India has allowed Pakistan to feel better about itself because in return, it expects Pakistan to deliver something tangible by September, when the United Nations General Assembly meets and when the two countries? delegations will again be in the same city. That may be the most pragmatic interpretation of the Manmohan Singh-Yousuf Gilani joint statement that has got both independent commentators and the Opposition worried. As long as Pakistan doesn?t get the satisfaction of talking about visas and bits of ice and water while doing nothing about the terrorists it plays host to, the so-called de-bracketing of terrorism and talks in the joint statement shouldn?t really matter. Manmohan Singh is determinedly making the point that Pakistan won?t get that satisfaction; that he is waiting for concrete action. It is fair to give the Prime Minister the benefit of the doubt on this issue. One must also remember that if India does want Pakistan to make positive moves, it has to think creatively. The Pakistani state is a strange entity. That?s also the reason all the chaffing about American pressure on India must be tempered. Yes, this US administration seems to lack so far the instinctive understanding of India that the Bush administration displayed. But, in this context, it is possible to work with and around that as long as America?s leverage on Pakistan delivers tangibles to India. Washington can?t make New Delhi do what the latter thinks it absolutely won?t. But maybe Washington can make Islamabad do what the latter usually doesn?t want to. So, it?s worth waiting. Here, it?s worth putting context above text.
But this is hard to apply to the bit in the joint statement that refers to Pakistani concerns about what?s happening in Balochistan. As Americans would say, this is right out of the left field. The official Indian spin is that the reference shows India?s self-confidence. But that?s a little hard to swallow. Pakistan has been making noises about Balochistan for years, as a cheap tactical trick to try and get even. The reference in the joint statement makes what was desperate and laughable into respectable and quotable. Why give Pakistan a handle it never had?this is not explained by arguments that the Indian PM was being statesman-like and taking the moral high ground. If and when positions harden again, something that can always happen, India may regret allowing the Balochistan reference. In this case, the text has to be put above the context. As India begins another wait for Pakistan to deliver something that means something, it should carefully weigh the possible implications of this unnecessary concession.
