Author: Balbir K Punj
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: October 25, 2002
Four years ago, when the Government
led by Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee first took charge in New Delhi, the prophets
of doom were quick to question its longevity. In 1999, when the NDA came
to power, again with Mr Vajpayee at the helm, cynicism about its durability
was natural since no non-Congress Government had completed two years in
Parliament. Today the issue is not how long the NDA Government will last,
but how well it will perform.
On hindsight, Mr Vajpayees success
must be attributed to his political perspicacity. In the last three years,
even though he has led a 23-party coalition, he has not allowed any constituent
to dictate terms. Rather, those who went out had humiliating encounters
with political reality and came back requesting their readmission in the
NDA. Mr Vajpayee, aided by Deputy Prime Minister LK Advani, had managed
the tensions and compromises of a large coalition without letting mutual
contradictions (like that of the DMK, the MDMK or the PMK on one hand,
and between the Trinamool Congress and the Samata Party on the other, or
even the demand of many allies for the ouster of Gujarat Chief Minister
Narendra Modi), sink the boat. This demanded rare political adroitness.
The main Opposition, the Congress,
did not hesitate to attempt to destabilise the coalition, both during the
presidential and vice-presidential elections. Both times it failed miserably,
ending up exposing the split in the wall of secularism. This, despite the
fact that the party has Governments in 14 States. But Mr Vajpayee outmanoeuvred
the main Opposition each time it played the destabilisation game.
However, Mr Vajpayees claim to solid
achievements during the last four years rests on more palpable laurels.
Consider, for instance, the international outcry when he took a firm decision
soon after he assumed power the first time round to demonstrate Indias
nuclear capability. Pokhran-II earned India a string of non-cooperation
notices from the West. But, by 1999, the situation was changing. Contrary
to expert forecasts that nuke tests would isolate India and create a huge
hiatus in the relationship with the leader of the unipolar world, the US,
a patiently negotiated improvement in India-US relations set the stage
where two countries could even conduct joint military exercises. But despite
the intensity of the cooperation with the US in the global coalition against
terrorism, there are no US troops or military installations operating from
India, unlike in Pakistan.
All this had an encouraging fallout
on the key issue of Kashmir. For over 50 years we have suffered the Wests
pro-Pakistan attitude on Kashmir, its refusal to even perceive the issue
from our angle. Today, the same Western statesmen-including those in the
US Administration-are saying direct India-Pakistan negotiations are the
best way to resolve differences over Kashmir. Pakistans move to introduce
American middlemanship (read meddle-manship) in Kashmir have been turned
down by the US.
Even more important is the Vajpayee
Governments success in making the international community accept that militancy
in Jammu & Kashmir is no freedom struggle, but a cross-Line of Control
proxy war waged by Pakistan. Therefore, no fruitful India-Pakistan dialogue
was possible unless this militancy ceased. As a result, both Britain and
the US have forced General Pervez Musharraf to give them firm assurances
of ceasing to support these groups and ending cross-border terrorism. In
the last 50 years, no Indian Government has been able to achieve a turnaround
in the Western stand on Kashmir as decisively as the Vajpayee Government
has done.
It is important to note that this
change in the international communitys perception was induced much before
the events of 9/11 changed the world itself. For instance, the US Administrations
report on the pattern of global terrorism back in 2000 observed that "Pakistans
military government, headed by General Pervez Musharraf, continued previous
Pakistani government support of the Kashmir insurgency, and Kashmir militant
groups continued to operate in Pakistan, raising funds and recruiting new
cadres." Even before 9/11, the Vajpayee Government had succeeded in wiping
out the bitterness that had crept into India-US relations post-Pokhran
II. The March 2000 Clinton visit sealed a new chapter in this relationship.
Analysts have acknowledged that this change had emanated from the Prime
Ministers firm leadership of the country, during the Kargil war when he
refused the invitation of President Bill Clinton to go to Washington where
the then Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was waiting to strike a
deal to withdraw from Kargil for a price. He could get that deal and had
to accept President Clintons advice to back off without condition. Subsequently,
Mr Vajpayees responsible leadership also won him universal respect.
Recent events in J&K have to
be seen in that context, without confusing the issue with the BJPs loss
in the Jammu region. While the Government had staked much in conducting
a free and fair poll, militants had also wagered everything in foiling
it. Who won and who lost is now self-evident.
In many ways, this "war" of nerves
was even more decisive than a real India-Pakistan war. Instead of giving
precedence to the question of who would form the new government, we should
take the entire legislature as the custodian of Kashmirs interest rather
than a section of it. The Prime Ministers commitment was to "the elected
representatives and organisations", not individuals and governments. The
Hurriyat had probably hoped, along with the Pakistani establishment, that
the militants would succeed in disrupting the polls and prevent a sizeable
voter turnout. Now both have lost, with the near-50 per cent voter participation
in the face of militants notified threat to eliminate candidates, voters
and polling staff. The Hurriyat has lost its face to speak for the whole
of J&K. The Vajpayee Government is no more under any obligation to
speak to it, so long as there is an elected Assembly to speak to.
Cutting Hurriyat, with its pronounced
pro-Pakistani stand, to size has been one of the biggest achievements in
this poll. President Musharrafs attempt to paint the poll as a fraud has
not found any takers even amongst the Islamic nations, let alone the international
community.
Everytime the Vajpayee Government
turns a successful chapter, the reverse happens in Pakistan as if destiny
had tied the two together in some mysterious way. In October 1999, Mr Vajpayee
won a handsome five-year mandate for his NDA Government in a countrywide
poll. The same day this was completed as he took office, the Government
changed in neighbouring Pakistan, with the elected Prime Minister being
replaced by a military dictator. Even to the outside world, the contrast
was striking. Democracy strengthened in one country while in the neighbourhood,
it was kicked out by the military boot. Now once again, Mr Vajpayee has
demonstrated the dynamism and flexibility of Indian democracy. While the
elections in J&K have been hailed as free and fair, the same day a
countrywide election in Pakistan failed to gain credibility in the worlds
eyes. The Indian Prime Minister, in taking up the challenge in J&K,
demonstrated his own abiding faith in democracy.
For India, there are some obvious
advantages in such a situation even as it should be ready for the worst.
Our greatest asset at this juncture is the Vajpayee Governments proven
ability to steadily swing international opinion towards accepting the Indian
position vis-à-vis our virtually military-ruled neighbour. Only
the other day Mr Vajpayee demonstrated this in Copenhagen when the Danish
Prime Minister did a turnabout in the face of his Indian counterparts strong
and effective diplomacy, within 24 hours of taking a strong pro-Pakistani
stand previous day. Over the last four years, what the two successive Vajpayee-led
Governments have demonstrated in world affairs is a capacity for firm,
determined and decisive leadership.
