Article

INDIA-PAKISTAN DIALOGUE UNDER
CONGRESS GOVERNMENT

Introduction

Currently, as regards important developments in South Asia, the regional and international community’s focus is on the process of rapprochement between Pakistan and India. After a deadlock of more than ten months, and massive military deployment along India-Pakistan border, from December 2001 to October 2002, the tense situation was finally defused by December 2002 after the withdrawal of massive military deployment along India-Pakistan border. The process of rapprochement towards the normalisation of relations between India and Pakistan began in April 2003, when former Indian Prime Minister Vajpayee during his speech in Srinagar extended the ‘hand of friendship’ towards Pakistan. Since then, moving cautiously, both India and Pakistan, took steps to improve relations between the two countries, such as, through the appointment of High Commissioners; exchange of prisoners; resumption of New Delhi-Lahore bus service (resumed in July 2003 after a break of one and half years); ceasefire along the Line of Control (LoC)-(declared by Pakistan in November 2003); ceasefire along Actual Ground Position Line (AGPL) in Siachen (declared by India in November 2003); and resumption of air links and over flights (in January 2004, before the Twelfth SAARC Summit).

However, it was after the successful SAARC Summit held in Islamabad in January 2004, including the  informal meetings between the two Prime Ministers of Pakistan and India and also the meeting between Prime Minister Vajpayee and President Musharraf, held on January 6, 2004, that both sides agreed to resume the composite dialogue process. In the joint statement, issued at the end of the President Musharraf-Prime Minister Vajpayee meeting, both leaders emphasised that ‘constructive dialogue would promote progress towards the common objective of peace, security and economic development for our peoples and for future generations.’

In this connection the Foreign Secretaries of Pakistan and India held their first formal talks in February 2004, in Islamabad, and both sides agreed on the basic schedule for composite dialogue process, as follows:

(i)   March/April 2004:  Meeting between the Director General of the Pakistan Rangers and the Inspector-General of the Indian Border Security Force.

(ii)  May/June 2004: Talks between Foreign Secretaries of Pakistan and India on Kashmir and Peace and Security in New Delhi.

(iii) May 2004: Expert level talks on nuclear CBMs.

(iv) June 2004: Talks on drug-trafficking and smuggling.

(v)  July 2004: Talks on issues such as Siachen, Wullar Barrage/Tulbul Navigation Project, Sir Creek, terrorism, economic and commercial cooperation, and promotion of friendly exchanges at the already agreed expert or technical levels. And

(vi) August 2004: The Foreign Ministers meeting.

As a result, the first meeting of the composite dialogue process, between the Inspector General of India's Border Security Force (BSF), J.S. Gill, and Director General Rangers Punjab of Pakistan, Maj. Gen. Hussain Mehdi, was held on March 24-27, in Lahore. Both sides signed an agreement aimed at curbing cross-border smuggling, drug trafficking and illegal immigration.

With the change of government in India in May 2004, after the Lok Sabha elections, there were concerns in Pakistan as well as within the international community regarding the continuity of the peace process between India and Pakistan. On May 14, 2004, while congratulating Ms. Sonia Gandhi, leader of Congress (I), on winning elections Mr. Boucher, US State Department spokesman, commented on the future prospects of the India-Pakistan peace process and said that Washington would keep encouraging the two countries to settle their differences through dialogue.¹ While talking to reporters in Beijing, senior official of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, Liu Jianchao, said ‘We hope both Pakistan and India would maintain the momentum of improving their relations.’² Speaking at the Pakistan Institute of International Affairs in Karachi, on May 13, 2004, the Ambassador and Head of the European Commission in Pakistan, Mr. Ilkka Uusitalo, referring to the dialogue process said, ‘We very much hope that the surprise results announced today after elections in India would not in any way derail the process.’³ US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, in an interview published on May 28, 2004, expressed the hope that the new government in India would continue with the framework of peace process between India and Pakistan.⁴

