Let me state at
the very outset that I am not an anti-Pakistan hate-monger. I have written
about the very
many liberal Muslim intellectuals in Pakistan, how the religious
minorities there, though certainly under perennial threat, are not in as bad a
shape as many of us imagine and I have even written
articles for one of their leading media houses, including one
condemning an attack on innocent Pakistani student Ali Hassan Raza in India.
I have had friendly interactions with Pakistanis in my travels abroad, and both
my parents have visited that country, recounting pleasant experiences.
Pakistanis have also visited my school and college for competitions and exchange programmes, and I have
had nice exchanges with them.
Having said that,
I may point out that there is a left-liberal section of Indians who tend to
equate India and Pakistan in terms of pinning the blame when it comes to
belligerence between the two countries (equating the victim and the
perpetrator, for India can't be blamed for defending its borders, and the dialogue in the movie 'Lakshya' - "SHUT UP... JUST SHUT UP! Tumko aman aur shanti chahiye....humko
bhi aman aur shanti chahiye... to kya karein? Hath par hath rakhkar
khade ho jayen... thali pe paros dein apna mulk? hawale kar de unke",
implying that while peace is indeed desirable, it is necessary to defend
the sovereignty of one’s country if it is attacked, is relevant in this context), as also when it comes to religious majoritarianism in both the
countries. These “peace-mongers” (as distinct from those engaging in meaningful
peace activism), entertaining a superiority complex of being liberal and
looking down upon the supposedly illiberal Indian masses (those supposedly
illiberal folks, by the way, are also full of fans of Ali Zafar, Atif Aslam,
Fahad Khan and Rahat Fateh Ali Khan, to know well enough that all Pakistanis
are not terrorists, and while it goes without saying that these Pakistani artists are appreciated for their artistic talent rather than just being Pakistani, as should be the case, it goes to show how Indians are willing to appreciate Pakistani artists to the extent of adoring them, without their being Pakistani coming in the way), seem to believe that merely chanting slogans of peace from
their rooftops and Indo-Pak cultural programmes can, by themselves, resolve the
Kashmir issue! They, unlike intellectually honest Pakistani liberals (for whom
I have the highest regard), even tend to shy away from frankly discussing the
terror factory in Pakistan,
trying to dodge it by way of whataboutism. The whataboutism takes the
form of speaking of Hindu communalism in India, which, in spite of all its
anti-Pakistan rhetoric, has not translated itself into a factory of
well-trained terrorists crossing the border to kill innocent civilians there
(though it has translated itself into horrendous riots against innocent Muslims
and Christians in India, which must be condemned in the strongest terms, but is
an internal Indian matter, and though India needs to do more to ensure communal
harmony, Pakistan is certainly no better on this front). Alternatively or as a
supplement, the whataboutism of India’s peace-mongers takes the form of
pointing to how Pakistanis are also victims of terrorism, their slogan being
"terrorism has no nationality" as though we need to tell aliens from
outer space to solve the problem, and as though Pakistanis dying in terror
attacks reduces the accountability of the Pakistani state to nip the terror
factory in its bud, though logically, it should only increase that sense of
responsibility in the government of Pakistan, and with all due respect to
humanitarian concern for Pakistani victims of terrorism, it's only normal for
Indians to be more concerned about what directly threatens them, and no, the
Indian government has not orchestrated any Kargil war or Operation Gibraltar,
all the Indo-Pak wars actually having been initiated by Pakistan, and if an
Indian states these facts, as many Pakistani liberals do,
it doesn't mean that he/she is biased (supporting your own side can’t automatically
be presumed to be bias, if one has a rational basis, and this is not to say
that one
should be blinded by nationalist bias to consider the morality of the Indian
state in foreign policy, or even engagement with secessionist forces, to be
axiomatic, but that doesn’t mean writing off genuine contentions where the
Indian state has an upper hand), and no, the Indian media doesn’t invite to its
studios those promoting bizarre, baseless conspiracy theories, the
way some media houses in Pakistan invite Zaid Hamid (who goes to the extent
of taking pride in the killings of Hindus in Afghanistan, and laments that it
has been long since it was repeated by the Pakistani establishment!). The
Pakistani establishment, as Pakistani liberals point out, is responsible for having
created terrorists in the first place, some of whom have turned against their
erstwhile master, and that is, by no means, India’s fault.
