In the ruling class circles and media in India, three conclusions are being emphasized after the Agra summit between Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Pakistan President Gen. Parvez Musharraf. First that the Agra summit has failed, secondly Kashmir-centred approach of Gen. Musharraf has been responsible for it and thirdly that during and after the Summit, the Pakistan ruler has scored in media over the leaders of Indian Govt.

As the issues dominating the Summit percolated among the people, the failure of the Summit has been increasingly publicized by the Indian Govt. and the ruling alliance, and they are doing this with a lot of satisfaction and relief. While doing this they even forget that they themselves had invited Gen. Musharraf for talks. What was being touted as an example of the statesmanship of Mr. Vajpayee is being forgotten as a bad dream.

The role of the Indian Govt. at the time of extending invitation to Gen. Musharraf, during the summit and after, clearly shows that this ‘initiative’ was not a result of any considered policy of the Govt. Rather it appears to have been taken under foreign pressure. Even while extending invitation to Gen. Musharraf, the cease-fire which was declared by the Indian Govt. at the time of Ramazan and extended subsequently, was called off. Whatever had been the efficacy of the cease-fire and its interpretation by the security forces, this could hardly be indicative of any initiative on the part of the Indian Govt. to advance towards resolution of Kashmir issue. The question arises, why had the invitation been extended in the first place while the Indian Govt. had thought of no proposal at all? The happenings give credence to the common perception that the invitation had been extended under US pressure.

The Govt. of India had been claiming that it would not talk to the military Govt. of Gen. Musharraf, whom Indian Govt. and media had painted as the architect of Kargil. This apparently high moral stance was soon abandoned for the more mundane i.e., no dialogue with Pakistan unless trans-border terrorism was stopped. And then suddenly, all this was brushed aside and no explanation was forthcoming, not even an apology of it. All this while the visitors to the west landed at Delhi claiming that US was about to declare Pakistan a “terrorist state”. The Indian Govt. functionaries and the intellectuals on their payroll craned their necks westward hoping for the windfall of such a declaration!

After receiving the invitation from Indian Govt., Gen. Musharraf had said that the invitation had been extended at the behest of Bush Administration, though he later, understandably, retraced his statement. Large number of those who manage the affairs in the Govt. and the ruling coalition had been making a beeline to visit the USA.

For some time US Admn. has been considering Kashmir the hottest spot in the world for nuclear conflagration and has been pressurizing the Indian and Pakistani Govts. for initiating dialogue. In the past decade, the growing economic and strategic dependence of Indian ruling classes on the USA had increased its ability to pressurize the Indian Govt. The case of Pakistan is too well known in this regard to be mentioned. The conduct of the Indian Govt. during the Summit and after was as if they wanted to communicate to US Admn. that they had done what was asked and have little to do with its success or failure.

On the other hand, Gen. Musharraf had been continuously claiming, since receiving the invitation, that he would mainly raise Kashmir issue during the Summit. In his press statements and interviews, he clearly said that though he was willing to discuss all issues, Kashmir was the “core issue”. Responding to the “confidence building measures” announced by the Indian Govt prior to the Summit, he reacted by saying that progress towards solving Kashmir issue is the real “confidence building measure”.

Gen. Musharraf’s visit had aroused great expectation and curiosity among the people of India and Pakistan. While the media hype is partly responsible for it, the main reason behind it is the longing among the people of India and Pakistan to see the relations between the two countries improve. Despite three wars between the neighbours, the bonds of the shared historical and cultural heritage are still too strong.

While the Summit had aroused big expectation among the people, the rulers thought differently. The Govt. of India thought that Gen. Musharraf would be willing to sign on routine musings on Kashmir in return for acceptance of the legitimacy of his rule. On the other hand Gen. Musharraf had thought of signing a statement/declaration only on achieving something tangible on Kashmir. He had calculated that failure to do so for the issue of Kashmir will only help him in Pakistan.

