The declaration of a unilateral ceasefire during the month of Ramzan (November 29- December 28) by Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee has given a new lease of life to the failing peace process in Kashmir. This unilateral move has been hailed by many in India and abroad as the first positive step in the direction of peace after the collapse of the August 2000 peace initiative of the Hizbul Mujahideen, which had also declared a unilateral ceasefire. Initially, Pakistan had dismissed Vajpayee's declaration as a 'ploy', and the Hizbul Mujahideen and other jehadist groups who operate from sanctuaries inside Pakistan not only rejected the Indian offer, but stepped up their military operations in the Valley. Almost a week after the Indian declaration, however, on 2 December, in a sudden change of stance Islamabad declared that it had ordered its armed forces on the line of control to exercise "maximum restraint" to "strengthen and stabilise" the ceasefire in "occupied Kashmir".
Dawn of Karachi linked Islamabad´s shift to the US Assistant Secretary of State Karl Inderfurth´s reported statement in New Delhi urging "Pakistan and Mujahideen organisations to positively reciprocate Indian prime minister´s ceasefire offer". Earlier, India´s Defence Minister, George Fernandes had indicated that New Delhi´s unilateral ceasefire was a response to ´suggestions´ from certain ´quarters´. Obviously, it was US pressure on India and Pakistan that led to a breakthrough in the India-Pakistan deadlock. But how does one now move from this stage of unilateral statements and counter-statements to dialogue? It is obvious that the two parties have to face each other across a table, and the sooner that happens the better for the survival of the current peace initiative. While the combined pressure of the US government and the IMF has succeeded in bringing the two warring governments this far, this will not be enough to take them to the next necessary stage.
A ´Camp David´ style peace pro-cess cannot work here in South Asia as it has not in West Asia. An antiseptic exercise in ´conflict resolution´ that does not challenge or question the status quo is bound to be stillborn. The hallmark of the Clinton Administration´s policy of ´waging peace´ in West Asia has been not to disturb the status quo (for example, to ignore the fundamental issues of Palestinian displacement and Jewish settlements). The fact is that the status quo always privileges the strong, and as we watch the Camp David agreement disintegrate we must examine the fundamentals of the new push for peace initiative in South Asia, one in which the Americans seem at least to have an indirect role.
To recapitulate recent history: Official talks between India and Pakistan, which were stalled once again in November of that year. In February 1999, Vajpayee took a bus ride to Lahore to kick-start dialogue, and this resulted in the Lahore Declaration and an accompanying buildup of hyperbole in the Indian media about how it was the harbinger of a new era of peace, friendship and cooperation. The fact that Musharraf and the other armed forces chiefs boycotted the Lahore event was noted, but not given due consideration. Within three months, in May 1999, came the letdown, the "stab in the back". Pakistani forces crossed the line of control in Kargil and started bombarding the Srinagar-Leh highway from the ridgeline. In hindsight, it is clear that the Lahore Declaration, significant in itself, was mainly a statement of intent not translated into policy. This was why bureaucrats on both sides continued to drag their feet on pressing bilateral matters even after its signing. It is also true that Sharif was caught completely unawares by Vajpayee´s acceptance of the invitation to visit Lahore by the inaugural bus from Delhi, which was the result of an off-hand remark during an interview Sharif had given to an Indian journalist. This unorthodox, almost Simon Perez-like initiative on the part of Vajpayee washailed as a bold and statesman-like step, particularly after the November 1998 round of secretary-level dialogue had failed (see box).