‘India can be a little more magnanimous’

You are among the few Pakistani former military officials who have been espousing peace between India and Pakistan. What prompted this change of heart?
We were brought up in an environment where one was taught that Indians were bad. But gradually when I held senior positions and also after retirement, I had the opportunity to travel abroad to countries like the US to participate in seminars where I met several Indians. It was only a matter of time before I realised that Indians were as good or bad as us.

It occurred to me that though we fought very gallantly in the 1965 and 1971 wars, it didn’t really resolve our issues. I have come to the conclusion that it is extremely important for Pakistan and its people to have peaceful relations with India.

What in your opinion are the milestones on the road to peace between India and Pakistan?
There has been a high level of tension between both countries after the attack on your Parliament on December 13, 2001. There was heavy troop mobilisation on both sides. The first benchmark would be to return to the pre-December 13 status. There have been some recent initiatives by both sides in this connection, but a lot still needs to be done.

The next step would be to start dialogue. I am a great believer in dialogue. After all, if it was not for my interaction with Indians, how could my mindset have changed?

By dialogue do you mean greater people-to-people interaction or engagement between both governments? And at which level?
Yes, by dialogue I mean involving both governments and that could start at any level. I support maximum people-to-people interaction, but as a benchmark for peace doors of dialogue should open between both countries. Though there has been a recent thawing in the relations, it must ultimately lead to a dialogue. We cannot let this conflict carry on in the 21st Century as well.

But then there has been no compromise on Pakistan’s position that Kashmir should be the core issue in any dialogue. This despite the fact that India has in the recent past shown willingness to discuss Kashmir along with the range of other issues like trade for instance.
Why not? As long as Kashmir is recognised as an important issue and discussed, I don’t see why anyone should have a problem with that. In fact, let me forestall your next question, I think the solution for Kashmir has to emerge through dialogue between all concerned.

I fully agree with you on the issue of trade. Many people I meet here tell me the same thing and, really, there can be nothing better than developing our regional trade. Look at Europe, and how they have benefited from this approach.

The military has played an important role in Pakistan’s internal politics. And there is a perception here that whenever there is any movement towards peace, Pakistan’s military intervenes and the process takes a U-turn.
I believe it is best for any country that its military does what it should, which is to defend the nation’s frontiers. Unfortunately in Pakistan, due to failure of political parties in running the government, the military has had to time and again intervene.

When General (Pervez) Musharraf took over, the economic situation was bad and there were many political problems. In fact, he received an overwhelming welcome from all sections when he came to power.

This is a sort of cycle in Pakistan. And I am not proud of this cycle. I would like democracy to take roots and hopefully we won’t have the military intervening after General Musharraf’s tenure.

Do you think General Musharraf’s approach is qualitatively different from that of other military rulers in Pakistan?
I was General Zia-ul-Haq’s personal staff officer and can say with certainty that he had a very forward-looking agenda, which didn’t succeed for several reasons. Even Musharraf has his seven-point agenda but then you must remember that Pakistan has multiple problems and it is not easy to achieve things easily.

There are radical elements in Pakistan for whom anti-India sentiment is political capital. How do you propose to counter this?
Pakistan, as you know, is an Islamic country and there are radical elements. But we are not a radicalised country. In fact, you (India) have radical parties who are now in power in the Central Government. You are, in fact, two steps ahead of us. However, we do recognise that they have been elected to power and India is an established democracy.

But in Pakistan, until the recent American action in Afghanistan, these sections never enjoyed much say. They are definitely not in a majority.

You are visiting India at a time when Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee has extended the hand of friendship. What impressions would you carry back with you?
The issue everyone raises here is that of trans-border terrorism. I would like to say that President Musharraf has stated he will do everything he can to stop this. And he has done so taking considerable risk. He has, in fact, received threats to his life. But he is doing his best and it is important for India to give him more space.

As for the peace process, I give full marks to India for the steps taken. But more can be done. For instance, I think the Samjhauta Express should start as soon as possible. India can be a little more magnanimous. After all, you will also get the credit.