One leader sees his last chance for peace. The other, perhaps, sees his political mortality amid repeated assassination attempts and political opposition.
But more than two years after their last summit ended in failure, India's prime minister and Pakistan's president have set the groundwork for talks that could end years of enmity.
In a region long accustomed to the threat of war, peace may actually be at hand.
"Now, I am a happy man," Pakistani President General Pervez Musharraf told reporters after the surprise announcement that the two countries would soon begin comprehensive talks. Among the issues: the divided, bloodied Himalayan region of Kashmir, where more than a half-century of bitterness has been nurtured.
South Asia has seen optimism before in relations between the two nuclear-armed neighbors. In July 2001, Musharraf traveled to Agra, India to meet Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee in a summit many hoped would lead to peace. Instead, within hours of its ending officials were simply trying to show it hadn't been an utter failure.
But things have changed dramatically since that summit, and the chances of peace appear much better now.
If nothing else, it's clear both nations want peace, a desire reflected, in part, by the careful way expectations were kept in check in the days before the announcement, and the quiet, behind-the-scenes discussions held during the regional summit in Islamabad that led to Tuesday's announcement.
"The establishment is determined not to repeat the wrenching experience of the Agra summit in July 2001, where runaway popular expectations ... could not be matched by the outcomes," C. Rajamohan, an Indian security analyst, wrote in The Hindu newspaper before the meeting.
Less than a year after the Agra summit, the two countries nearly went to war for the fourth time, after a militant attack on the Indian parliament building that New Delhi blamed on Pakistan-backed militants.
But the past few months have seen regular steps forward, with a truce declared along the line of control that divides Kashmir, where the two countries exchanged near-daily weapons fire. While militant violence continues in Kashmir, road and air links, severed after the parliament attack, have been restored. Peace -- and, both sides hope, the trade that would come with it -- have increasingly seemed possible.
"There was a growing realization on both sides that peace is a necessity," Pakistani analyst Zahid Malik said in Islamabad.
Not that peace is a certainty. Just a few months ago Musharraf was blasting India for suppressing "the legitimate struggle of the Kashmiri people." Indian diplomats, for their part, accused Pakistan of the "diplomacy of abuse and hate."
Easing relations began in April, when the often-ailing Vajpayee stunned the region with the announcement he was ready to resume dialogue.
"This round of talks will be decisive, and at least for my life, these will be the last," Vajpayee told the Indian Parliament at the time. "We don't want to forget the past, but we don't want to remain slaves of the past."
Many analysts believe the 79-year-old Vajpayee is desperate to forge a legacy of peace for himself. The prime minister has, as Rajamohan put it, an "irrepressible enthusiasm for exploring different options to break the political deadlock."
Now, with Indian elections expected in a few months, Vajpayee may be hoping to solidify diplomatic gains before the vote.
Musharraf, for his part, in mid-December signaled new flexibility on Kashmir, saying Pakistan was willing to look beyond a long-standing UN resolution that calls for a referendum in the disputed region to decide its own future. The resolution has been the basis of Pakistan's Kashmir policy for decades, but is strongly opposed by India.
It was a significant move for Musharraf, who faces bitter opposition from hard-liners at home, including some in his own army and intelligence services, who see him as a traitor to the Kashmiri militant movement and to the militant Muslim cause in general.
In the past month, he has twice survived assassination attempts.
But if talking peace costs Musharraf politically at home, it will earn him tremendous capital with the US, which is desperate to keep him as an ally in its war against terrorism.
Enmity has been part of India-Pakistan relations since the two countries were carved from British India at independence in 1947. The "partition" of colonial India cost the lives of over a million people, as Muslims went to the new nation of Pakistan and Hindus to modern India.
Today, Kashmir is at the center of their continued bitterness. A Muslim region whose Hindu prince chose to align himself with India in 1947 -- almost certainly against the wishes of his people -- Kashmir has been divided ever since by India and Pakistan.
Both nations claim the region in its entirety.
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Most countries are commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II with condemnations of militarism and imperialism, and commemoration of the global catastrophe wrought by the war. On the other hand, China is to hold a military parade. According to China’s state-run Xinhua news agency, Beijing is conducting the military parade in Tiananmen Square on Sept. 3 to “mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II and the victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression.” However, during World War II, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) had not yet been established. It
A recent critique of former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s speech in Taiwan (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” by Sasha B. Chhabra, Aug. 12, page 8) seriously misinterpreted his remarks, twisting them to fit a preconceived narrative. As a Taiwanese who witnessed his political rise and fall firsthand while living in the UK and was present for his speech in Taipei, I have a unique vantage point from which to say I think the critiques of his visit deliberately misinterpreted his words. By dwelling on his personal controversies, they obscured the real substance of his message. A clarification is needed to
There is an old saying that if there is blood in the water, the sharks will come. In Taiwan’s case, that shark is China, circling, waiting for any sign of weakness to strike. Many thought the failed recall effort was that blood in the water, a signal for Beijing to press harder, but Taiwan’s democracy has just proven that China is mistaken. The recent recall campaign against 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, many with openly pro-Beijing leanings, failed at the ballot box. While the challenge targeted opposition lawmakers rather than President William Lai (賴清德) himself, it became an indirect
RSS