However, failure to sign the joint declaration or what is being termed failure of Agra Summit, should surprise no one. The rulers of India and Pakistan had done no ground work for any meaningful agreement. By this groundwork is meant that the rulers had only parroted their oft repeated stance and were not prepared to accept any agreed position or any compromise. All sections of the Indian ruling classes – the rightists, the so-called centrists and the ‘leftists’ – had been shouting themselves hoarse that “Kashmir is an indivisible part of India” and were propagating that “cross-border terrorism” is the only issue. Both in India and Pakistan questions were being raised “whether we can trust them?” Given this atmosphere and campaign, the joint declaration/statement from Agra could not go beyond a pious declaration of their desire to continue the dialogue.

From the “ups and downs” of the Summit which were telecast live on TV channels as a running commentary and from the concrete results then, it is clear that the main stumbling block for the Summit was, naturally, the difference between India and Pakistan on the question of Kashmir. While the Govt. of Pakistan was determined to make Kashmir the main or “core” issue for improvement in bilateral relations, Indian Govt. was not willing to concede more that considering Kashmir as one of the many issues between the two countries.

Both the sides were keen to show that they had stuck to their professed positions. They were keen to project that they had said what they ought to have done. There was hardly any willingness to listen to the other side in what can be termed as 'a dailogue of the deaf'. Indian Cabinet Minister Sushma Swaraj, in her press briefing, ‘forgot’ to mention Kashmir as the issue of discussion in the first day of talk between Mr. Vajpayee and Gen. Musharraf. The Pakistan spokesman and next day Gen. Parvez Musharraf himself claimed in the meeting with the editors of different newspapers that most of his talks with Mr. Vajpayee were devoted to discussing Kashmir.

After the Summit there is a good deal of talk in the media about the “use” of media by Gen. Musharraf with the complaint that Musharraf has upstaged Vajpayee-Advani. What probably hurts them most is that a military ruler has scored over the political leaders who are considered experts in the use of media. At the bottom of these complaints/criticisms is the propagation of certain aspects of Kashmir issue which are outside the framework accepted by the Indian ruling classes. According to the propaganda of the Indian ruling classes – “Accession of Jammu & Kashmir to India is final”, “Kashmir is an inalienable part of India”, “The real problem in Kashmir is terrorism sponsored from across the border”, “Struggle in Kashmir is being conducted by non-Kashmiris”, “Kashmir problem can only be resolved through use of Army and paramilitary forces”, “Question of violation of democratic rights in Kashmir is raised by anti-Indian forces” and so on.

During Gen. Musharraf’s visit to India and thereafter certain things have been widely propagated through the media, e.g., Kashmiris have been conducting struggle against the Indian Govt. for over a decade and the fact that tens of thousands of Mujahideens are buried across the state proves that there is a large scale participation of Kashmiris in this struggle. Ruling classes and their media obviously can not tolerate this propagation through Indian media. In fact, so taken aback were the prominent people of the big media, at Gen. Musharraf’s remark that media in India has to work under certain constraints while reporting on Kashmir, that they delivered long lectures on democracy to the military ruler.

Nor do the Indian rulers want that Indian unwillingness to solve Kashmir issue should come into focus, they wish to keep it wrapped below the cloak of “bilateral discussions”. Rather than the ‘failure’ of Agra Summit, they rue that Indian unwillingness to discuss Kashmir issue has been propagated. This is what is being termed as “better management of the media” by the Pakistan ruler.

Kashmir issue dominated the talks, articles and interviews before, during and after the Summit. Whatever the Indian rulers may propagate, struggle of the people of J&K for their right to self-determination is a reality.  Lakhs of troops are not being stationed in the J&K only to tackle a “handful of terrorists”. This propaganda is being daily exposed by the number of people dead and wounded on both sides.

Kashmir issue was born out of the communal partition of India by British imperialists and the then leaders of Congress and Muslim League. The issue was taken to United Nations by the Indian Govt. and there an agreement was reached to conduct plebiscite to decide the issue. But the Indian Govt. backed out of the commitment. Indian ruling classes and their intellectuals have been resorting to falsehoods on the issue that plebiscite could not be held due to Pakistan not withdrawing its forces from areas controlled by it. But the fact is that the Commissioner appointed by the United Nations had held the Indian Govt. responsible for non-implementation of United Nations resolution on Jammu & Kashmir. Indian Govt. not only backed out of this commitment, it also backed out of the Delhi agreement it had reached with Sheikh Abdullah in 1950 and gave prison to him instead of ‘autonomy’. In fact, it became apparent that through UN resolution and Delhi agreement Indian Govt. was biding for time to consolidate its hold over Kashmir.