The aim of this study is to evaluate the composite dialogue process between Pakistan and India under the Congress (I)-led coalition government. Here it is important to note that the composite dialogue process, agreed to in February 2004, is based on the Working Groups already identified during the India-Pakistan foreign secretary level talks held in June 1997, to discuss all outstanding issues in an integrated manner. The Working Groups which were formed were: (i) Peace and Security including CBMs and Jammu and Kashmir; (ii) Siachen; (iii) Wullar Barrage Project; (iv) Sir Creek; (v) Terrorism and Drug Trafficking; (vi) Economic and Commercial cooperation; (vii) Promotion of friendly exchanges in various fields.

Congress (I)’s Policy Towards Dialogue with Pakistan

The Congress (I), even when in the opposition, supported the peace process initiated by the BJP-led government. For example, in May 2003, referring to the moves by BJP-led government for normalisation of relations with Pakistan the Congress party spokesman, Anand Sharma, said that they were on expected lines. He emphasised that the party had always held the opinion that diplomatic channels should be kept open between the two countries.⁵ Its Election Manifesto 2004 stated, ‘The Congress has been consistent, unlike the BJP, on the issue of dialogue with Pakistan on all issues including Jammu and Kashmir.’ It may be mentioned here that in the manifesto the emphasis by Congress (I) on ‘Simla Agreement framework’ and ‘Pakistan’s sponsored cross-border terrorism’ raised doubts about the party’s intention for continuing the peace process initiated by BJP, if elected to power. The manifesto stated that the Congress (I) has always ‘advocated formal and informal talks on the basis of the historic Shimla Agreement of 1972. At the same time, the Congress is firm in its view that Pakistan’s sponsorship of cross-border terrorism must end completely once and for all. If it continues, then the Indian state has the responsibility to protect its citizens.’ 

However, even as the initial vote counting showed her party in a winning position, the Congress party president, Ms. Sonia Gandhi, speaking to reporters on May 13, 2004, pledged to continue the dialogue process with Pakistan and said, ‘From the very beginning we have been supporting Prime Minister Vajpayee’s initiative vis-à-vis Pakistan.’⁶ Later, the new Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, also expressed his government’s willingness to continue the process. On May 20, 2004, speaking at a press conference he favoured talks with Pakistan to find solution to outstanding problems, and for making friction between the two neighbours ‘a thing of the past.’⁷ Moreover, in the Common Minimum Programme released on May 26, 2004, it was stated, ‘Dialogue with Pakistan on all issues will be pursued systematically and on a sustained basis.’⁸

However, the continuity of the agreed composite dialogue process again became doubtful because of the statements made by the new Indian External Affairs Minister, Natwar Singh. For example, in his first interview to the Hindustan Arial, on May 28, 2004, Mr. Singh said that he wanted a ‘multi-speed dialogue’ with Pakistan to follow on the lines of New Delhi’s relationship with Beijing. He said, ‘Pakistan is close to China and so is India. So why don’t we follow the same example? We’re saying don’t forget Kashmir, (but) keep it aside for faster progress on other issues.’⁹ The views of Mr. Natwar Singh gave the impression that probably the Congress government might not follow the schedule of talks on issues agreed upon during the BJP-led government, and also, that the Congress government might not support simultaneous progress on all issues including Kashmir issue. 

It was in this context that during the initial days, after the coming to power of Congress (I)-led government in India, there were concerns in Pakistan, and at the regional and international levels, regarding the continuity of the composite dialogue process between India and Pakistan. However, in view of Pakistan’s support for the continuation of the dialogue process and also the international community’s concern and focus on the dialogue process, that the Congress government expressed its willingness to carry forward the agreed dialogue process. Mr. Natwar Singh, during his first news conference in New Delhi, on June 1, 2004, in an attempt to reverse his earlier image said, ‘The future of Indo-Pak relationship no longer lies in the past. We cannot forget the past but neither we can be prisoners of the past.’¹⁰ He also announced the new dates for the talks on nuclear CBMs and the foreign secretary level talks. Therefore, after some rescheduling of dates, which was understandable, as the new government needed time, the Congress government adopted the policy of continuing dialogue with Pakistan. The first phase of the composite dialogue process was completed in August 2004. The next section reviews the substance of the talks that were held.

