Pakistani rulers' double-speak on the Mumbai terror attacks is now history. They first claimed the attackers including Kasab caught alive were not Pakistanis. It was claimed that Kasab's name was neither in government records nor in the voters and ration card holders lists. When Pakistani media published his parents' interviews admitting Kasab was their son, the authorities posted police outside his house denying any access to family members. It was after India provided foolproof evidence coupled with global pressure that Pakistan admitted that the attackers were its citizens.

Now Pakistan has denied, though less vehemently, any hand in infiltrations arguing that when the country was itself a victim of terrorism how can it encourage terrorists. If it is not double-speak, then the implication is that the Pakistani Army, particularly its ISI, is weak and is not even capable of ensuring the security of the country's borders. This would contradict Pakistani rulers repeated declarations about their Army being strong enough to meet any challenge. In sharp contrast, the Indian security forces have been thwarting most of the infiltration attempts. The charge that the infiltrations are taking place with the support of the Pakistani Army is supported by reports that it provides firing cover to facilitate infiltrators.

The revived infiltrations of armed terrorists into Kashmir and other parts of India is a clear violation of Pakistan's solemn commitment given by then President Pervez Musharraf that the country's territory would not be allowed to be used for attacks on other countries.

There cannot be two opinions that resumption of composite dialogue is imperative for normalizing India-Pakistan relations, resolving the Kashmir issue and for peace and economy of the two countries. But Pakistan will have to stop the use of its territory by terrorists against India. The US is not using its full leverage with Pakistan, which is now virtually under its thumb, to prosecute the perpetrators of Mumbai attacks.

The Gilgit-Baltistan Empowerment and Self-governance Order will have wider implications not only for the Kashmir issue but also for the separatists' stand on the state's future. Before dwelling on the implications, some facts about this not so widely known part of the state.

A part of the erstwhile undivided state of Jammu and Kashmir under Pakistani occupation since 1947, the area is strategically located having common borders with Afghanistan, China and India. It is a separate administrative unit designated by Pakistan as the 'Northern Areas' which did not have any political or legal status and whose people were denied democratic rights, access to justice and civil liberties. In the past, the area has often been hit by popular unrest. With the promulgation of the new Order, the official name of the area has been changed from 'Northern Areas' to Gilgistan-Baltistan. Now it is supposed to have an elected legislative assembly which would elect a Chief Minister who would be assisted by six ministers and two advisers. The Governor would be nominated by the President on the advice of the Pakistan Prime Minister. It would have its own public service commission, a chief election commissioner and an auditor-general.

India has since lodged a strong protest with Pakistan over the Empowerment Order. It has pointed out that the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir of which Gilgistan and Baltistan area, now under Pakistan's illegal occupation, is an integral part of India by virtue of its accession in 1947.

The most important implication of the Order is that it has changed the status quo of the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Its not so hidden objective is ultimate merger of Gilgit-Baltistan with Pakistan. Leave aside the protest by India, the Order has pulled the rug out of the Kashmiri separatists' Azadi campaign. They need to unambiguously clarify their policy and future line of action on the issue. If they dither they will further lose their credibility among the Kashmiri people and will be seen as betrayers of their Azadi stand. It would also amount to diluting their stand on a united Jammu and Kashmir state, particularly in the light of stand of the Pakistan-occupied Kashmiri leadership who has always asserted that Gilgit-Baltistan is a legal and constitutional part of Jammu and Kashmir.

The PDP would obviously find in the Gilgit-Baltistan Order an echo of their self-rule stand. But what about their attitude on treating the whole Jammu and Kashmir as one entity which the Order negates? Pursuing a soft separatist line, the PDP will also have to take an unambiguous stand and elucidate their future line of action on the issue.

Pakistan, which has been pressing for a solution of Kashmir problem by also placing it on the composite dialogue agenda, has further complicated the issue through its Gilgit-Baltistan Order, It will further delay the solution of the Kashmir imbroglio. (IPA Service)