

Health Organization. India has 13 of the 20 most polluted cities of the world. And our national capital New Delhi has the world’s dirtiest air, earning it the dubious distinction of the most polluted city of the world. In a city of 18 million people, we have 8.5 million vehicles, and still counting. And at least, if not more, 1,500 new vehicles are added to Delhi’s roads every day. New Delhi has the highest number of vehicles in the country, more than three other metros -- Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai -- put together. Delhi accounts for more than 8 percent of the total registered vehicles in the country. In the last decade, vehicle numbers have increased by more than 100 percent. Is it an achievement that we should be proud of?

Vehicular emissions cause close to three-quarters of Delhi's air pollution. The WHO found that Delhi had an average of 153 micrograms of the smallest particles, known as PM2.5s, per cubic metre in its air. The international “safe” level for these particles is 6 micrograms per cubic metre. Is it not a scary scenario? There have been rising incidences of allergies, respiratory problems and birth anomalies, thanks to city’s toxic air.

Then why are we making such a hue and cry after the Delhi government came out with an odd-even car formula, that, too, on a trial basis for a fortnight, just because it will inconvenience us? There is no doubt that the proposal will lead to chaos, to begin with. Our daily routine will be badly disturbed. But is it not the time to press the panic button and bite the bullet? We are to be blamed for the mess that we find ourselves to be in. How do we explain that a small family of three or four people having an equal number of cars? It has become status symbol for many to park high-end cars outside their homes as coveted trophies, leaving little space for people to even walk. Over the years, roads of Delhi, one of the widest in the country, have shrunk with no space for pedestrians and cyclists. The pavements today appear to be extension of road as bikers use them unabashedly. One just can’t walk and cycle because it is fraught with dangers. A 2012 road accident data shows a person is either injured or killed in a road accident in Delhi every hour.

Today Delhi has become gas chamber. The air has become so polluted that we breathe toxic air when we take a stroll out in park in the morning. So what do we do? Should we not take corrective steps?

When the first car-free day was kicked off from Red Fort to Bhagwan Das Road on October 22 this year, studies found that there was a dramatic 60 percent drop in the amount of dangerous pollutants in comparison to the previous day. There is no doubt that if 30 to 40 percent cars are off Delhi roads, air will be much less pollutant.

Critics say Delhiites will puncture government’s good intention by buying another car or cars, as it happened in Mexico, defeating the purpose. Yes, we Delhiites are quite capable of doing that. But how many of us will be able to buy new cars? There is no doubt that car rationing is not the only solution. It will have to be accompanied with several harsh measures. The government should keep a tab on the people buying cars. Those found having more than two cars should be slapped with a heavy road tax. The monitoring agency should also ask the buyer whether he has parking lot for the vehicle. Those using the second lane of roads as parking lots should be fined.

Counterfeiting of number plates is another problem the authorities will have to grapple with as an English daily recently found out. Scheming people are already out with innovative ideas! It will be very difficult to differentiate between a genuine and a counterfeit number plate. 

Critics also point to Delhi’s inadequate public transport system which will not be able to take the load if 30 or 40 percent private vehicles are off roads. The government has promised to add more than 3,000 vehicles but it will have to procure much more if it wants the system to work. The government will also have to sort out the last mile problems if wants to get people to use more public transportation.

The National Green Tribunal should be lauded for suggesting a ban of all vehicles older than 15 years from the streets of Delhi beginning April next year. It will take off at least one-third of the total vehicles from the roads. Authorities should also test vehicles regularly for pollution levels. And those vehicles found emitting pollution more than the limits should be penalized.

Subsidies on diesel should end. Cheaper diesel fuel has led to people buying more diesel vehicles. Diesel car sales accounted just 4 percent in 2000. Today diesel cars are half of new car sales. According to WHO, diesel emissions have strong link with lung cancer.

There is a desperate need to create public awareness to switch off engines while waiting at traffic signals. An idling vehicle is likely to cause more pollution than the running vehicle.

Buses and minibuses should not be allowed to stop longer than necessary to pick up or put down passengers.