Meetings held under the Composite Dialogue Process

(i)   Talks on Nuclear CBMs

The two-day expert-level talks on Nuclear Confidence Building Measures (N-CBMs) were held in New Delhi, on June 19-20, 2004. The Indian side was led by Additional Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, Dr. Sheel Kant Sharma, while the Pakistani side was led by Additional Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Tariq Osman Hyder. At the end of the meeting a joint statement was issued stating that both sides were conscious of the need to promote a stable environment of peace and security between the two countries, and recognised that the nuclear capabilities of each other, 'based on their national security imperatives,' constitute a factor for stability.¹¹ The joint statement highlighted the following points of agreement:

(1)  The existing hotline between the Directors General of Military Operations (DGMO) to be upgraded, dedicated and secured.

 (2)  To prevent misunderstandings and reduce risks relevant to nuclear issues, a dedicated and secure hotline to be
       established between the two Foreign Secretaries, through their respective foreign offices. 

(3)  Both countries to work towards concluding an agreement with technical parameters on pre-notification of flight-testing of missiles, a draft of which was handed over by the Indian side to the Pakistani delegation. 

(4)  Each side reaffirmed its unilateral moratorium on conducting further nuclear test explosions. However, there is an escape clause that says, ‘unless in exercise of national sovereignty, it decides that extraordinary events have jeopardised its supreme interests.’ 

(5)  Both countries would continue bilateral discussions and hold further meetings to work towards the implementation of the Lahore MoU of 1999. 

(6)  Both countries would continue to engage in bilateral consultations on security and non-proliferation issues within the context of negotiations on these issues in multilateral fora. 

(7)  Both countries called for regular working-level meetings to be held among all the nuclear powers to discuss issues of common concern.

The points of convergence, highlighted in the joint statement demonstrated the desire of India and Pakistan to strengthen cooperation and stability in South Asia through confidence-building measures. Though the talks were held in a cordial atmosphere, still differences remain between the two countries on specific issues related to nuclear CBMs. For example, India reiterated its proposal of ‘no first use’ of nuclear weapons and Pakistan proposed the idea of ‘strategic restraint regime’, both in conventional and nuclear fields. In the past, these proposals were also put forward during the meetings of the foreign secretaries of both countries in Islamabad in October 1998 and are likely to figure in future discussions as well. Overall these talks made a significant headway.

(ii)  Talks on Peace and Security Including CBMs  and Jammu and Kashmir

After a gap of six years, on June 27-28, 2004, the Foreign Secretary of India, Shashank, and the Foreign of Pakistan, Riaz Khokhar, held their first meeting in New Delhi to discuss the issue of peace and security, including CBMs and the Kashmir dispute.The last Foreign Secretary talks on peace and security were held in October 1998, in Islamabad.

The June 2004 talks ended on a positive note. The joint statement issued at the end of the meeting stated, ‘There is of course the wider realisation on both sides that peace is the only path, and that recourse to war to find solutions was unthinkable in today's context.’ The joint statement ¹² stated:

(1)  The talks were held in a cordial and constructive atmosphere, with the objective of taking the process forward. 

(2)  The Foreign Secretaries reiterated their commitment to the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations, and their determination to implement the Simla Agreement in letter and spirit.

(3)  Both sides expressed satisfaction over the ongoing process of dialogue and confidence-building measures between the two countries. They approved the measures recommended by the expert-level meeting on nuclear CBMs held in New Delhi on June 19-20, 2004, as follows: 

(i)     Agreed to conclude an agreement on pre-notification of flight-testing of missiles, and directed the experts to work towards finalising the draft agreement. 

