US embassy cable - 05NEWDELHI621

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 NEW DELHI 000621 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/24/2015 
TAGS: PREL, PGOV, IN, NP, PK, Kashmir 
SUBJECT: INDIA WELCOMES MORE CONTACT BETWEEN KASHMIRIS 
 
REF: 04 KATHMANDU 2464 
 
Classified By: DCM Robert O. Blake, Jr.  Reasons 1.4 (B,D). 
 
1.  (C) Summary: The Pugwash-sponsored conference on Kashmir 
held in Kathmandu last December has reinforced growing GOI 
receptivity towards contact between Kashmiris from India and 
Pakistan, and New Delhi is considering proposals for a 
follow-on meeting, possibly in Srinagar, according to Kashmir 
Interlocutor NN Vohra.  Kashmiri separatist participants 
called the seminar "very good," even "spectacular" -- better 
than other events in Europe or North America in recent years, 
because its venue allowed for much broader participation and 
more extensive interaction between Kashmiri activists and 
those who write about the issue.  While the New 
Delhi-Hurriyat dialogue remains completely stalled, GOI 
openness to more cross LOC contact is positive, and meetings 
like this can serve as placeholders of sorts until conditions 
improve for restarting a formal dialogue.  End Summary. 
 
2.  (C) Academic and policy conferences on Kashmir tend to be 
of limited value for several reasons: 1) usually sponsored by 
a clearly pro-India or pro-Pakistan group, they are perceived 
as "biased," thus depriving them of credibility with major 
constituencies; 2) the "right people" are not there, usually 
because they boycott, are prevented from leaving their 
countries, cannot obtain visas, or do not want to accept 
travel funds from the organizers or cannot/do not wish to pay 
their own way; and 3) discussion reviews well-worn positions 
and does little to advance the thinking of people who matter 
(GOI, GOP, and major players in J&K).  These weaknesses have 
been part of the Kashmir seminar landscape for decades, and 
continue to characterize the vast majority of periodic 
efforts by academics, politicians, and others to discuss this 
issue seriously outside India and Pakistan. 
 
Unqualified Success 
------------------- 
 
3.  (C) Following the December 11-14 seminar, our 
conversations with a number of the participants (as a 
supplement to Kathmandu's timely and useful report (reftel)) 
indicate that this event was unusually successful, because 
many Kashmiris and other well-informed observers attended, 
and because they represented most major shades of 
non-official GOI and Kashmiri opinion.  Perhaps most 
importantly, the session proved to GOI skeptics that India 
can benefit from facilitating more contact between Indian and 
Pakistani Kashmiris, including separatists.  Press reports 
that this was the first such meeting of Kashmiri leaders from 
both sides since 1947 were somewhat exaggerated, in that 
Kashmiris have met at conferences outside the country in the 
past, but we are unaware of a case in which such a large 
number of influential Kashmir-related people (ca. 45) met for 
so many days at one time, and spoke so extensively with each 
other. 
 
Separatists 
----------- 
 
4.  (C) Moderate All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC) 
leaders were uniformly positive about the event, praising the 
organizers in particular for bringing Kashmiris from both 
sides of the LOC together for four days of talks, and 
expressing appreciation that New Delhi did not block their 
travel.  Mirwaiz Umar Farooq told D/Polcouns recently that 
the very fact that the meeting took place was a great 
achievement.  Until his plane departed, he had expected the 
GOI to prevent him and other Kashmiris from going, and he was 
surprised to be able to attend at all.  (We know that NSA 
Dixit personally intervened to make this travel possible.) 
Well-organized conferences cannot fix the Kashmir problem, 
but similar meetings would be useful in bringing people 
together who would otherwise have little or no opportunity to 
communicate with each other on this issue, he stated. 
 
5.  (C) The Hurriyat's Prof. AG Bhat was struck by the fact 
that the Indian authorities had allowed him to travel without 
an Indian passport or other official GOI-issued document, but 
on the basis of a piece of paper he had drafted himself.  It 
was his first ever trip outside India (he is in his 60s), and 
he clearly relished the opportunity to meet so many people he 
had only read about.  Some participants came with open minds, 
others were ideologues, and still others represented official 
Indian and Pakistani positions, but this produced 
"spectacular" interactions, and a certain "togetherness," he 
said.  He characterized the general consensus among 
participants as: 1) there is no military solution to the 
Kashmir problem; 2) the Kashmiris should not suffer any 
longer; and 3) Kashmir is a hurdle in the path of progress 
for the peoples of India and Pakistan. 
 