Pakistan weakened after its division in 1971. Indian rulers had then utilized the contention between US and the then Soviet Union for world hegemony. In the Shimla agreement there was a provision for solution of Kashmir issue through bilateral dialogue. This suited Indian Govt. as it could maintain status quo in the name of ‘bilateral dialogue’ and integrate the part of Jammu & Kashmir controlled by it. While talking of solving Kashmir issue through bilateral dialogue, Indian Govt. intensified its propaganda that Kashmir is an integral part of India.

Since 1989, struggle of the people of Kashmir has been intensified. Many Kashmiri organizations have come to the fore in the course of this struggle. According to reports nearly 75,000 Kashmiris and thousands of Indian soldiers have died in the course of these twelve years. There has been widespread destruction and civil liberties have been trampled under foot. Can it be said that Kashmir is not an important issue? Can one turn a blind eye towards the struggle of the people of Kashmir?

In 1947 rulers of India and Pakistan could solve the issue of Kashmir between themselves. But after struggle of the people of Kashmir over these 54 years, this has not remained a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan. The people of Kashmir are the most important side in the issue on the strength of their struggle. For a democratic solution to the issue of Jammu & Kashmir it is imperative to involve representatives of the people of J&K in the dialogue.

Rulers of both India and Pakistan reject the right of self-determination of the people of Jammu & Kashmir. Indian Govt. considers that accession of Kashmir is final and does not consider people of J&K as a party to the dispute. Pakistan rulers too reject the independence of Kashmir; for them self-determination means accession of J&K to Pakistan. During his visit and after, Gen. Musharraf talked ‘loudly’ about the people of J&K and their freedom struggle. There can be justifiable objection to his moral right to raise the issue of self-determination of the people of J&K, while he does not even agree to the right of people of Kashmir to choose their rulers. During the recent elections held in Kashmir controlled by Pakistan, the nominations of those not accepting accession of Kashmir to Pakistan were rejected and those protesting against it were arrested. Whatever Pakistani rulers may say to hoodwink the people of J&K, they do not want to give the right to freedom to the people of J&K.

While Agra Summit is being termed as “inconclusive” by Pakistan Govt., the Indian Govt. is claiming its failure. Pakistan Govt. wants to carry forward the discussions beyond Agra, while Indian Govt. wants to start from Shimla and Lahore negating Agra. The attitude of the Indian Govt. gives credence to the claim of the Pakistan Govt. that during Agra talks, India had agreed on some points which it now wants to disown. Prime Minister has said that he would visit Pakistan only if there is an “agreed agenda”.

During Agra Summit, total unity between parties of the ruling classes prevailed – Congress, Samajwadi, NCP, CPI and CPM – all echoed the line of the Indian Govt. Rather than criticizing Indian Govt. for its obstinate attitude on Kashmir issue, they even questioned the propriety of holding the Summit.

After the Summit, revisionist parties, e.g. CPI, CPM, have alleged that preparations were not made by the Govt. of India for the Summit. By this they mean that the Summit should not have been held unless Pakistan agreed with the Indian Govt.’s point of view on Kashmir. ‘Left’ section of the Indian ruling classes is trying to outwit the rightists on the issue of Kashmir.

After initial expression of satisfaction, US admn. has shown its disappointment at the outcome. US Secretary of State Colin Powell has offered to mediate between India and Pakistan on the issue of Kashmir and nuclear weapons. He also significantly talked of “balanced relations” with both India and Pakistan, rather than the much touted ‘tilt’ towards India.

Agra Summit was not a result of any independent initiative of the Indian Govt. During Vajpayee’s Lahore Bus visit in 1999, we had commented that “Rulers of the two countries have neither their hands on the steering of the bus nor their feet on the accelerator.” Agra Summit too affords an interesting spectacle where an examinee is cheerfully and loudly announcing that he has failed. It would be better if the rulers of India and Pakistan take the initiative to stop arms race and improve their relations in the interest of the people of the two countries rather than trying to please US Admn. Indian rulers should stop selling the country under the pretext of mobilizing US and for western support for their stand on Kashmir and respect the democratic aspirations of the people of Jammu & Kashmir.