(ii)    Reaffirmed the elements in the joint statement of June 20, 2004, on the need to promote a stable environment of peace and security, recognising the nuclear capabilities of each other as constituting a factor for stability, and for working towards strategic stability, and the call for regular working level meetings to be held among all the nuclear powers to discuss issues of common concern. 

(iii)   Proposed a comprehensive framework for conventional CBMs aimed at initiating and enhancing communication, coordination and interaction, to be discussed further. 

(4)  Recalling the reassurances contained in the joint press statement of January 6, 2004, they exchanged views on carrying the process forward in an atmosphere free from terrorism and violence. 

(5)  The Foreign Secretaries held detailed exchange of views on Jammu and Kashmir and agreed to continue the sustained and serious dialogue to find a peaceful negotiated final settlement, to the satisfaction of both sides. 

(6)  Both sides agreed that the strengths of the respective High Commissions would be restored immediately to the original level of 110 personnel on either side. 

(7)  Both sides agreed in principle to re-establish India's Consulate General in Karachi and Pakistan's Consulate General in Mumbai. The two governments would work out the modalities. 

(8)  All apprehended fishermen in each other's custody would be immediately released and a mechanism put in place for the return of unintentionally transgressing fishermen and their boats from the high seas without apprehending them. Steps would be initiated for the early release of civilian prisoners. 

(9)  It was agreed that the meetings of the remaining six subjects of the composite dialogue on Siachen, Wullar Barrage/Tulbul Navigation Project, Sir Creek, terrorism and drug trafficking, economic and commercial cooperation, and promotion of friendly exchanges in various fields, would take place between the third week of July and the first half of August 2004.

(10)  The Foreign Secretaries agreed to meet again in the third week of August to review progress achieved in the composite dialogue and prepare for the meeting of the Foreign Ministers, which will immediately follow. 

(11)   The Foreign Secretary of Pakistan conveyed invitations from the President of Pakistan to the President and Prime Minister of India, and to Mrs. Sonia Gandhi.

The above meeting is important as it has set a positive trend and given a boost to the overall process of normalisation and confidence-building between the two countries. The points of agreement regarding restoring the High Commission’s strength and opening up of the consulate generals has helped revive the past level of diplomatic cooperation between the two countries. However, there was no substantive progress as regards the core issue of Jammu and Kashmir. Though, the Foreign Secretaries of India and Pakistan held detailed discussions on the Kashmir issue, yet, no substantive proposals could be agreed upon for making progress towards an amicable resolution of the dispute. Both sides raised issues and put forward various proposals, however, no consensus could be reached. During the discussions India raised the issue of terrorism and infiltration in Jammu and Kashmir, whereas the Pakistani side stressed on an end to human rights violations, withdrawal of draconian Indian laws, ending of combat operations by Indian troops, and also the reduction of the Indian troops in the State. As regards the proposal of the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus service, differences remained regarding the travel modalities and procedures. The proposals put forward by India included: Line of Control to be made a line of peace and tranquillity; establish a new bus link between Sialkot in Pakistan and Suchetgarh in Jammu; promote cultural contacts between Kashmiris on both sides of LOC and facilitate visits to religious shrines; setting up of border trading points for Kashmiris on the LOC. During the discussions, Pakistan stressed on the need to evolve mutually acceptable modalities for talks on Jammu and Kashmir issue; how to involve the Kashmiris in the negotiation process; and the need to agree on a timeline for the discussions on Kashmir.¹³

During the first phase of the composite dialogue process, from the discussions on Kashmir, it is clear that strong differences on the core issue remain. Indian analyst, Indrani Bagchi, in his analysis in India Today says: ‘The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has churned out what it calls a ‘creative’ approach to the Kashmir issue. ‘Cooperation’ is the new buzzword and India hopes that within the rubric of ‘supreme national interest’ there can be diplomatic wiggle room with Pakistan, particularly on Kashmir.’¹⁴ Nevertheless, the resumption of Secretary level talks, encompassing also the Kashmir dispute, was in itself a significant development.