6. (C) Representing pro-independence views, "Kashmir Times" 
editor Ved Bhasin called the seminar "a meeting of minds." 
Discussion was open, and there was none of the bitterness he 
had expected.  The most notable part was a separate dialogue 
between Kashmiris conducted by Kashmiri-American Farooq 
Kathwari.  JKLF leader Yasin Malik did not attend, and his 
representative Ghulam Rasool Dar did not contribute to the 
discussion, according to participants.  The GOI also 
permitted a representative of Shabir Shah's pro-independence 
faction of the Hurriyat to travel, which no one expected. 
Hardline pro-Pak activist SAS Geelani's did not attend, 
although he was approached. 
 
Non-Official Indians 
-------------------- 
 
6.  (C) Former Indian High Commissioner in Pakistan G 
Parthasarathy highlighted the unusual mix of Kashmiris from 
both sides of the LOC, who discussed their views frankly at 
great length, focused on ways to make Kashmiris' lives more 
secure, and agreed to meet again.  He described a consensus 
among participants that the LOC ceasefire should be made 
permanent, that violence of all kinds should end, and that 
all concerned should refrain from actions that incite 
violence.  A reduction of GOI and GOP security presence would 
also be welcome.  He was struck by the yearning for more 
contact between Kashmiris.  He criticized New Delhi's 
position on documentation for the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus, 
arguing that as India claims this territory as its own 
anyway, passports should not be necessary.  He was also 
skeptical of the argument that more cross LOC travel would 
increase terrorism, and called for greater interaction 
between Kargil and Skardu, not just J&K and POK.  Finally, he 
noted the absence of leaders from the Congress Party, BJP, 
PDP and National Conference, and from the Northern Areas in 
Pakistan (some were invited).  Strategist C Raja Mohan added 
that the conference was not supposed to come up with any 
solutions, but if the initiative were sustained, it might 
come up with a "wee bit of political space" for Delhi and 
Islamabad to explore. 
 
GOI Positive 
------------ 
 
7.  (C) The GOI has also been unusually positive about this 
event, not because it was "pro-Indian" (it was not), but 
because senior officials have been changing their minds about 
the utility of such meetings.  In a conversation with 
D/Polcouns on January 24, Kashmir Interlocutor NN Vohra 
summarized New Delhi's position as "not only to allow it to 
happen, but to ensure that it would."  MEA Joint Secretary 
(Pakistan, Afghanistan Iran) AK Singh told Polcouns that the 
conference was a success from the Foreign Ministry's 
perspective.  The GOI intelligence agencies had reservations 
about some participants' travel, but Dixit intervened to 
guarantee that they be able to go.  Several particpants told 
Vohra of unusually candid exchanges between Kashmiris in 
particular, whose positions faced scrutiny in a semi-public 
manner.  Vohra welcomed the fact that the sloganeering that 
passes for debate on Kashmir was subjected to debate.  Vohra 
also confirmed a late December "Hindu" story which reported 
that the GOI is keen to allow more contact between Kashmiris, 
including with APHC leaders.  This receptivity extends to 
those from Pakistani Kashmir who wish to visit India, he 
said. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
8.  (C) The Pugwash meeting was only a seminar, but it had 
one important consequence: it reinforced evolving GOI 
attitudes on the utility of contact between Kashmiris and 
others who think about the problem.  Interaction between 
Indian and Pakistani Kashmiris has always been subject to 
political interference from New Delhi and Islamabad, but we 
are struck by the event's positive after-effects in official 
Delhi, which holds the door open for more such meetings in 
the future.  This kind of event cannot be a substitute for 
the stalled dialogue between New Delhi and the moderate 
Hurriyat, but it can serve as a placeholder until conditions 
for formal talks improve.  APHC leaders noted the greater GOI 
openness.  In the absence of significant initiatives on the 
New Delhi-Srinagar axis, more contact of this nature between 
Kashmiris can only be positive. 
MULFORD