When he made the opening remarks, Shaukat Aziz mentioned travel, trade and Kashmir in the same breath. But then he realised that the relaxation of visa facilities, which the two countries had already accepted, would sound hollow if he were to bracket travel with Kashmir. He watered downed his reservations on travel. He was probably confident that whatever visa facilities he had agreed to, Islamabad could always nullify through its mission in India.

In fact, I have found how the two governments have agreed to the liberalisation because of popular pressure on both sides. But it is equally true that they go back on the facilities whenever they feel like, or whenever the intelligence agencies frighten them over the increase in the number of visitors.

After a five-day stay last month in Lahore, Pakistan's political capital, my impression is different: the public and the establishment are at variance. People want to open up with India, a bigger market and a larger economic unit. Yet the government, beleaguered by internal problems, does not want Indians in the midst if it can help it.

Industrialists and businessmen are more eager than others to have free trade with India, because they realise that the solution on Kashmir is like waiting till the cows come home. At a meeting of a commerce chamber, where I was present, an industrialist representing the setup said that he used to believe that Kashmir was the core problem of disputes between India and Pakistan. But he had come to realise that the core problem was free trade, not Kashmir. Nearly 50 leading industrialists present at the meeting applauded him. I did not find any media criticism about his views.

Two things have contributed to the change in outlook. One, the industrialists have generally felt that they are in no way inferior to their counterparts in India. Two, the circuitous route the goods of both countries take through Dubai and Singapore raise the

costs unnecessarily, and even profit a particular clique in the establishment.

However, Shaukat Aziz's observation has once again defeated the Saarc purpose, which looked like emerging from the debris of bad relations between India and Pakistan. The 22-year-old organisation has made no headway because New Delhi and Islamabad have been at daggers drawn. One felt that there was realization, at last, to keep politics and economics apart. But this is not the case when a person like Shaukat Aziz, who once headed a foreign banking organization, plays to the gallery.

This does not mean that the Kashmir question should be put aside. It has to be sorted out, not only for the sake of peace in the region but also for the satisfaction of the people who have died in thousands to change the status quo. Why should Islamabad kick the dust when it is beginning to settle down, probably because of some specific proposals New Delhi has sent to Islamabad? The progress is slow because there is a difference of outlook over the joint control. Still, the fact that India has come up with suggestions to

change the status quo is a step forward. New Delhi has not done so officially so far.

Finalising even a modicum of agreement will take time. This will need to be placed before the public for debate. Then it will be presented to parliament in India and the National Assembly in Pakistan. This process is difficult and time consuming. Should Saarc be held to ransom? Trade cannot wait till then. Members at the summit emphasised this.

When Shaukat Aziz cautioned at dinner at the Pakistan High Commission in Delhi that the coming generations would not forgive them if they continued to remain mired in conflict, I told him that this was precisely what my generation said two decades ago. Words have no meaning if they are not backed up with action. Indeed, this is what ails SAARC. Shaukat Aziz himself said that the time has come for them to implement the declarations they have made. Then why bring in matters like Kashmir, which should be sorted out away from public gaze?

The core problem is how soon will economic prosperity come to the region, so that people can forget religious and other differences and set themselves the task of improving their standard of living. This is not impossible, because all the Saarc countries are now committed to social justice and democracy.

I support Shaukat Aziz's other observation, that there has to be a level-playing field. India is a developed country while, in comparison, Pakistan is developing. If India is justified in seeking concessions from the developed West, Pakistan has every right to expect concessions from India. New Delhi has done well to announce custom-free entry to goods from small neighbouring countries. But it should lower the wall of tariffs for Pakistan.

The SAARC countries have to develop a common market, as Europe has done or the ASEAN countries have nearly done. After the emergence of Bangladesh I asked Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, then heading Pakistan, whether the common market to string together countries in South Asia was feasible. He said: "We will have to see whether we can mutually benefit but, in principle, I think as far as a common market is concerned, we are

not ready for such an arrangement. Europe also was not ready for it. It took time for Europe as a whole to get the advantage of a common market. Today, we are basically producers of primary commodities and your industrial progress has been better than ours. We have also had some industrial progress but we have not reached that standard where there can be a grand collaboration in industry, because these things are very difficult to arrange and even Europe is finding it difficult regarding agriculture commodities."

That was 35 years ago. Pakistan, if not Bangladesh, has come a long way. The development depends on harnessing natural resources, manpower and technical know-how in the region, from Afghanistan to Bangladesh, and using them collectively. There is an unhappy history. With time, we may jettison the baggage of the past. As Qaid e Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah said before partition" "Some nations have killed millions of each others, yet an enemy of today is a friend of tomorrow. That is history."

Kuldip Nayar is an eminent Indian columnist.