(iii)   Talks on Wullar Barrage/Tulbal Navigation Project

Pakistan’s Secretary of Ministry of Water and Power, Ashfaque Mehmood, and the Indian Water Resources Secretary, V. K. Duggal, led their respective delegations during the talks on Wullar Barrage/Tulbal Navigation Project held on July 29-30, 2004, in Islamabad. The talks remained inconclusive. The joint statement issued at the end of the talks stated: ‘The talks were held in a cordial and constructive atmosphere. Both sides reaffirmed their commitment to the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960. It was agreed that the discussions would continue at the next round of the dialogue process with a view to finding a solution to the issue consistent with the provisions of the treaty.’¹⁵

Talks on the Wullar Barrage issue were last held in New Delhi on November 5, 1999, without any agreement. Pakistan’s stand has been that the existing design of the project violates the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty, whereas India does not accept the argument and insists that its construction would not have an adverse effect on Pakistan. Under the 1960 Waters Treaty, the waters of eastern rivers, Ravi, Sutlej and Beas, were allocated to India, whereas the waters of western rivers, Jhelum, Chenab and Indus, were allocated to Pakistan. In 1984, India started the construction of the Wullar Barrage on the Jhelum river without informing Pakistan, as required under the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960. The barrage is around 439-feet-high and 40-feet-wide with a storage capacity of around 0.3 million acre-feet of water. Pakistan had strongly objected to the construction, on the ground that it was a violation of the Indus Waters Treaty, as Article III of the Treaty clearly states that India ‘shall not store any water of, or construct any storage works on the Western Rivers.’  As a result work was suspended in 1987 on the Indian side. During the current talks, both sides reiterated their stated positions and agreed to continue the talks under the composite dialogue process.

(iv) Talks on Promotion of Friendly Exchanges

Pakistan’s Secretary for Minorities, Tourism, Culture and Youth Affairs, Jalil Abbas, and Indian Culture Secretary, Neena Ranjan, led their respective delegations at the talks on ‘Promotion of Friendly Exchanges in Various Fields’, held in New Delhi on August 3-4, 2004. The joint statement issued at the end of the talks, noting that the talks were held in cordial and constructive atmosphere, stated: ¹⁶

(1)  Both sides exchanged views on expanding the scope of the 1974 bilateral protocol on visits to religious shrines. They discussed the need to liberalise the visa regime and facilitate travel by more pilgrims to shrines on both sides.

(2)  Both sides felt the need to address humanitarian issues concerning civilian prisoners and fishermen in each other’s custody. 

(3)  Both sides made wide-ranging proposals for promoting friendly exchanges and cooperation in art, culture, archaeology, education, science and technology, youth affairs and sports, media and tourism. Implementation of the programmes would be undertaken through mutual coordination.

The proposals put forward during the meeting aimed at promoting people-to-people contacts between the two countries. Successful implementation of the proposals will certainly have a positive impact on the progress made in the composite dialogue process and the overall relations between India and Pakistan. However, disagreement over the lifting of the ban on Indian TV Channels’ broadcasts in Pakistan remains. Pakistan imposed the ban on Indian channels in 2002.

(v)  Talks on the Siachen Issue

Pakistan’s Defence Secretary, Lt. Gen. Hamid Nawaz Khan, and Indian Defence Secretary, Ajai Vikram Singh, led their respective delegations at the talks held in New Delhi, on August 5-6, 2004.  The talks have remained inconclusive, as there were no points of agreement on the issue. The joint statement, issued at the end of the two-day talks stated:

‘Frank and candid discussions were held in a cordial and constructive atmosphere aimed at taking the (peace) process forward. The two defence secretaries agreed to continue their discussions to resolve the Siachen issue in a peaceful manner. Both sides assessed positively the ceasefire that has been in effect since November 2003.’¹⁷ 

According to reports, differences remained between the positions taken by Indian and Pakistani officials, over the issue of demarcation of the glacier and the authentication of maps showing the existing positions of Indian soldiers.¹⁸ The Indian side proposed that the Actual Ground Position Line (AGPL) be accepted. Pakistan, on the other hand, argued for pulling back forces to the positions agreed upon under the 1972 Simla agreement. There was no agreement on the issue of redeployment of troops and also on a mechanism to monitor the disengagement. The last talks on this issue were held in November 1999.

