Several anachronistic leaders of Pakistan’s political parties which have scant public followings and barely any representation in the parliament particularly the extremist religious groups, and some ambitious retired Generals of the army, are out in the streets these days crying hoarse that what had been achieved by the valiant freedom-fighters on the heights of Kargil has been lost by Nawaz Sharif at the negotiation table in Washington.

Be that as it may, the very first question concerning Kargil that occurs to mind is: Was it not a project that belonged more to the realm of fantasy than that of reality? According to press reports it took two years to plan it. Was not a single pragmatic thinker, a single realist associated with it over this long period of time? It strains credulity to believe that the United Jihad Council comprising 15 militant groups, whose eleven leaders Nawaz Sharif requested last Friday to withdraw from Kargil, had any thing to do with its planning.

That it remained a well-guarded secret till the fighters sneaked last winter into the bunkers and hide-outs which had been vacated by the Indian units at the advent of winter, indicates that it was conceived in a setup with tight security apparatus. The Indian Defense Minister and even Prime Minister Vajpayee thought that Nawaz Sharif was not in the know of the operation. Their accusing fingers pointed towards the army. The $7-million ads in the US papers, ostensibly financed by the expatriate Indians, carried the same pitch but in an offensive and slovenly diction.

The findings of the foreign media and western powers were not much different. No wonder the US sent an army Commander-in-Chief, Gen. Zinni, to advise, particularly the brass, on need to de-escalate the conflict.

What could have been the objective behind this operation? Was it calculated to draw attention to the Kashmir issue and the continuing insurgency in that state? That is quite plausible. But its timing, coming as it did almost on the heels of the Lahore Declaration, makes one wonder whether it emanated from the instinct of self-preservation and promotion of the men in uniform.

The Washington statement points out the Lahore Declaration as the proper framework for talks on Kashmir. The Kargil operation has effectively sabotaged that framework and sent it to Limbo. It has also effectively countered the idea taking roots among the people at large that defense expenditure could and should be curtailed following the acquisition of atomic capability.

Pakistan’s economy has in fiscal 1998-99 recorded its poorest performance ever. Defense budget nevertheless has been increased by 10% in the current year. Some 30 per cent increase in salaries had already been granted earlier to the men in uniform. Pakistan’s defense budget of $4 billion works out to a levy of almost $30 per annum per head of its 134 million people, while India’s defense budget of $10 billion works out to $10 per head per year of its population of 1billion. Pakistan is thus spending three time that of India on a per capita basis. This despite the fact that its army and navy are half of India’s and its air force is one-third. During the 1980s India was spending 3.5 per cent of its GDP on defense. In 1990s its defense expenditure went down to 2.5 per cent of the GDP. That reflects the emphasis on economic growth and the strict control on defense expenditure in that country.

Pakistan has been half of the time since independence under military rule. Each successive military leader has rewarded his only constituency –the military- with increased funds and perks at the cost of other competing and more pressing demands

The defense budget was taken out of the purview of civil scrutiny and debate in the parliament. Figures of expenditure are therefore not easily available. How enormous, and how illogical, is defense expenditure by the two poverty-stricken countries may be gauged from the fact that India is spending $700,000 a day (BBC figure)for maintaining its armed personnel on the Siachen glacier –a godforsaken area but projected by the two armies as strategically overviewing the Karakoram highway linking China with Pakistan.

India’s daily expenditure on Kargil is estimated to be $4million (BBC). This does not include the cost of the aircraft and helicopters and other hardware lost in the war.

According to the Human Development index, both India and Pakistan languish close to the bottom!

Over the past half a century, world opinion was quite favorably inclined towards the right of self-determination of Kashmiris. Pakistan fought two wars with India on this issue and on both occasions, all major policy decisions were taken through debate, discussion and consensus between both the civilian and military setups. There was no temple of secrecy.

The perception in the temple that once Kargil hits the headlines, the world would automatically line up behind the right cause has turned out to be wrong. Even Pakistan’s closest and “all-weather” friend, China, abstained from even making noises in our favor. The resolution of the US Foreign Relations Committee, the G-8 statement and the unambiguous admonitions of the State Department were all clearly unfavorable to Pakistan. Why? Because the project was not well conceived.

