Gandhara

The Indian and Pakistani prime ministers met in New York on September 29 against a backdrop of hope for a lasting peace between the two nuclear-armed rivals.

With the weekend handshake approaching between Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his Indian counterpart, Manmohan Singh, Pakistani and Indian newscasters were busy speculating on the future course of relations.

Three major issues were on the anvil: terrorism, Kashmir, and Balochistan.

But with public sentiment presenting obstacles in both countries, those high hopes appeared to come to naught.

In India, parliamentary elections are due early next year and the perception of a soft stance vis-a-vis Pakistan could punish the ruling Indian National Congress.

In Pakistan, the powerful security establishment wields considerable influence when it comes to Pakistan's relations with India, and crossing the line can prove costly for Pakistan's elected rulers.

Discussing the key issues between India and Pakistan, leading Pakistani Urdu-language newspaper "Jang" writes in a September 30 editorial that the two sides need to revive the process that broke down in 1999.

Then-Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and his Pakistani counterpart at the time, Nawaz Sharif, signed the Lahore Declaration, under which they have agreed to devise a road map for resolving all the contentious issues between the two countries.

They key problem hampering India-Pakistan ties over the past 66 years is the disputed status of Kashmir. Each country accuses the other of forcefully occupying the territory in the valley of Kashmir.

Commenting on the same issue, another Pakistani Urdu-language newspaper, "Daily Express," says the Indian prime minister, instead of extending a hand of friendship to Pakistan, accused the country of supporting terrorism and called Kashmir "an integral part of India."

"Daily Express" suggests that if the two countries are really interested in overcoming the widespread poverty, they should set aside their enmities and focus on the promotion of peace.

"Daily Mashriq," another Urdu-language newspaper, adopting a tougher stance, writing in its editorial that Kashmir is not an integral part of India, as suggested by Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in his address last week to the UN General Assembly.

Had that been the case, the paper asked, why did Kashmiris need to sacrifice thousands of lives to win the right of self-determination?

India accuses Pakistan of supporting militancy in Indian-controlled Kashmir. In response, Pakistan says the Kashmiris' struggle is indigenous.

In contrast to the more conservative Urdu-language press, English-language newspapers mostly concluded their lead editorials on positive notes.

"Dawn" newspaper, in its September 30 editorial, writes that "improving the India-Pakistan equation will depend on tremendous political will by each country's political leadership. Much was expected of Mr Sharif in this regard, but so far he's preferred to play his hand very carefully, almost to the point of inaction."

"The News International," in its editorial under the title "The Net Positive," says the Indian prime minister's speech at the UN General Assembly and his meeting with U.S. President Barrack Obama were disastrous for the mood of meeting.

"On a heartening note, both leaders invited each other for visits although a note of realism crept in when they decided that it would not be possible to schedule any meeting in the current climate of mistrust. Still, that Pakistan and India decided to continue with talks at a time when hawks on both sides are more vociferous than ever should still be seen as a net positive," "The News International" concludes.

"Daily Times" praises the meeting between the two prime ministers and says "the intent to move forward provides a befitting response to all the negative forces that had been designing ill-will around the relationship ever since Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif announced his intent to mend fences with India."

Referring to Pakistan's urge for peace and the Indian foreign minister's statement regarding role of Pakistan army in the country's peace bids toward Indian, "Daily Times" writes that "Pakistan's India-centric approach had of late been dismantled as the internal threat mounted pressure on its law enforcement and security forces to first put its own house in order."

-- Daud Khattak

On September 9, political parties at a government-sponsored All Parties Conference (APC) in Pakistan agreed on dialogue with militants as the first option to address ongoing terrorism in the country.

The daylong meeting was attended and briefed by, among others, Pakistan's two most powerful men: Army Chief General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani and the director-general of the country's prime intelligence agency, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), Lieutenant General Zaheer-ul-Islam.

The government's offer of talks with the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) amid increasing incidents of terrorism was regarded by many as a goodwill gesture and was widely welcomed in Pakistan.

However, any high hopes suffered a serious blow when two senior army officers were killed in a roadside bomb attack in an area near the Afghan border on September 15 and the claim of responsibility instantly came from the TTP.

In a resulting fit of anger, it was the army chief who came out with a blunt warning, saying that "terrorists would not be allowed to take advantage of the military's support to the political process."

Since then, potential peace negotiations with the Taliban have become the topic of heated debate in the Pakistani print and electronic media, with some key questions being raised about the proposed process:


Many Pakistani analysts suggest that if the answer to any of these questions is a clear "no," then the last option left to the Pakistani government is the use of force rather than any futile attempt at talks.

Commenting on the government's olive branch to the Taliban and the latter's killing of two senior army officers, the leading English-language daily "Express Tribune" asked:


Another English daily newspaper, "Dawn," in an editorial on September 16 questioned the Pakistan army's policy toward the Taliban and warned that before hoping to achieve lasting peace, the military establishment needed to do away with its allegedly duplicitous policies of "good" and "bad" Taliban:


In an op-ed piece in "Dawn," retired police officer Tariq Khosa asked the government and the military leadership to work together to counter the Taliban threat:


In his op-ed piece for the "Daily Times" on September 19, columnist Muhammad Taqi argued that "without setting the parameters for what exactly is the state willing to concede to the TTP in exchange for peace, the prime minister and his APC have left the door wide open for the terrorists to keep making highly perverse demands."

Since 2001, the government of Pakistan has signed various peace agreements with militants in different parts of northern Pakistan. But critics complain that each agreement has ended up further strengthening the Taliban and eroding people's trust in writ of the state.

Elaborating on the same point in an op-ed piece for "The News International" on September 19, columnist Kamila Hayat said that "each new cease-fire called over the years appears to have given the militants time to re-group, strengthen their ranks and welcome back freed fighters."

Following the killing of the two army officers in the September 15 bomb attack claimed by the TTP, some leading columnists asked for an across-the-board action against the militants. That came against the backdrop of years in which the Pakistani army has been accused of using certain jihadist groups as "strategic assets" in Afghanistan and India.

Columnist Kamran Shafi, in an op-ed piece for the "Express Tribune" on September 20, wrote:


Conservative Urdu-language media also expressed anger over the Taliban attacks and advised the government not to hesitate to employ force if the first option (talks) was not going to bear positive results.

The "Daily Express," in an editorial on September 19, wrote that "the government peace talks offer to the Taliban was a golden chance which they [Taliban] wasted following their attack on the army officers in Dir Upper of northern Pakistan."

Writing in another Urdu-language newspaper, "Daily Jang," columnist Irfan Siddiqi said the killing of army officers and the instant claim of responsibility by the Taliban have shattered hopes for peace talks. Though still supporting a midpoint between the use of force and negotiations, Irfan Siddiqi said the Taliban claim that it killed the army officers on September 15 has provided a golden opportunity to those who support the use of force in order to crush the Taliban insurgency.

-- Daud Khattak