The social graces of Nawaz Sharif



I  cannot  think  of  a better way of starting this blog than with personal recollections  of Nawaz Sharif whose triumphant long march drew the world’s attention  to the Pakistani civil society that yearns for modern democratic institutions—not the Qazi Courts the Taliban got at gun-point in Swat and elsewhere in battle-torn NWFP.

Who  exactly  is  this man whose brawny politics has remained unaffected by the  grave  risks it  entails  for  his  business family counted among the country’s richest? On first introduction, he comes across as one who loves the  good things of life. Have a meal with him and you’d know how much of a foodie he is.

The chandeliers, exquisite cut glass vases, wall hangings, the curtains and the mahogany furniture in the spacious room where he receives guests at his sprawling farmhouse near Lahore, are worth a fortune an ordinary Pakistani cannot  aspire to build in a life-time. But there is about Sharif an earthy touch,  a  friendly demeanor that didn’t come easily to the stiff-upper-lip Benazir Bhutto.

Yeh desi Murgi key hai, kam se kam do tukdey lena,” he whispered as I made my way to a tray-full of tangdi kebabas at his lavish Iftar party after the 1997 poll  campaign  that  returned him to power with a thumping majority.

Knowing  we  had deadlines to keep and were in a hurry to leave, he had the social  grace to lead The  Hindu’s Malini Parthasarthy and me to the dinning room ahead of hundreds of other invitees.

A  perfect  host—  that’s  what Sharif always is. More recently, he stood waiting  in  the  portico  after guards at the outer gate took unduly long checking out our credentials when I turned up in the company of a Pakistani friend they weren’t expecting.

“I’m so  sorry  they made you wait that long,” said a profusely apologetic Sharif  as  I  introduced  him  to  my friend Sattar Khan, a journalist who jocularly  presented  himself  as  my driver (Indian pitarkar da driver) to demand  a  cup  of tea that would suit a truck driver’s palate: “Mian Saab, truck draivaran wali chaa palao” Cups full of strongly brewed masala tea arrived in no time but went cold as we engrossed ourselves in a conversation on Musharraf, Zardari and the late Benazir.  Midway through the interview, Sharif asked his khansama (cook) to prepare some more tea with similar tang and colour: “Yeh puraney cup le jao aur isi rang mein naye chai banao.”

The rough and tumble of politics hasn’t dented his business instincts. At a meeting in  Islamabad  a day after he pitted a retired Supreme Court judge against  Zardari  in the presidential election, he asked whether the Ambani brothers,  Mukesh  and  Anil,  were still among India’s richest. “Yes, very much  so,  Mian  Saab,” I replied.”Oh, even after they’ve split the family wealth,” he wondered.

The  PML  leader  has  indeed traveled a long distance since his political debut in the 1980s as a Zia acolyte. In a role-reversal few had expected at the time, Sharif fought in 1993 the civil-military establishment with which Benazir  patched  up  to  secure power the second time. His refusal to take dictation from  the  then President,  Ghulam  Ishaq  Khan  forced early elections  despite  his dismissed government’s reinstatement by the Supreme Court.

Sharif  lost  at the hustings but made for himself a permanent place in the national psyche by refusing to bury the hatchet with GIK after the historic court judgement.

“Why can’t you let bygones be bygones and make up with the President,”  I asked at a press conference. His media advisor who has since defected  to  the pro-Army  PML  (Qaid),  Mushahid Hussain stonewalled the question.

As  I  was  leaving  after the press meet, Sharif sought me out. “You had a valid point. But I have now an (anti-establishment) constituency to keep.”

It  was  that  credo  that  drove  his  long march for the dismissed judges restoration  16  years  later. This time around, the establishment buckled. For  politics  isn’t  merely  about being  street  smart, which Zardari undoubtedly is.

It’s more about stirring up the streets.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (9 votes, average: 4 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...
  • Sana

    A Great start , all the very best to you.

    [Reply]

    Ruchi Ahuja Reply:

    An interesting read and insightful :)

    [Reply]

    Sujata Anandan Reply:

    Loved your piece, Vinod. I was fascinated by his movement against Zardari and glued to television through his long march, admiring his courage in taking on the establishment in a country as dangerous as Pakistan where you can be killed for simply being the opposition!

    There are few politicians you can admire, least of all across the border but I have liked Sharif ever since I heard him once say honestly that the Pakistani system is “ aadha teeter, aadha bater” — and quote from Mughal-e-Azam. Thanks for bringing him alive to those who can only watch from a distance.