Some among the
peace-mongers even try to suggest that so much as raising the issue of
terrorism emanating from Pakistan implies an anti-Muslim sentiment (yes, in a
debate in Jesus and Mary College, Delhi, I once attended, I remember a girl
interjecting someone to the effect whether that person was communal because
that person had talked about terrorism in India emanating from Pakistan), which
is the biggest insult to Muslims, for this misplaced logic unintentionally
equates all Muslims as being somewhat associated with the terror factory!
Islamophobia in India is a real problem (I have written an
e-book, available for free download, trying to logically address and dispel the
same, and I would request all readers with even the mildest sense of
anti-Muslim resentment to peruse that book with an open mind, not skim through
it judging it by preconceived notions, and equally, I would assert that there is much exaggeration of Muslim victimhood in India, which I have discussed at some length in this
article), but it cannot be checked by brushing
the facts about Muslim extremism under the carpet, for facts cannot be hidden
forever and combating extremism under any banner cannot be effective
until we understand how that banner is being invoked to ideologically, or even
strategically, counter the same (if some Muslims are resorting to extremism in
the name of Islam, we need to counter their version of Islam and the prejudices
they hold about whoever they are against, and I have discussed how to do so in this
article; just chanting the mantra of peace, without addressing real or
perceived grievances or countering regressive ideologies in specific cases, is
no solution ever).
And yes, India doesn't have discriminatory laws against its religious minorities like the blasphemy law in Pakistan or the law that restricts the Ahmedias' civil liberties and religious freedoms in Pakistan, nor have the religious minorities here faced any systematic ethnic cleansing that has reduced their percentage in the Indian population (as is the case with the Hindus of Pakistan, and sections of the minority communities of Pakistan have almost never been involved in rioting or terrorism, the scenario in India being different, given the Khalistanis, Indian Mujahidin and some terror groups in India’s northeast invoking Christianity), nor did the saffronized textbooks of the previous NDA government present such blatantly biased and distorted versions of history as we see in Pakistan, and to use the logic of whataboutism employed by the peace-mongers, more Muslims have been dying at the hands of Muslim extremists in Pakistan than Muslims at the hands of Hindu extremists in India over the last few years. Indeed, prejudices about "the other" exist among many people, to varying degrees, on both sides of the border, and need to be dispelled, and people-to-people contact can help in creating a good climate, but till both sides have a frank discussion of political narratives (people-to-people contact has usually just meant exchanging pleasantries, but just mention ‘Kashmir’ and the average Indian and the average Pakistani, if really compelled to discuss the same, will be a hardcore jingoist) and shed their chauvinistic versions of nationalism (but this does not mean, in the Indian context, shying away from acknowledging the dismal scenario in Pakistan for what it is), long-term Indo-Pak peace is not possible, and while there are those with vested interests in perpetuating the conflict in both India and Pakistan, the biggest stumbling block is the Pakistani army, which always actually seeks to derive its political legitimacy and huge budgetary share from the anti-India bogey!
In fact, I would
even go to the extent of asserting that till such time as Pakistan doesn’t
liberate its democracy from the mullah-military nexus (here’s a
piece on that nexus by a Pakistani liberal), peace with India is
impossible, and hence, we should always have the best degree of preparedness
when it comes to war and terrorism. As eminent Indian police officer KPS Gill has aptly stated-
"There is... one general principle that must guide our explorations, perspectives, plans and projections: The primary and most effective strategy to avoid war is to prepare for it. It is one of the ironies of the human condition that, if you love peace, you must be ready and willing to fight for it. The weak, the vulnerable, the unprepared and the irresolute will always tempt the world and call misfortune and ruin upon themselves. This is tragic, but it is the inexorable lesson of history. It is strength that secures respect and dignity; conciliation, appeasement, and a desperation to avoid confrontation at all costs - these will only bring contempt and aggression in their dower."
Stern measures like suspending trade with Pakistan, which strengthens their economy much more than ours, may not be a bad idea, and trying to have talks is impossible if there are repeated terrorist attacks from their end.
