Manjrika Sewak Multi-Track Diplomacy between India and Pakistan : A Conceptual Framework for Sustainable Security (Published by the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies 2 Elibank Road, Colombo 5, Sri Lanka, 2005, 136pp.) Manjrika Sewek is Programme Officer of Women in Security, Conflict Management and Peace (WISCOMP), an initiative of the Foundation for Universal Responsibility created by the Dalai Lama. Here, she is concerned with non-official forms of diplomacy – Track Two – with its key concepts of relationship, process, capacity-building, coordination, collaboration, diversity, and transformation. These are concepts which are not always welcomed by governments who often consider such initiatives detrimental to the ‘real work’ of diplomats following Track One. Yet Track Two is becoming increasingly important in world politics. Track Two talks are discussions held by non-officials of conflicting parties in an effort to clarify outstanding disputes and to explore the options for resolving them in setting that are less sensitive and often less structured and with less media attention than those associated with official negotiations. The non-officials involved usually include scholars, senior journalists, former government officials, retired military officers, and businesspeople. Depending on the aims and the styles of these meetings, the profile and expertise of Track Two participants will differ. Manjrika Sewek draws upon the work of what we may call the second generation of Track Two specialists, such John McDonald and Louise Diamond “Multi-Track Diplomacy”, Harold Saunders “A Public Peace Process”, John Paul Lederach “Preparing for Peace” and the numerous writings of Johan Galtung and Adam Curle as well as the psychological efforts of Herbert Kelman. She is particularly interested in the roles which women play or could play in such Track Two efforts as she notes “ A study of the peace process between Pakistan and India points to another significant role that women have played in peacebuilding: They have been able to negotiate and transcend ‘fault-lines’ and sustain cross-border dialogue, at times representing the only group of civil society doing so…Despite these contributions, the voices of women remain absent from the negotiation table, even though their perspectives might help to make a negotiated settlement durable and lasting.” The first generation of Track Two specialists are still largely unknown until the archives of the Comintern are open for scholarly study. The Comintern was the pre-World War II coordinating body of Communist parties world wide and basically an instrument of the Soviet Union’s foreign policy. As of 1935, began a complicated network of Track Two efforts in Europe and to a lesser extent elsewhere. The first effort was to create new nongovernmental organizations which would link communists with non-communists in a ‘common front” or a “popular front” against Nazi and Fascist movements .The noncommunists in these fronts were often people who had been opposed by the Communists a short time before. The common front groups were theoretically not controlled by the communists but were often used by Soviet diplomats to gain information and to try to influence the politics of other countries. At the same time the Soviet Union was using Track Two channels of communication with Nazis in Germany which ultimately led to the Stalin-Hitler Pact of 1939 – much to the