    [Reply]

    vinod Reply:

    Thanks Sujata.Would love to keep hearing ffrom you.

    Anil Maheshwari Reply:

    Welcome to the Blogosphere. An interesting read. However, commentary on the Indiuan elections 2009 by an established, of course pro-establishment, veteran journalist would have been more approriate. I look forward to hear about the Indian polity. As far as the Pakistan is concerned, one should read ” The Idiot’s Guide to Pakistan” in the latest issue of the prestigious Foreign Policy magazine.

    Anil Maheshwari Reply:

    Inadvertantly I forgot to give the link as a post on a blog without link is considered a “dead post”.

    The link is http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4782

    vinod Reply:

    Gud you read it Anil. We south asians don’t need the Idiot’s guide, that too an American idiot’s guide, to understand Pakistan.

    Anil Maheshwari Reply:

    That is the problem of MINDSET. You seem to be unaware of the subaltern study of history. History is not mere the life and works of rulers. Without reading someone, if you can describe someone idiot, it is your prerogative.

    Rajesh Kumar Jha Reply:

    I have been following ur reports ever since ur stint as HT correspondent in Pakistan. Anyway, without doubt Sharif is one of the politicians, capable to deliver good for Pakistan. Even during Kargil, which was to a large extent result of our own intelligence and military failures, he was candid to a large extent. But then Pakistan is a difficult ball game altogether, dificult to manage and run by anyone, however capable and efficient he or she may be. Thanks Mr Sharma in joining club of ur colleagues in launching ur blog.

    S.Sethi Reply:

    amazingly overated reaction from a seasoned media person like Mr VInod Sharma to Nawaz Sharif’s hospitality.
    I have my roots from Pakistan, and have visited that place several time(four time to be precise) and every time i returned disappointed and upset.
    Pakistan is not defence colony or Gulbarg(in lahore) it is a mindset which is disturbing.After Kabab and Biryani and some scotch,pakistani show their true colors.They want India to bleed,they want it to disintegrate.They want Kashmir and Dear what y say in your introduction-that you have been to Pakistan’s side of Kashmir, you don’t have the guts to say that is Pakistan occupied Kashmir- well need i say more– you have to go to pakistan and that is why you keep them in good humour and when they come here we again have to keep them in good humour,that is the tregdy of India.
    ss

    vinod Reply:

    Sethi saab, I am afraid u missed the point altogether. You were reading a blog on the social graces of a man fighting the Pak establishment in defence of a cause. It wasn’t about India-Pak. It was about a civil society he mobilised in defence of modern democratic institutions as opposed to sharia laws imposed by the Taliban. I’ll request you to note that the judiciary they forced the government to restore took suo motu notice of the flogging of a woman in swat by islamic hardliners.
    Shouldn’t there be some kind of a coalition between such sections on either side of the border? I for one am optimistic about it.

    SChawla Reply:

    Dear Vinod,
    Interesting but well known insights about Nawaz Sharif. As a journalist you obviously are trained to be politically correct but you remind me of the famous saying by Advani about Indian journalist during the Emergency –”they were asked to bend but they crawled.”

    vinod Reply:

    Presumptuous? Who? Read your own responses and you’d know who chose the high pedestal to pass value judgements like “mindset” and “pro-establishment.” I’m aware of Nocholas Schmidle’s work based on his two years stay in Pakistan. Learning is a humbling experience that invariably escape’s dilettantes. Matter over from my side.

    Shashank Kalucha Reply:

    I sometimes wonder about the charm most Pakistani leaders seem to possess. Karan Thapar cannot stop fawning over Gen. Musharraf or Benazir Bhutto. I even read an editorial once in the HT about a changed “mature” Zardari. Here you too Mr. Sharma give us a personal insight about Nawaz Sharif.

    I have nothing personal against any of these leaders but i sometimes wonder if this brotherly feeling truly exists for our generation. (I am 21). Mr. Sanghvi pointed this out too in one of his editorials. All the above leaders have come from influential families and have seen the fine life, and it shows in their personal equations with respective Indian journalists. But this seems to be the only positive trait about them. Or maybe I’m hellbent on being biased against politicians(there does seem to be a consensus on corruption charges against all of them to be true)

    Anyway, great start Mr. Sharma!

