Let’s remain engaged

The India-Pakistan composite dialogue is being re-examined in the context of the recent terrorist-related serial bomb blasts in Delhi just before the change of government in J&K, says C Uday Bhaskar

The serial bomb blasts in Delhi on October 29 that claimed more than 60 lives, and the Srinagar car explosion that killed six people on November 2 on the eve of the swearing-in ceremony of Ghulam Nabi Azad as the new chief minister of Jammu and Kashmir provide the most recent context of terrorist-related violence and bloodshed against which the India-Pakistan composite dialogue is to be examined.

While the Jaish-e-Mohammed has claimed responsibility for the Srinagar attacks — it has been described in a macabre fashion as a 'first gift' to Azad — investigations are still proceeding as regards Delhi, though the finger of suspicion at the time of writing pointed to the Lashkar-e-Taiba. Both attacks were carried out in the Diwali-Eid period and the symbolism is self-evident. The terrorist groups are seeking to establish their credibility and malignant intent in the backdrop of the earthquake that has seen the LoC generating more chaos and compassion than ever seen since 1947 and the bilateral dialogue proceeding in a reasonably satisfactory manner.

The mood in India is one of anguish and anger, and Pakistan has been swift to not only denounce the Delhi blasts as acts of ‘terror’ that are unacceptable but has also offered to co-operate with India. This in itself is encouraging but the sincerity of the latter is yet to be proven. Anxiety has been expressed in India and the future of the composite dialogue is being questioned. However, after the experience of the attack on Parliament in December 2001 and the snapping of links with Pakistan thereafter, it is evident that the more prudent course will be to engage with Islamabad and use all politico-diplomatic leverages available to prevail upon Musharraf to deliver on the January 2004 composite dialogue statement agreed to by him and Vajpayee.

The pattern of continuing terrorist violence would indicate that the regime in Islamabad is either unable or unwilling to deal firmly with terrorism – notwithstanding the status conferred on it by the Bush administration of being a staunch ally in the global war on terror. This is the central paradox for India that while most major terror incidents reveal an unmistakable foot-print and trail to Pakistan, the global community led by the US are willing to give the benefit of doubt to Musharraf and the Indian experience is diluted or selectively interpreted.

However for the first time in recent memory, the Security Council issued a stern statement on October 31 apropos the Delhi blasts that places the onus on Pakistan (without naming it) to prove its credentials as a responsible state in the war on terror by cooperating with India. Whether Pakistan does so in a meaningful manner is still moot. But the course of action for India in the next few months will be to find the appropriate mix of deftness and determination in its security and foreign policies with regard to the many inter-linking issues that span terrorism, nuclear proliferation and major bilateral relations. This is not the first time that the Jaish-e-Mohammed has claimed responsibility for a major terrorist attack and their support structures are too well known for Islamabad to feign ignorance or deny their existence. India could marshal irrefutable evidence so that Musharraf is enabled and ‘encouraged’ to deliver. The trajectory and momentum of the composite dialogue can be predicated upon this demonstration of sincerity.

Simultaneously, India has to review the efficacy of its own long-term strategy towards terrorism and its penchant for passive, transient reactive responses when confronted with blood and gore – as in Delhi. It is pertinent that the outgoing Chief Justice RC Lahoti noted that India lacks the requisite political will to deal with the scourge of terrorism in a sustained and effective manner. This is the mindset that has to be redressed with resolve and in the process, engaging with Pakistan remains the more prudent option.