A foreign country’s policy towards an issue like Kashmir is hardly based on the merit of the case. It is rooted in that country’s vested interest and influence in the region. Apart from the vast dimensions and growth potentials of Indian economy and its fast growing cadre of scientists, engineers and other professionals, Pakistan’s economic vulnerability to coercion must have weighed with the policy makers in their condemnation of the Kargil adventure.

What choices were available to Nawaz Sharif once he found himself saddled with the Kargil conflict?

He tried to cash in the goodwill he had cultivated with the Indian premier Vajpayee. The reply was: withdraw first the infiltrators -ghusbaithiye in Hindi- and then talk. He went to China and received little encouragement in the venture. He talked to President Clinton and other leaders. Same reply. He resorted to back-channel diplomacy, but it rendered no advantage. He sent emissaries to different countries. But, instances are wanting of success of quick fix diplomacy and special emissaries.

In a situation like this, he had to seek a meeting with President Clinton and agree to the ostensibly humiliating Washington accord. That, nontheless, provides a way out of the quagmire. He may be able to pull the chestnuts out of the fire.

Nawaz Sharif’s populist image has been eroding under constant rumors of his inability to differentiate between personal and public financial interests and assets. Despite his loud claims of honesty, the public perception has been that he is no less guilty in respect of corruption than is Benazir.

Be that as it may, he is on the severest test of his political career right now. The Islamic radicals whether in uniform or belonging to religious parties have the podiums of mosques available to them to excite the sentiments of credulous, illiterate, people.

They would have little difficulty in convincing that he had capitulated in Washington for personal gains or owing to his inability to put forward his country’s point of view convincingly. That is not true, but truth becomes the first casualty when sentiments are excited.

The only way now open to him to cope with the campaigns of the reactionaries is to surprise the people by coming clean with them and the people will astonish him by rejecting the radicals’ provocation.

Extremists in India too have been quite vocal and active in harming the resumption of the Lahore spirit. Wallowing in jingoistic zeal, the Sangh Parivar, for instance, has advocated a nuclear strike on Pakistan. There are demands from these elements for an end to cricket contests and cultural exchanges. Viewing of Pakistan TV has been banned and the website of daily Dawn has been blocked. These steps have done great damage to India’s image here as an open and mature society. Chauvinism has gone quite astray in the demand by Shiv Sena, elements belonging to BJP, Congress and other parties that the famous film star, Dilip Kumar, return the Nashan-I-Pakistan award conferred on him by Pakistan. Dilip had played a role in the bus diplomacy and was lauded for that. Now he is being bullied to return the award.

Once the pullout from Kargil of the Mujahideen is complete and their posts are reoccupied by Indian army, Atal Bihari Vajpayee will be able to brush aside the warmongers and jingoists and present the whole Kargil episode as a remarkable success of his government. He may win with a vast majority in the Sept-Oct general elections.

Nawaz Sharif too has a good opportunity to come clean with the people, instead of being dictated from the temple of secrecy. The US has already warned the army against any move affecting the position of Nawaz Sharif as a democratically elected leader. That by itself is a great gain for him. The civil polity should be able now to keep the warrior caste under control.

By prevailing upon the Mujahideen to climb down from Kargil heights, he would have, in effect, added another financial burden on Indian army of maintaining units in the thin air of Kargil heights throughout the year as they are doing in the icy wilderness of Siachen at a cost of $700,000 a day.

If the Lahore spirit is resumed, the two neighbors would be able to come to some agreement obviating the need for such silly expenses. Pakistan would be able to concentrate in strengthening its brittle economy. Perhaps it was no coincidence that soon after the Washington accord the London Club has rescheduled the repayment of over $800 million owed by Pakistan, and the IMF installment of $100 million is not likely to be withheld. France may also release the fighter planes which Pakistan had purchased and paid for.

The biggest threat to a country’s security comes from within. India and Pakistan both face the same challenge in this respect. Without peace, they would not be able to rid the vast population of grinding poverty that will continue to imperil their security from within. Their nuclear arsenals will not come to their rescue since hungry people need bread, not bombs for their sustenance.