Former prime minister Inder Kumar Gujral would always say that a solution between Pakistan and India had to be evolved, not presented to the people as if a magician had pulled a rabbit out of the bag. He had a point. The two sides, particularly the politicians and the establishments, had to chew over the solution and gulp it down — a slow process. This is like building brick by brick. Therefore, person-to-person contact is the obvious way for the two countries to discuss and debate the various issues facing them at length, without even reaching a consensus of any sort.
My experience shows that the contact is confined to those who can get a visa or are lucky enough to be part of a Track II committee. Governments on both sides move frustratingly slowly. They have hardly left any scope for contact among the common people on both sides. India's home ministry is further tightening visa eligibility criteria so that it can keep out "unwanted elements".
Norms under discussion indicate income criteria and minimum educational qualifications for entry into India. This is an approach meant to allow only the elite to participate. I thought the home ministry would facilitate the exchange of newspapers, which has stopped since the 1965 war. (In Pakistan, the dissemination of Indian television news is banned.)
The meeting between foreign ministers of the two countries is a step forward, following the talks between the two home ministers and foreign secretaries. What they say and the steps they take will decide whether normalisation is possible. They should act quickly.
Yet the most important thing is to disabuse people on both sides. Feelings of national solidarity are nurtured on each side by emphasising the ‘misdeeds' of the other. When nationalism is fuelled in this way, there is little hope of creating an atmosphere of confidence. Nationalism is, in fact, prejudice.
Understandable suspicion
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's remark that he wants to "trust and verify" the sincerity of Pakistan may be understandable, but it only underlines the depth of distrust. Who is to verify what and how? These are ambiguous questions and should not be raised when the two countries are yet to outline even the agenda of talks. New Delhi does not even want to call these talks "composite dialogue", the phrase Pakistan prefers.
People in both countries have to overcome the traumatic experience of partition. The events of those days are still being passed on from one generation to another. I can tell you from my experiences — I travelled from Sialkot to Amirtsar on September 13, 1947 — that there was no difference between the Hindus and Muslims in terms of killing and looting. One million people were killed and nearly 20 million families uprooted.
It is time to set up a joint commission to go through the textbooks and give directives to those who prepare them to ensure that what happened is accurately reflected. No doubt, such a step will do away with the hatred cultivated at a young age. Pakistan's fear as the small nation pitted against the big state of India is understandable. And most Pakistanis still believe, even after 62 years of the formation of the country, that New Delhi wants to destroy them. This thinking gives grist to the propaganda mills of extremist organisations. Civil societies in both countries have to fight against them. I am reminded of what Atal Behari Vajpayee wrote in the visitors' book at Minar-e-Pakistan: India's integrity and prosperity depends on the integrity and prosperity of Pakistan.
Innocent victims
The prisoners on both sides are a sad commentary on the attitude of rulers and bureaucrats. Indian and Pakistani prisoners languish in jails long after their sentences are over. In most cases, their crime is that they strayed into the other country. Poor fishermen, in particular, have become victims of the hostile atmosphere. The fishermen of Gujarat and Diu in India and Pakistan's Sind suffer the worst. Unknowingly, they enter into the other's waters and are arrested. As of now, there are nearly 560 Indian fishermen in Pakistani prisons and more than 150 Pakistani fishermen in Indian jails.
These people become pawns in the hands of political leaders. They are released only when the leadership in either country feels it is politically beneficial to do so. Though both countries accept that these people are innocent, they continue to incarcerate them.
When the missions on both sides have too many undercover agents, a spy exchange is the result. When one country declares a person persona non-grata and deports him, then there is retaliation from the other side. India and Pakistan have gone through this exercise on numerous occasions.
I still believe that person-to-person contact will improve the situation and reduce fear, suspicion and mistrust. But I do not see such a possibility in the near future because terrorism has changed the scenario. It is true that Pakistan has fallen prey to this phenomenon, but numerous reports from the US think-tanks have said that the Taliban, who attack Pakistani cities at regular intervals, are trained and funded by elements within Pakistan. Now that both New Delhi and Islamabad are determined to fight against terrorism jointly, some kind of mechanism should be created to eliminate the Taliban.
Kuldip Nayar is a former Indian high commissioner to the UK and a former Rajya Sabha MP.
