Unilateral concessions can backfire

new delhi: in the run-up to the agra summit, india has announced a series of unilateral measures aimed at improving the atmospherics and creating a certain degree of goodwill with pakistan. pakistani prisoners have been released, trade concessions announced, military-level consultations sought with a view to reducing tension in siachen and along the line of control, and visa procedures relaxed.but given the perverse geopolitics of the subcontinent, some of india's gestures may well end up killing - with kindness, that is - any prospects of reaching agreement with pakistan on these issues. new delhi does not appear to have take into account the prospect of its gestures being seen by islamabad as an attempt to predetermine the focus of the agra meeting between president musharraf and prime minister vajpayee. pakistan feels that by making all sorts of grand gestures and seeking an urgent meeting of director generals of military operations (dgmos), india is trying to bury the `core issue' of kashmir under a heap of secondary subjects. india's decision to open new border crossing points in rajasthan and even along the line of control - announced on monday - is an example of how well-intentioned unilateralism could end up backfiring. border crossings need the cooperation of both countries and cannot be unilaterally announced by india alone. thus, monday's announcements have little practical import in the absence of a pakistani endorsement. indeed, by going public with the issue in this manner rather than seeking to discuss it with musharraf at agra, india could even be jeopardising the possibility of pakistan agreeing to open up the rail line through rajasthan and allow border crossings along the loc. this is because easing travel restrictions will be seen as an `indian demand' and not one that arose after joint deliberations between the two delegations. on the dgmos issue - if islamabad's official reaction is to be believed - the first that pakistan heard of vajpayee's proposal to have the two military men meet was when the indian media relayed the announcement. it would have been much better for the proposed meeting to have been planned not via public announcements but through the well-established procedures that the two dgmos have for communicating with each other. that way, an unnecessary and irritating controversy could have been avoided and their discussions could have been more fruitful as a result. as a tactic, the vajpayee government should have held back on some of its initiatives till after the summit. if musharraf, for whatever reason, was unwilling to ease travel restrictions or expand the scope for bilateral trade, a unilateral announcement by india after the summit would have sent a much more effective signal to the people of the two countries and indeed to the world at large.