Buses should not be allowed to take more than two lanes of the left side of the road to avoid traffic jams. Traffic jams contribute heavily to pollute air.

And lastly, pollution is not the problem of Delhi government only. The Centre should also pitch in to make the programme a success. Timing of government offices should be staggered and the sarkari babus should work in shifts as it happens in corporate houses. Why everybody in government offices has to report at 9 in the morning and leave around 5 p.m.? If the timings are staggered by two hours beginning 8 a.m. in three shifts, considerable traffic will be off the roads at a particular time to beat congestion. Delhi's congestion has more than doubled in the last 10 years and the day is not far when the average speed of the vehicle will be five kiometres an hour. Until and unless road congestion is not improved, the war against pollution cannot be won. 

We have won this war before. When Sheila Dixit government moved polluting industries out of the city, closed down coal-based power plants and introduced cleaner CNG in public transport vehicles, the air quality improved significantly. But sadly we let the guard down. We can do it again. What we need is a will and self-discipline. We own Delhi and we won’t let it choke to die. It should be our New Year resolve.

DORMANT INDIA-PAKISTAN TIES NEED A JOLT

It was not a surprise stopover when Prime Minister Narendra Modi landed in Lahore from Afghanistan to meet and greet his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif on his 66^th birthday. It was the visit shrouded in secrecy. Since the PMO has taken over reigns of foreign affairs with National Security Advisor Ajit Doval at the helm, diplomacy has acquired a new meaning. Status quo has been replaced with unconventionality. It has its advantages as well as pitfalls. Indo-Pak relations have been mired in such deep mistrust that one needs to go beyond the run of the mill approach. It has been 68 years and the political establishments of both the countries view each other with suspicion. This is one reason why there has been very little progress on issues which bedevil bilateral ties.

Barely hours into the meeting of the two leaders, had hawks from both the countries started dwelling on mundane issues puncturing hopes of renewed bonhomie. Instead of concentrating on the high points of the visit, there was meaningless debate on who was more generous between the two or who took the first step? Or was it Modi who first expressed his desire to meet Sharif or the latter who invited him to drop by since he was in the region? Come on! Be a good sport and give them some time.

That the two leaders decided to meet, impromptu or under a well-crafted strategy, is immaterial. What matters is that it is a good beginning. What bureaucracy can’t achieve, sometimes a meeting between the two heads of the states can do wonders. Such meetings devoid of any agenda can break the ice and bridge the trust deficit. As long as the two countries view each other with suspicion it will be difficult to overcome roadblocks. Such meetings also give a new direction to the people involved in the decision making that there is a desire on the part of the leadership of the two countries to move ahead.

Both the countries have gone to wars three times, twice over the disputed Kashmir, and had a brief armed conflict in Kargil. Did any of the two countries gain anything? On the contrary, the international community always keeps its fingers crossed fearing a nuclear war between the two. Both the countries are seen as villain to global peace. It is high time both New Delhi and Islamabad display a matured leadership and shrug off world’s concerns and make a new beginning.

Now that the first step has been taken, the two countries should try to redefine their relationship by taking up issues which are less complex in nature. As they grow in confidence, they can approach complicated issues. Trade, for example, appears to be a low-hanging fruit where both the countries can make tremendous progress. Better trade ties will act as a deterrent against any misadventure. Pakistan can reciprocate by granting the long-awaited MFN status to India which will be a win-win situation for both the countries. What’s strange that Pakistan continues to import goods from India, but via third countries, thus inflating its import bill. Pakistan, which has been importing several items from other countries, can do so from India saving on its transportation costs and high-cost imports.

Both the countries should learn from Indo-China relations. In spite of decades of stand-off and a war over border, New Delhi and Beijing have made giant progress in several fields, particularly in bilateral trade. Today, both the countries stand together at world forums to take on the powerful West on issues of common interest. They have not let their border dispute come in between their relationship.

Then there are humanitarian issues of fishermen who inadvertently cross over to each other’s waters. A mechanism can be worked out so that fishermen of both the countries are not detained for long. Easy visa regime is another area which can be looked into as people have families in both the countries.