    [Reply]

    vinod Reply:

    Nawaz Sharif’s was the face lent to an idea. The point I am making is that there is in Pakistan a civil society that seeks modern democratic systems and is as threatened by Taliban as the rest of the world. Sharif brought them to streets and showcased them for those with blinkered, one-sided view of Pakistan.

    shantiveer kaul Reply:

    Welcome!

    Stylistically, your blog post reads just like your Pakistani Diary entries in the broadsheet. Perhaps a little sparseness is in order.

    Anil Maheshwari Reply:

    Now, I understand why the stylebook of The Statesman started with the sentence ” English is a language of understatement”. The matter is not over from my side.

    vinod Reply:

    I Agree Shanti. Blogs have to be sparse. In my case, its like a classical singer learning rap. Am trying to get used to the new medium (or is it idiom?)

    shantiveer kaul Reply:

    Well Vinod, we might get lucky! You might spawn the genre of classic-rap, along the lines of fusion medium/ idiom like techno-rap and stuff.

  • Amti Julka

    Since all your readers raised the important questions,here’s a trivial one….

    How was the tangdi kebab?

    [Reply]

    vinod Reply:

    yummy! The guy serves sumptuous stuff.

    [Reply]

    Sam Reply:

    how come people mix up the personal charm or gracious host to political philosophies.

    All the american presidents were gracious with Russian presidents (vice versa).

    this just means extending courtesy as a fellow human.

    That should not stop us from asking the critical or important questions about political differences.

    please do not get confused hospitiality with politics.

    will sharif be gracious to amend the pakistani law, to let hindu/christian/parsi/sikh become president of pakistan ? Only question & answers like these matter, not what chai or murgi you had…

    [Reply]

    vinod Reply:

    There is no scope for generosity or compassion in statecraft. So nobody is confusing hospitality here with Indo-Pak issues. I for one do not expect Sharif to serve us Kashmir like kebabs on a platter. The effort was to present the human side of a person whose political side is well known. As for making a non-Muslim the President of Pakistan, shouldn’t India set an example by electing a Muslim as prime minister?

    Nikhil Reply:

    Vinod,

    The human side of any individual can evoke sense of compassion or generosity. I’m sure many diplomats and journos across the border are well received in India. But, how does that help in hashing out thorny issues? Far less.

    Many Muslims have succeeded in acquiring key positions in the Indian government. There is a scope for more however, if you’re looking for symbolic gesture there can be an Indian Muslim PM in the future. Can we remotely assure that we’ll see a non-Muslim President of Pakistan? Probably not.

    vinod Reply:

    Chawlaji,
    It would have been better had you quoted someone other than Advaniji because when he called Jinnah “secular” I perhaps was the only Indian journalist to openly back his position. Did that mean that I crawled before Advaniji? No, I only agreed with his appraisal of Jinnah, whose biographer Stanley Wolpert wrote that his speeches after the Partition brought out the realisation that while you can create a country on the philosophy of hate, you cannot run it on the philosophy of hate!
    I’m no great fan of Advaniji but I understood the point he sought to make. My yardstick for measuring the actions of other leaders is no different. I don’t crawl. I comment. Hope you have understood the distinction, sir.

    [Reply]

    SChawla Reply:

    Dear Vinod,
    Generalizations are obviously always inaccurate but when debating we have to resort to them otherwise we miss the forest for the trees. The general consensus amongst many NRIs, especially those who like to think about these issues is, that Indian journalist are always living in fear that their international colleagues will brand them as “pro-Hindutva.” Thus they go the extra mile to polish their “secular credentials,” even if it means manipulating with the truth. Your colleagues on the otherside of Wagha have no such compulsions. That is why, for example, Ahmed Rashid, is going around town, pushing Pakistan’s paranoid pov that the cause of Pakistani descend into chaos is because India has a consulate in Jalalabad!

    Many of us view your and your colleagues columns/blog with that prior model in mind. I think you will need to work harder to convince us that your “softness” for Pakistan is a result of painstaking research and analysis rather than a form of twisted logic that proceeds as “If I am anti-Pakistan then I must be anti-Muslim and therefore pro-Hindu. God forbid.”

    vinod Reply:

    Don’t mind please, Chawlaji, but you are clearly a babe in the woods on India-Pak. But I intend being patient with you. I aren’t pro-Hindutva because I’m pro-India. When I returned from a posting in Pakistan in 1994, I had resolved to myself that I’d never be a Pak-basher or part of trishul dhaari mobs whose very existance helps Pak hardliners drag down our country from the moral high-ground it always had vis-a-vis Pakistan as a non-denominational secular state. In fact, that’s the basis of our claim on kashmir, a muslim majority Indian state. Ur hindutva weakens that claim. Do you really want it that way?

    vinod Reply:

    I don’t speak for Mr Vinod Mehta. But I rate him highly as a writer and a journalist. He’s upfront about what he thinks. By the way, who’s your favourite writer on Pakistan? I ask this because a man is known by the company he keeps. Or the books he reads.

