I wish I had an answer to the question which I term the Sarabjit Singh problem. He is awaiting execution in Pakistan. The media has once again taken the matter to such a pitch that it has got linked with the country's izzat (pride).
Instead of talking to each other, India and Pakistan are talking at each other. Even after 60 years of estrangement - enmity may be a better word - the two are as inconsiderate, as irresponsible and as distant as they were when they became independent in August 1947.
The Sarabjit Singh problem is a symptom, not the disease. The disease is distrust, bias and something verging on hatred. You solve the Sarabjit Singh problem today and you will have another one like that tomorrow.
Both countries are neighbours and both cannot help the geography and history they share. But they seem to have developed a vested interest in spiting each other.
Even after three wars, besides hostilities like the one at Kargil, they have not learnt how to solve their problems between themselves and how to live in peace.
It is good that Islamabad took a larger view on the release of Kashmir Singh (who returned to India recently, after spending more than 30 years in a Pakistani jail on charges of spying).
Difficult
However, I do not understand why he had to serialise his "achievements" in the press. It is difficult to separate the chaff from the grain but I have taken his account with a spoonful of salt. He has created ill will among the Pakistanis who have come to link him with Sarabjit.
Kashmir Singh has let down many people who worked hard for his release. To gloat over his deeds is demeaning. To be a spy is not a matter of pride. Spies do not add to the knowledge of governments.
They may, at best, confirm certain reports. When the chanceries of both countries, like the rest of the world, have men from the intelligence agencies in the garb of counsellors or attachés, why should spies be considered important?
They, in fact, are irrelevant in an age where satellites and other sophisticated contraptions collect even the regimental badge on a soldier's uniform.
I think where India can be faltered is in the death of Khalid Mahmoud, a visitor to a cricket match at Mohali, Punjab. His dead body was sent to the Pakistani side in a sack. One, it is a hell of indignity to a human being.
The body of the dead demands respect and it should be handed over with respect. Two, there was no explanation from the Indians about how Mahmoud died. He is reported to have "loitered" in Punjab and elsewhere and overstayed.
Apparently, the police picked him up and he died in their custody. It is surmised that his death was due to torture by the police. If this is so, why has no human rights organisation in India made noise about it?
The National Human Rights Commission could have taken a suo moto notice of death - it can still do that - when the death aroused a furore in Pakistan and it happened under suspicious circumstances.
There has to be an inquiry by the government to go into the case of Mahmoud. Any unnatural death has to be probed under the law. Yet to link Mahmoud's death with Sarabjit is not fair.
I can understand the feeling of outrage in Pakistan. I can also understand the prevailing opinion that Sarabjit's execution will be the rightful reply to the treatment meted out to Mahmoud. But it seems to be a tit-for-tat case.
I do no know the Sarabjit case in detail. But should he be hanged? I am in principle against the death sentence. As many as 130 countries in the world have abolished the death sentence. Unfortunately, both India and Pakistan retain the draconian death penalty in their statute books.
They should have fallen in line with the civilised countries long ago. I hope they will do so before long. I was not surprised to find the element of hypocrisy in the speech given by BJP chief Rajnath Singh.
He gave a lengthy argument why Sarabjit Singh should not be hanged. But at the same time he said that Afzal Guru, sentenced to death for an attack on the Indian parliament, should be hanged immediately.
In fact, he took the Manmohan Singh government to task for the delay. Must the BJP politicise as serious a matter as that of Sarabjit? To take his case out of the arena of politics, more so from the arena of sour India-Pakistan relations, is important and Sarabjit's case should be viewed from the humanitarian angle.
Punished
Legally what Pakistan says is correct. He has been punished by the highest court and the matter ends there. Does it really end if the mercy angle is brought in?
In Sarabjit's case, the government of India has sought clemency from the government of Pakistan. It has not happened since the creation of the two countries. That the Indian parliament has given unanimous support to his case should carry more weight than otherwise.
I am glad that Sharma has said that those prisoners who have completed their sentences in both countries should be released without delay. This is something overdue.
The list of people killed by both sides, knowingly or purposely, is a long one. Somewhere, some time it must stop. Let it be with the commutation of Sarabjit Singh's death sentence.
Kuldip Nayar is a former Indian High Commissioner to the UK and a former Rajya Sabha MP.