And what about cricket diplomacy! One of the easiest issues could be the resumption of cricketing ties between the two countries. The love and affection that the cricketers are showered with when they travel to each other’s country is unimaginable. It will not only improve people-to-people relationship but may prove to be a game changer.

But the road ahead is not hunky-dory. Both the leaders will have to encounter several roadblocks. The renewed bonhomie between the two countries may not be music for terrorists who may feel threatened that Pakistan may turn its back to them in future. The terrorists have always responded ferociously whenever Pakistan was forced to take action against them. Pakistan may have nurtured them as their safe assets, but they are increasingly becoming its liability. As the world unites against terrorism, Pakistan will have to take a hard call. It would not like to be seen bracketed as “with us or with them”.  Pakistan’s seriousness in improving ties with India will also be tested in future. It is then that terrorists may carry out some spectacular attacks against India forcing the two countries to retrieve to its “no-talks” position. This is one scenario which will weigh heavily in any future engagements between the two countries. Will India under the hardline Hindu party government not forced to call off talks and take jingoistic stand? India can weather such an attack if it is convinced that Pakistan has stopped providing oxygen to terrorist groups and that Islamabad has no direct hand in it. But for that to happen, Pakistan will have to prove its credentials.

Back home, Modi will have to take the Opposition into confidence as he moves ahead with his kind of diplomacy. For, there seems very little opposition to their meeting in Pakistan. In India, the Opposition has cried foul as the Modi government has taken a complete U-turn as far as its policy with Pakistan is concerned. The Opposition will pester the government which is being seen as yielding too much and too soon to Islamabad without any tangible change on the ground. Perhaps the BJP would also have reacted in the same fashion had it been in opposition. Therefore, Modi will have to reach out to the Opposition and use his charm offensive to bring them on board. Modi might have pulled off a diplomatic coup but the success of such an adventure will depend largely how he mends the frosty relationship with the Opposition. Equal responsibility lies with the Opposition to give Modi a fare opportunity as he tries something different from the time-tested old formula. There is no doubt that India-Pakistan relationship is very complex in nature. But every complex problem has its solution also. It is time both the countries display maturity and self-confidence to do business with each other.

FROM PARIS TO BANGKOK TO ISLAMABAD IN 10 DAYS!

The lightening speed with which India-Pakistan talks have traveled is amusing if not baffling. Can a less than three-minute conversation between prime ministers Narendra Modi and Nawaz Sharif on the sidelines of the Paris climate summit change the atmospherics so much that the two countries would agree to composite dialogue within 10 days? How can a government, which takes offence to Pakistan high commissioner to New Delhi hosting Kashmiri separatists leading to cancellation of foreign secretary level talks, take a sudden 360-degree U-turn? What has happened in between that the Modi government decided to expand the scope of bilateral dialogue from terror-specific talks? There is something more to this sudden development which meets the eye. Is there a nudge from some foreign power? Any guesses? Will the government come clean on it?

Questions are being asked whether the Indian government has conceded too much and too soon? Has the government smelt something which others have not? Has Pakistan created a positive atmosphere warranting a “composite” dialogue? There does not seem any prevention of infiltration attempts from across the border. Terror activities continue unabated in Jammu and Kashmir, not to talk about the on-off border skirmishes.

It will be interesting to know whether Pakistan has committed to India that it will look seriously into the concerns of New Delhi. Will it fast-track the 2008 Mumbai blasts trial and bring the guilty to book? Will it not allow its soil to be used by terrorists whom it continues to shelter at its backyard against India? Will it take action against people like Hafeez Saeed, who India considers to be the mastermind of the Mumbai blasts, by arresting him and not allowing him to spew venom against New Delhi? Why terrorists like Syed Salahuddin continue to be feted by Pakistan? Will Pakistan stop denying the presence of Mumbai blasts’ main accused Dawood Ibrahim in its country? These are some of the crucial issues on which India wanted some progress before full-fledged talks could be resumed. Has there been any forward movement on any of the abovementioned issues? India knows the answer best.