    SChawla Reply:

    Dear Vinod,
    Thanks for your time. I think Indians should never claim “high moral ground” over Pakistan or any other country. That is silly and a waste of time. The Chinese understand that. Indians should be working aggressively to secure India’s interests. This sometimes mean using the stick to keep Pakistan in check. I never understand why people argue that the basis of India’s claim on Kashmir is because it is a secular state. What is the basis of China’s claim on Tibet; or Indonesia’s claim on Bali? Please don’t get bowled over by your own rhetoric. The basis of India’s claim on Kashmir is the India Independence Act of 1947 and the instrument of accession signed by Hari Singh. It is a failure of Indian diplomacy that Kashmir is till an issue. Don’t mind my saying but you seem to have been “Arundhati Royed.” Won’t waste your time further!

    sanjay mittal Reply:

    podmena traffica tested some of your despatches from Pakistan. My only misgiving was that in an effort to build a bridge, we should not end up conceding Pakistan the right to “eternally foment terrorism’ as its state policy.

    But then I have a high regard for Parthasarthi for his insight and every thing on Pakistan.

    Regards

    vinod Reply:

    I’ve got my answer. The gentleman in question also gave peace a chance: he was our ambassador to Pakistan when Vajpayee took a bus-ride to Lahore to be Sharif’s guest. That should convince you that there is no alternative to peace, to dialogue, to reconciliation. I am not at all suggesting that we should buy peace with the Taliban. We should empower good people in Pakistan to fight them with force and conviction.

  • sanjay mittal

    Dear Vinod,

    I read your blog with great interest. Now I just want to know one thing for sure.

    IS IT TRUE that once Indian Journos manage to eat kababs with some Pakistani leaders, they tend to go fida????

    History bears me out. Khushwant singh was dropped at the door by general Zia, and till date is still confused whether the man was responsible for fomenting terrorism in India or was it really RAW upto some dirty tricks.

    Karan Thapar managed to invite Benazir to his house… and for that matter a former Pakistani HIgh commissioner. And even after the Indian Parliament was attacked, Karan mentioned in his column that he really felt sorry for the Pakistani High commissioner who looked isolated at a page 3 party.
    Sorry for th **** High commioner after the Indian Parliament was attacked? sounds strange…

    Kuldip Nayar feels that if Pakistan is under the throes of extemism, so is India … so it all cancels out. My God, what innocence. Pakistani terrorism is attacking India, and what Kuldip considers as Indian extrmists ( BJP and Sangh parivar) is about only as bad as the most liberal Pakistani faces like Nawz and PPP.

    So vinod, are we all so innocent or is the quality of the Kababs served by by Pakistani leaders of very high quality.

    Eagerly awaiting the unravelling of this mystery,

    sanjay

    [Reply]

    Nikhil Reply:

    Sanjay,

    Good response to Vinod’s article. Clearly, Pakistan’s ‘kabab’ diplomacy goes a distance with Indian journos.

    [Reply]

  • vinod

    U r so tongue-in-cheek on Pakistan that you wouldn’t really be able to enjoy the kebabs. Ask Vajpayee whom Nawaz hosted in Lahore during the bus ride and before Kargil. By your reckoning, the BJP leader should also be bracketed with Messrs Khushwant Singh, Nayyar, Thapar and your’s truly.
    On a serious note, we have to deal with Pakistan so long as it’s our neighbour. Sharif isn’t a Zia-ul-Haq or Baitullah Mahsood. He’s Pakistan’s richest man who has had the courage to stand up to four successive army chiefs. That he has people behind him was proved in the movement for restoration of judiciary.

    [Reply]

  • sanjay mittal

    podmena traffica test27s me again. I am still thinking about the kababs. I read in OUTLOOK that Vinod Mehta swears by the wining and dining provided by the Pakistani emabassy. No wonder OULOOK at times, goes to the extent of endorsing every Pakistani position, and at times even blames India for the Pakistani sponsored terrorism in India!

