news details |
|
|
| Indo-Pak Dialogue: For Islamabad water, not Kashmir, core issue | | | RUSTAM
EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, Jan 29: Reports from New Delhi clearly suggest that hectic discussions are on to restarted dialogue with Islamabad. Reports also indicate that Indian and Pakistani officials are in touch to give final agenda ahead of the foreign Secretary-level talks scheduled next week at Thimpu, Bhutan. At the same time, Indian Foreign Office (IFO) is not very sure if anything tangible would emerge during the talks. The apprehension is well-founded. New Delhi is aware of the Pakistani antics. There are elements in the IFO who are convinced that the forthcoming meeting between the foreign secretaries may end in a deadlock as before. Moreover, Islamabad has already made its agenda public and virtually declared that it would accept only such solution that promotes its own geo-political interests. But more than that certain are elements in the Pakistani establishment and outside who have made it quite clear that water issue for Pakistan is far more important as compared to Kashmir.
"India is indulging in water terrorism…India has 'imposed war on Pakistan' by constructing 'illegal dams' and diverting water of Pakistani rivers…The Government (of Pakistan) must prepare the nation to counter this aggression…If India continues with her water terrorism, Pakistan must keep the option of using force".
Who said so and when and where? Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) chief Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, who masterminded the 26/11 terrorist attacks in Mumbai and who is part and parcel of the Pakistani establishment in the real sense of the term said so. He described as "India's 'theft' of Pakistan's share of river waters" at Lahore only recently. In fact, he warned India of dire consequences in a public rally, which also adopted an anti-India "declaration" on the water issue.
What Hafiz Saeed said should not surprise anyone. For, he has spoken what the Pakistani state believes in and what it has been striving to achieve since 1958, when General Ayub Khan fixed his evil eyes on the Indus waters or on the Chenab, Indus and Jhelum rivers. Ayub Khan was of the view that the Indus waters were "indispensable for the economic survival of his country". He took a concrete step in 1965 to establish Pakistani control over the Indian waters. Pakistan invaded J&K to annex it that year, but suffered a humiliating defeat at the hands of the Indian Army.
Former Pakistan President, General Pervez Musharaf, also belonged to the school of thought to which General Ayub Khan belonged. For him, Kashmir was a "core issue not because of ideology but because of Pakistan's water requirements". In other words, while Ayub Khan considered Kashmir "indispensable for Pakistan's economic survival", General Pervez Musharraf, who "discarded" the Pakistan's decades old stand on the UN resolutions on J&K and did not talk of "accession as his country's ideology", made it quite clear that J&K was "indispensable for both the country's economic survival and for its national integrity".
It was no wonder then that he, like General Ayub Khan, also strove to annex J&K. His Army attacked Kargil in May 1999 in order to integrate J&K into Pakistan and establish Pakistan's complete control over the precious Indus waters, which, if made optimum use of, can produce about 20,000 MW of electricity. As was expected, the Indian Army once again inflicted a crushing defeat on the Pakistani intruders but in the process lost several precious lives.
That General Pervez Musharraf considered the Indus waters "indispensable" for the economic survival of Pakistan, as also for its "national integrity", had become clear as early as in 1990, when he was holding the rank of Brigadier. That year he read a paper on the issue of water in the Royal College of Defence Studies, London. In fact, General Musharraf had gone to London to take part in a training programme at the said college. The title of his paper was: "The Arms Race in the Indo-Pakistan Sub-continent. Conflicts with the Pressing Requirements of Socio-economic Development. What are its Causes and Implications? Is there a remedy?"
The bottom-line of his paper was that the Indus waters or the three rivers of J&K "hold the key to the future conflict between India and Pakistan".
Former Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz had also expressed almost similar views on March 3, 2005 while interacting with Communist leaders like Harkishan Singh Surjet and A B Bardan in Islamabad. He had told the visiting communist leaders: "Baglihar and Kishanganga dams could cause ripples in bilateral relations if not resolved amicably". Ruling Pakistan Muslim League (PML) president Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain was also present on the occasion.
All this shows that it is not just the pernicious two-nation theory that has been determining the Pakistani attitude towards J&K. It also shows that at the heart of Islamabad's fixation is the prospectus of "acute water scarcity in the immediate future". This was one of the conclusions of the new study on Indo-Pak relations. The study had been undertaken by Sundeep Waslekar and his colleagues at the International Centre for Peace Initiatives ICPI) and the findings were made public in March 2005. (To be continued) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
