Nov 23, 1998

Learning the virtues of meaningless conversation

That talks between Indian and Pakistani diplomats are no more than a ritual has long been an open secret. During the recent secretary-level exchanges in Delhi even pretences were dispensed with. The most substantial policy statements were made far from the negotiating table. In Islamabad, the Pakistani foreign minister told a news agency that his country would not deploy nuclear weapons if India made a similar promise. In Lucknow, the Indian home minister called Pakistan a "terrorist state". At the talks themselves, Indian representatives argued that settling smaller disputes or allowing greater cultural exchanges should prepare the ground for a true detente. Their Pakistani interlocutors turned conventional wisdom on its head. They insisted any conflict resolution should begin with Kashmir. Broadly, the two countries are still at square one. They disagreed before the talks; now they disagree with a greater degree of cordiality.

Given this half-farcical, half-impossible situation is there any point persisting with the parleys? Geography leaves India no choice in the matter. Contiguous neighbours and continuous disputes necessitate constant dialogue. That apart, to call off talks or even appear less than interested would be to play into Pakistan's hands. Islamabad has convinced itself that it is at a disadvantage in any bilateral forum due to the sheer size differential. Part of its recalcitrance can be explained by its fervent desire for third party, pro-Pakistani intervention. This will make the subcontinent as much of an international playground as, say, West Asia. It is to Pakistan's advantage therefore to ensure that direct negotiations go precisely nowhere and the global community makes south Asia its business. Such an eventuality will do no harm to Pakistan -- but will scupper India's geo-political ambitions. If to prevent that alone, Delhi has to keep chatting -- while keeping its powder dry.

Misplaced Priorities

Is a nationally ignored election Mizoram's pace dividend?

In an election season where political and media attention is focused on Delhi, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh, it is easy to forget that Mizoram too is going to the polls. Not that this relegation to a collective amnesia is anything new for Mizoram. The entire North-east, in fact, is often a forgotten corner of India -- a laggard rather than a leader in popular perception. How unfair such notions are. Till well into the '80s, Mizoram was torn apart by insurgency. The discontent went back to the days when the region was a part of Assam and substantially neglected during a calamitous famine. Subsequently, Mizoram became a separate though troubled province. In 1986 negotiations between the militant Mizo National Front (MNF) and the Government of India came to a successful conclusion. An accord was signed and peace returned, bringing with it everyday, bread and butter politics. Today voters in Aizawl and in the hinterland confront issues like corruption, inefficiency, moral decay; separatism is dead. The MNF has been true to its word, put away its guns for good and become a regular political party.

Mizoram's absolute renunciation of insurgent-induced violence has few parallels in the world -- and certainly none in India. While other states are in the midst of an election which, like almost any other in India, is obsessed with the past, Mizoram has put history behind. In contrast, the 1984 Sikh massacre is still a festering wound in Delhi. Ultimately it is a question of commitment: the MNF was sincere about peace, those who promised to punish the guilty of 1984 were not. It is an irony that India reacts instantaneously when, say, former militants in Punjab threaten a return to bad days and worse ways. On the other hand, a Mizoram which stays away from such blackmail gets the cold shoulder. Talk about a nation's priorities.

© Living Media India Ltd