    Well I am getting the feeling that these kababs Pakistanis serve the Indian journos and track 2 peaceniks are like lollipops meant to seduce them into a fantazsy world where terror sponsorship looks like a trivial issue…:)

    regards

    [Reply]

  • sanjay mittal

    podmena traffica test reply

    Ahem!

    Now let me ask you a vital question. Where are the good people in Pakistan? One does not hear them speak or manage to get hold of their writings. I met Nawaz Sharif by chance at a departmental store in London and we shared a cup of tea. He seemed nice, polite and reasonable and probably is the most balanced of the Pakistani leaders in the horizon.

    Yet the same Nawaz Sharif will not say anything against the Taliban. In fact a columnist in Dawn writes that before any interview, Nawaz makes it a pre-condition that no questions on Taliban be asked.

    Imran Khan, for all the fascination some of our aunties and uncles have for him, conveniantly defends Islamic laws and Taliban on Indian TV. Infact even blamed India for the attack on the Lankan cricket team. But our aunties (mostly mid fifties and above) still fawn on him.

    Zardari smiles, talks nice if an indian interviews him, speaks differently when the Pakistani channels do.

    Forget the big fish. Even the ordinary columnists in their most liberal papers hardly have anything positive to say about india. Infact the moderate Muslim and Islamic positions they espouse are more extreme than that of Shiv Sena. How would the minoirites of Pakistan live in such a state never comes in their calculations.

    And to concede that people have a right to be non believers woudl sound like blasphemy to them!

    Maybe they are denying the existence of the evil within. So it is indeed very difficult to find an actual liberal constituency in Pakistan which can live with the idea of a multi religious India with Kashmir being a part of India.

    If you know ten such people let me know!

    [Reply]

    vinod Reply:

    For a long period post-1971, most pakistani scholars, journalists and intellectuals held India singularly responsible for dividing that country. In recent years, they’ve arrived at a more balanced assessment with a commission blaming the Pak army for the excesses that provided the kernel for the bengali discontent that turned into a revolt.
    Closer in time, the IT revolution and people-to-people interaction has created a very articulate constituency for peace in Pakistan that gets stifled each time there are bilateral tensions caused by terror strikes in India. I’m one who’s optimistic that this body of opinion will grow with the passage of time and realisation in Pakistan that extremism isn’t what they need. When a Geo TV journalist was killed in Swat, journalist Hamid Mir who holds a key position in that news channel appreciated on record the cross-border media support on the issue. When 26/11 happened, my friend Imtiaz Alam, who is the secretary general of South Asia Free Media Association (SAFMA), called it the Kargil of Asif Zardari— with Nawaz Sharif and not Musharraf in mind. Hope you’d remember that Musharraf planned Kargil behind Sharif’s back to embarrass him after Vajpayee’s bus ride.
    Scepticism isn’t the answer dear. Hope alone provides the way forward.

    [Reply]

    vinod Reply:

    Dear Mittalji,
    One last bit that I forgot to mention is that Pak bashing in India helps the fundamentalists and weakens liberal opinion in Pakistan. That applies as much to India and that’s why a motivated section of the media there is constantly demonizing India to influence the thinking of people like
    you.

    [Reply]

  • Ramesh

    The clan of so called ‘intellectuals’ like M/s Vinod & Khushwant have been harping on the same philosophy, which Gandhi adopte since his play on Indian ground, which can be called Hindu-Muslim bhai bhai ism that miserably failed culminating in mascare and carnage leading to illfated partion resulting in continued bleeding of India and waste of resources to the tune of trillions and trillions that could have been otherwise used for developmental works. As such such an approach as that of Mr Vinod is nothing but an attempt in vain to extract oil from sand.

    [Reply]

    vinod Reply:

    You quoted the right adage to make the wrong point. oil deposits are always found in desert lands.

    [Reply]

    shantiveer kaul Reply:

    Not always! Sometimes, they are found underwater too!

    [Reply]

    vinod Reply:

    You haven’t questioned the basic premise,Shanti.

    shantiveer kaul Reply:

    Well! Your blog is called “Separated-at-birth”, not “Conjoined-twins”! Having said that, there is clearly much that could be better on either side of the Radcliffe line. I guess most of us here are talking about the underpinning-if not the basis-of the nationhood of Pakistan, and not its civil society.

    vinod Reply:

    An argument burdened so much with the baggage of history. Not the least out of the box! Separated at Birth is the title of this blog, not its mantra or credo. We are separated in a very physical (geographical) sense. The fact remains that we are conjoined in terms of what happens on either side of the line Radcliffe drew. That is what makes a dialogue between civil societies important and could perhaps lead to building a climate for solution of issues without compromising our respective national pride.