surprise of the people in the ‘common front’ groups. The Comintern was officially dissolved during the Second World War as a gesture of good will toward the Western allies. However the Comintern agents did not forget their experiences. Thus, as the Second World War was coming to an end and the Cold War starting, there was organized a host of international nongovernmental movements: World Federation of Democratic Youth, the International Union of Students, World Federation of Democratic Women, World Federation of Scientific Workers, World Peace Council etc. The working of these organizations, the degree of Soviet control, the extent to which they were used for espionage, and later for serious dialogue and cooperation with Western groups has not been seriously studied nor their archives opened. In response to these Soviet controlled efforts there were developed corresponding Western non-governmental organizations such as the World Assembly of Youth. Although generally these Western groups were not created by the US intelligence services, they quickly were largely financed by the CIA. The master CIA hand behind these operations through their US members was Cord Meyer Jr, a former NGO official who became convinced that the Soviet Union was dangerous and had to be fought using the same techniques. His version of the CIA-NGO efforts are told in his largely autobiographic book, Cord Meyer “Facing Reality: From World Federalism to the CIA” (New York: Harper and Row, 1980). Again, the degree of CIA control has not been seriously studied. However, with organizations in place, Track Two types of discussions started being held. Those involved developed negotiating skills later used in governmental and in other NGO activities. These Cold War experiences would merit more serious study. Manjrika Sewak does draw upon the history of the longestlasting of Soviet-American Track Two efforts — the Dartmouth Conference named after the US college where the first meeting was held. See James Voorhees “Dialogue Sustained: The Multilevel Peace Process and the Dartmouth Conferences” (Washington DC: US Institute of Peace Press and the Charles Kettering Foundation, 2002). Manjrika Sewak sets out clearly the framework of Track Two efforts “Multi-track diplomacy involves efforts that seek to change not only government policy, but also the way people think. This is extremely challenging because it means that the worldviews and basic attitudes of people need to undergo radical shifts for social change. In order to accomplish such a change, multi-track actors need to first, identify their audience; second, communicate with their audience effectively and relentlessly; third, coordinate their efforts with other civil society actors (and engage Track One actors as well); and fourth, frame their ideas and strategies in ways that are well-organised and compellingly argued.” She then turns to recent India-Pakistan experiences, many of which are outlined in Navrita Chadha Behera, Paul Evans and Gowher Rizvi “ Beyond Boundaries: A Report on the State of Non-Official Dialogues on Peace, Security and Co-operation in South Asia” (Ontario: University of Toronto/York University, 1997). What struck me when reading “Beyond Boundaries” was the largely empty space between 1948 and the late 1980s.The first bilateral dialogues listed are in the 1970s with meetings between former students of the preIndependence Royal Indian Military College, more an ‘old boys” network than real Track Two. The Indian-Pakistan Friendship Society dates from 1987. Either researchers have not looked seriously at the 1950s and 1960s or there were no organized Track Two efforts, despite the obvious difficulties of both governments to deal with the consequences of the refugee movements linked to partition, to the recurrent tensions over divided Kashmir, to the war leading to the independence of Bangladesh, and to the development of nuclear weapons by both states.

As Manjrika Sewak notes, the conflict India-Pakistan “can be described as protracted (because it has continued for a long period of time) intractable (because it has been resistant to sustainable positive change for more than fifty years), and deep-rooted (because it has affected the thinking and attitudes of people in different sections of society in the two countries; the hostility has not been limited to governments, but rather has permeated into public discourse.” Enemy images of each other have become part of the socialization process passed on to following generations by the Partition experience of parents and strengthened by the educational systems and the media. Sewak reports that “In many of the interviews conducted with Pakistanis and Indians, the image of the ‘Hindu expansionist state’, which has not accepted the existence of Pakistan and the image of an ‘ Islamic terrorist state’ which threatens the territorial integrity of India, emerged as important components of the socialisation process that citizens in the two countries have undergone.” Therefore, one needs to look at how ‘enemy images’ and perceptions leading to mistrust and hostility are created and then how such psychological and emotional schisms can be overcome. What is not developed by Manjrika Sewak is why it took so long to start Track Two efforts among people who are condemned to live as near neighbors, whose elite speak English, and who share much cultural background, both Asian and English-influenced. Fortunately in more recent times, such efforts as the ‘Neemrana Dialogue’ started in 1991 brings together high level former officials, academics, media, NGOs and specialists in the themes to be discussed such as trade, science and technology. A more broadly based Pakistan-India Peoples’ Forum for Peace and Democracy started in 1994 hopes to break down the walls of silence and distrust. Manjrika Sewak shows that each person can make a difference in building a peace constituency that can support partial agreements and then press for further measures. Faced with complex situations, Track Two efforts must develop a wide range of techniques such as face-to-face dialogues, conflict resolution trainings, coexistence youth camps, and media engagements. Some techniques address immediate issues, others more long-term issue relating to systemic and institutional change and the rebuilding of human relationships. As Manjrika Sewak states “sustainable peace and security can be built only if the energies, perspectives and experiences of all the stakeholders, particularly those at the grassroots who experience conflict at an intimate level – are injected into official peace processes.” This is an important contribution to the analysis of Track Two efforts. Rene Wadlow

Drawing : Cecile Wadlow