(vi) Talks on Sir Creek Boundary Issue

Rear Admiral Ahsan ul Haq Chaudhry, Additional Secretary Ministry of Defence of Pakistan, and Prithvish Nag, Surveyor General of India, led their respective delegations during the talks on the maritime boundary issue in Sir Creek area, held in New Delhi, on August 6-7, 2004. Sir Creek is a salty marshland lies between India’s western state of Gujarat and Pakistan’s Sindh province. The area is believed to be rich in oil and gas deposits. India claims that the boundary should be in the middle of the 100 km estuary, whereas Pakistan’s stand has been that the border should lie on the southeastern bank of the creek. The last talks on this issue were held in November, 1999.

There was no breakthrough during the talks as both sides reiterated their past stated positions and exchanged views, though both sides also supported an early resolution of the dispute and agreed to continue the discussions.¹⁹

(vii) Talks on Terrorism and Drug Trafficking

Pakistan’s Interior Secretary, Tariq Mahmood, led the Pakistani side, whereas Indian Home Secretary, Dhirendra Singh, led the Indian delegation at the talks held in Islamabad, on August 10-11, 2004. The joint statement issued at the end of the talks reaffirmed the determination by both sides to combat terrorism and the need for complete elimination of the menace. Both sides expressed satisfaction over cooperation and information-sharing between Narcotics Control Authorities and agreed to finalise an MoU for institutionalisation of cooperation in this area.²⁰

As a goodwill gesture, Pakistan announced it would release 41 Indian civilians prisoners, most of them detained for visa violations, and 408 fishermen detained for transgressing Pakistan’s territorial waters. Also, India was asked to confirm the nationalities of other 150 Indian civilian prisoners in Pakistan, to facilitate their release. The process is expected to be completed by September 15.

During the discussions India and Pakistan raised various issues concerning terrorist activities. According to reports in the media, ‘Pakistan raised the involvement of Indian agencies in terrorist incidents in Pakistan, the activities of Indian consulates in Afghanistan and continuing state terrorism in Indian-held Kashmir,’ and claimed that there were 55 terrorist camps in Indian-held Kashmir and other parts of India which targeted Pakistan. The Indian side brought up the issue of terrorist camps in and funded by Pakistan, and sought the extradition of the hijackers of an Indian Airlines plane in 1999 and suspects in the Bombay blasts, such as Dawood Ibrahim.’²¹ The Indian side also gave a list of 25 wanted persons, which they accuse are hiding in Pakistan. Pakistan reiterated that none of them, including  Dawood Ibrahim, were in Pakistan.

As regards the drug trafficking issue, ‘both sides agreed that the heroine produced in Afghanistan is ultimately smuggled to Pakistan and India, so the two needed a joint strategy to stop this.’²²

On the terrorism issue there are many concerns on both sides, which were raised during the talks. However, no concrete proposals were agreed to address these issues, and both countries could not come up with any concrete, mutually acceptable definition of terrorism.

(viii) Talks on Economic and Commercial Cooperation

Pakistan’s Commerce Secretary, Tasneem Noorani, and Indian Commerce Secretary, Deepak Chatterjee, led their respective delegations during the talks held in Islamabad on August 11-12, 2004. In the joint statement, issued at the end of the talks, it was stated, ‘the discussions were held in frank and cordial atmosphere. Wide-ranging proposals were made on various aspects of economic and commercial cooperation. These would be considered further.’²³ Both sides expressed the desire to continue the dialogue process to enhance volume of trade and cooperation.