Some of the fundamental questions remain unanswered. All through, Prime Minister Modi government had been maintaining a very hardline approach vis-à-vis Pakistan. In fact, it came under criticism for abruptly cancelling the National Security Advisers meet early this year, for it wanted to discuss terrorism only while Pakistan was opposed to restricted talks and wanted the scope of the talks to include Kashmir. In reality, the Modi government was incensed at the decision of Pakistan’s National Security Advisor Sartaj Aziz to entertain Kashmiri separatist leaders ahead of the talks. Why the hullabaloo over such a meeting? In the past, Kashmiri separatist leaders have met Pakistani leaders whenever they visited India. Pakistan high commission to New Delhi has been regularly hosting them on Eid. Everybody knows that Kashmiri separatists are nothing but proxies of Pakistan.

In fact, Mr. Vajpayee also had a meeting with them while he was trying to find a peaceful solution to the vexed Kashmir issue in 2009. So, what is the big deal if they meet any Pakistani leader or any official? Today, the Hurriyat leadership has lost its relevance in Kashmir as successive state elections have proved. The participation of people in the elections has increased over the years despite Hurriyat’s poll-boycott calls. Gone are the days when its writ used to run in Kashmir Valley. Today, its influence has shrunk to a very few pockets in the Valley. Moreover, it has been considerably weakened following numerous splits in the past. Therefore, it hardly matters who they meet? India-Pakistan relations should not be seen through the prism of Hurriyat.

Is the sudden volte-face by the Modi government in dealing with Pakistan an admission of defeat of its policy? The hawkish stand taken by India on Pakistan since Modi came to power last year has proved to be counter-productive. It might have increased his standing among his hardcore followers in India but it certainly did not enhance his position at international level. Modi was increasingly being seen as a hardline leader wanting to isolate Pakistan while reaching out to other countries. Has the reality dawned on Modi and his top bureaucrats that his ambitious plan to enhance regional cooperation will not materialize as long as India-Pakistan relations remained frosty?

The fact of the matter is that over the last few months Pakistan’s stakes have gone up after it facilitated talks between Afghanistan government and the Taliban. The US and other NATO countries have deep interests in Afghanistan as they want to pull out of the war-torn country but not before restoring a semblance of normalcy. Pakistan, which pulls strings of several militant groups, has a pivotal role in Afghanistan. In fact, the US President Barack Obama has gone on record praising the role of Pakistan in Afghanistan when Sharif called on him in Washington in October this year. A joint statement after the meeting said “President Obama affirmed Pakistan’s role as a key counterterrorism partner and recognized the sacrifices that Pakistani civilians, military, and law enforcement personnel have made over the years as they confront terrorism and militant groups.”

Is it a mere coincidence that both the countries went into a diplomatic overdrive after Nawaz Sharif expressed his desire to hold unconditional talks with India during his meeting with British Premier David Cameron on the sidelines of CHOGM meeting in Malta last month?

All said and done, talks had to happen. How long can the two neighbours be at odds with each other and not on talking terms? There is no other option but to talk to resolve all issues, no matter how intricate they are. As the then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee rightly said: “You can change friends, but you can’t change neighbours”.

Now that the talks are back on track, it is expected of the leadership of the two countries to display maturity and not act amateurishly. What has given hope to the fresh initiative is that it is being backed by Pakistan’s powerful military. The appointment of Lt Gen. Naseer Khan Janjua as Pakistan’s National Security Advisor is being seen as a positive development as he comes from army. It will be difficult for the Pakistani military leadership now to veto any decision taken during future talks. In the past, Pakistan’s army was seen as a major obstacle whenever the democratically elected government tried to strike peace with India. Kargil happened soon after Vajpayee traveled to Lahore and signed an agreement with Sharif. The agreement between Modi and Sharif in the Russian city of Ufa was followed with a spurt in infiltration attempts and ferocious ceasefire violations.  One can now hope there will be no such provocations from either side to derail talks. The talks must go on.