    shantiveer kaul Reply:

    What baggage? Whose history? The Indian subcontinent is the only unfortunate region in the world that underwent a formal partition along supposedly religious lines. The award, handed down by an imperial power, gave rise to two successor states only one of which was declared to be a religious state – the Islamic republic of Pakistan. The rump state of India was a multi-religious, multi-ethnic and multi-cultural democracy that had an Islamic population in excess of that of Pakistan. The seeds of the present sub-continental instability lie in this little part of history. The basic question is – can religion be the sole ideological underpinning of a modern, independent nation-state? Quite clearly the answer has to be in the negative.

    vinod Reply:

    Pakistan is there. One has to accept that reality the way Vajpayee did when he visited Minar-e-Pakistan and said in a speech later “Pakistan ko mairey mohar ki kya zaroorat hai. Pakistan is apni mohar has jo chal rahi hai.”
    They called themselves an Islamic Republic and we chose to be a non-denominational secular state. Is it your case that the two cannot do business without redefining themselves? By that logic, we should shut ourselves off from half the world that’s Muslim.

    shantiveer kaul Reply:

    It is not my case that Pakistan needs to redefine itself. Also, it is for States to do business with each other. I am just an ordinary Indian citizen – and a non-journalist to boot. Let us only engage the civil society of Pakistan in a dialogue without having any preconceived notions or being judgmental. But I sure reserve the right to have an opinion about the Pakistani state and the personae that represent/constitute it or happen to be its interlocutors/apologists.

    vinod Reply:

    Yes. Agreed. Nobody can deny you the right to a perception and the flexibility to change it if the need arises.

  • puranchand

    I just dont understand as to how almost all English language Indian jurnos perception of Pakistan vis a vis India is not in tune with the general thinking of indian masses. Most of these jurnos have a soft, pro-pakistani tilt and a nostalgia for Lahore, Pindi etc.

    [Reply]

  • sanjay mittal

    Puranchand, the attraction of attending a kabab party makes the difference…

    [Reply]

    vinod Reply:

    Shed the mutton in your head, Sanjay. Show some grey matter if you really have it.

    [Reply]

  • sanjay mittal

    Dear Vinodji,

    hello again! Thx for the prompt reply. Sorry if I sounded sarcastic, but then that was my intention. THe point is, Indian journos tend to go overboard when it comes to Pakistan, forgetting that in our quest for promoting peace, we tend to forget the huge wave of terrorist attacks being unleashed on our soil.

    We Indians tend to shame ourselves for promoting peace. Like toeing the line – ” we have Muthalik and you have Taliban so it all cancels out.” This is the most stupid line. Muthalik is a small spider who has been shown his space. While Pakistani Taliban is a dino out to blow up the world, and Pakistan is only reluctantly confronting them, under pressure for getting US funds and not out of any deep conviction.

    The fact is the basic Pakistani attitude has to change as Joe Biden too has pointed out. The enemy for Pakistan lies within and not in its eastern borders. If the journalists were to convey this to the Pakistani leaders and readers this would do more for Indian Pakistani friendship then all the kabab parties and the mushairas put together.

    But alas this is clearly wishful thinking.

    [Reply]

    vinod Reply:

    U are living in the past, Sanjayji. Indo-Pak track two isn’t any longer kaju ki burfi diplomacy. I didn’t want to blow my own trumpet but must tell you here that when I meet my Pakistani friends (and there are far too many of that creed now), we talk freely and with a lot of realism. We have an organisation called the South Asia Free Media Association (SAFMA) that conducted journalists from the two countries to either side of the Line of Control in 2004. That was a first in post Independence India and Pakistani journalists ticked off the Hurriyat leaders who sought to castigate them for travelling to our side of Kashmir on an Indian visa.
    SAFMA is a forum for journalists from eight South Asian countries and is recgonized as an associate body of SAARC on media-related issues. Its main agenda is to promote free movement of media persons and media products across south asia.
    I went to open its office in Afghanistan along with two Pakistani SAFMA office bearers with the message that India and Pakistan should work together and not at cross purposes in the war-ravaged country. The objective might seem difficult today but will be achievable in the not very distant future. That’s my hope and conviction.
    So, it isn’t about Kebabs alone. It is also about a lot of hard work on the ground that includes being patient with chornic sceptics like you, Sir.
    Cheers with Kebabas!

    [Reply]