However, on some controversial issues no consensus could be reached during the talks. India raised the issue of granting the MFN status to India, whereas Pakistan linked the granting of MFN status to progress on trade-related and other issues such as the Kashmir issue. India also proposed direct shipping between Mumbai and Karachi, transit of goods through Wagah border to Afghanistan and import of POL products from Pakistan. Pakistan suggested a softening of the high tariff structure by India and the removal of non-tariff barriers. The proposed Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline proposal made by Iran was also discussed.

Conclusion

The first phase of the composite dialogue process between India and Pakistan ended on August 13, 2004, with the conclusion of the eight meetings scheduled during this phase having taken place. This was a significant momentum given the resumption of the dialogue process after a gap of six years. Therefore, to expect major breakthroughs in the initial rounds was to expect too much. Given the levels of mistrust to be overcome and complex modalities involved, it is likely to be a lengthy process.

Now that the first phase of the composite dialogue process has ended, what has emerged is that there has been some progress as regards people-to-people contact and the level of diplomatic relations between the two countries, such as decisions to liberalise visa facility on both sides, release of civilian prisoners, restoring of the strength of High Commissions in each country, and establishing of hot line between the Foreign Secretaries of the two countries. Also, important to note is the fact that while the composite dialogue was progressing there already had been simultaneous developments at the people-to-people level between the two countries. For example, for the first time, in July 2004, a group of Pakistani scouts visited Srinagar to participate in the SAARC integration camp held in Gulmarg, near Srinagar; and on August 9, 2004, India and Pakistan exchanged prisoners of war, held by the two countries since the Kargil conflict.

During the first phase of composite dialogue process, both sides have expressed support for continuing the dialogue process, however, as regards the specific issues between India and Pakistan, keeping in view their respective national interests, there is no change in the official positions. Therefore, progress in case of issues such as, Jammu and Kashmir, Siachen, Wullar Barrage, Sir Creek, are presently not substantive, though the dialogue process would and must continue. However, the important point to note is that both sides have expressed satisfaction over the developments during the first phase and their resolve to continue the process as well. Pakistan’s Foreign Office spokesman, Masood Khan, on August 12, 2004, said, ‘it is a matter of satisfaction that in accordance with the agreed schedule between the two countries all the eight agenda items have been covered in the composite dialogue.’²⁴ On August 14, 2004, in a speech on the eve of India’s Independence day, Indian President A. P. J. Abdul Kalam, said, ‘I note with satisfaction of our continuing efforts towards good neighbourly relations, particularly the sustained progress of the peace process between India and Pakistan.’²⁵

1.     ‘Upset in India, reactions in US’, http://us.rediff.com/ election/2004/may/14net.htm

2.     http://dailymailnews.com/200405/24/news/117.html

3.     Dawn, May 14, 2004.

4.     Dawn, May 29, 2004.

5.     As reported by the The Hindu, May 2, 2003.

6.     Arial of India, May 14, 2004.

7.     Indian Express, May 21, 2004.

8.     ‘Common Minimum Programme, The Hindu, May 27, 2004.

9.     Hindustan Arial, May 29, 2004.

10.   The Daily Mail, June 2, 2004.

11.   Daily Arial, June 21, 2004.

12.   ‘Delhi talks on Kashmir make progress’, Dawn, June 29, 2004.

13.   For details see India Today, July 12, 2004, pp.36-40; Outlook, July 12, 2004, pp.26-27.

14.   India Today, Ibid.

15.   Dawn, July 31, 2004.

16.   Daily Arial, August 5, 2004; The News, August 5, 2004.

17.   The News, August 7, 2004; Daily Arial, August 7, 2004.

18.   Ibid.

19.   Dawn, August 8, 2004.

20.   The News, August 12, 2004.

21.   Daily Arial, August 12, 2004; The Hindu, August 12, 2004.

22.   Daily Arial, August 12, 2004.

23.   The News, August 13, 2004.

24.   The Dawn, August 13, 2004.

25.   Arial of India, August 15, 2004.

Back to Top