Our left-liberal chorus that wants India to severe trade ties with Israel (an idea I do not support) should not logically have any objections to this proposal, given the sponsorship of terrorism by the Pakistani establishment not only in India* but even in Iran and Afghanistan, as also Pakistan’s poor human rights record with the Baloch people who have been deprived of self-determination (theirs was an independent country like Nepal or Bhutan, invaded by Pakistan, and those who suggest that it is the same vis-à-vis India and Kashmir should read
"There is... one general principle that must guide our explorations, perspectives, plans and projections: The primary and most effective strategy to avoid war is to prepare for it. It is one of the ironies of the human condition that, if you love peace, you must be ready and willing to fight for it. The weak, the vulnerable, the unprepared and the irresolute will always tempt the world and call misfortune and ruin upon themselves. This is tragic, but it is the inexorable lesson of history. It is strength that secures respect and dignity; conciliation, appeasement, and a desperation to avoid confrontation at all costs - these will only bring contempt and aggression in their dower."
Stern measures like suspending trade with Pakistan, which strengthens their economy much more than ours, may not be a bad idea, and trying to have talks is impossible if there are repeated terrorist attacks from their end.
Our left-liberal chorus that wants India to severe trade ties with Israel (an idea I do not support) should not logically have any objections to this proposal, given the sponsorship of terrorism by the Pakistani establishment not only in India* but even in Iran and Afghanistan, as also Pakistan’s poor human rights record with the Baloch people who have been deprived of self-determination (theirs was an independent country like Nepal or Bhutan, invaded by Pakistan, and those who suggest that it is the same vis-à-vis India and Kashmir should read
this article) and subjected to aerial
bombings. On the other hand, however, we must equally not stereotype the
Pakistani populace in a negative fashion, not only because it’s fundamentally
wrong and may incite more violence from their end, but because keeping an open
mind is necessary for us to resolve issues with Pakistan if it ever gets out of
the mess it is in, for long-term peace and stability, which will only be in our
interest, and jingoism perpetuating conflict is not. We must indeed, with an
open mind, understand
the multiple narratives of the Kashmir issue (no, it
is really not as oversimplified as many of us imagine) and work
towards a compromise that ensures an end to conflict, for no other avenue
is possible with a fellow nuclear power. Indeed, to explain this with an
analogy, Nehru was not overly trusting of or generous to the Chinese as many
imagine, but in fact, a little too aggressive and tried to unilaterally impose
the Indian position on the Sino-Indian borders, on the Chinese (his infamous
“Forward Policy” among those who know of it), ignoring the advice of military
officers like Thimayya asking him to not provoke the Chinese, and rejecting the
very fair and pragmatic Chinese offer of a swap of Indian and Chinese claims over Aksai
Chin and Arunachal Pradesh respectively (kindly study the history of the
Sino-Indian border dispute carefully and with an open mind before calling me
anti-national), and even resorting to the threat of force, leading to the war
of 1962 disastrous for India, and the conflict has only perpetuated, and so, if
and when Pakistan liberates itself from the mullah-military nexus (the
likelihood of which seems very low), we should be in a position to arrive at a
lasting solution. There are some people circulating saffron maps (possibly
inspired by green maps of a proposed Islamic caliphate, even including parts of
India, a very ridiculous idea) online, showing Myanmar (not a part of India in
Mauryan or Mughal times) and several other neighbouring countries (including
obviously Pakistan) as a part of the proposed to-be larger India. While many
would dismiss this as childish, it only worsens the image of India among neighbouring countries, where,
barring Afghanistan and Bhutan, India
is seen as a hegemonic power (and this negative image only works to the
strategic advantage of India’s
adversaries). Some international observers have even unfortunately and
erroneously taken this seriously as translating into the BJP having a territorial expansionist ideology, as you can see here.
Also, gone are the days when the size of a country solely determined its status
(that way, India is larger
than England and way larger
than Singapore!),
and trying to accommodate unwilling citizens (like Pakistanis), who are bound
to raise the banner of revolt, is not a good idea! Also, being a developing
nation wherein very many Indians suffer from poverty and illiteracy, solving
these problems within our borders should be our primary focus.
Not being a hawk
doesn’t mean acting like a perennial dove, and your having met some very nice and friendly Pakistani individuals, in no way, changes the security threat India faces. We must commemorate all those innocent civilians, irrespective
of religion or nationality, who died in all the terrible terrorist attacks on
our soil, the sacrifices of all those Indian security personnel, irrespective
of religion, who fought Pakistani soldiers and terrorists risking their lives,
some dying martyrs (and among many others, the names of Brigadier Mohammad
Usman and Hawaldar Abdul Hamid of the Indian Army will remain enshrined in
golden letters) and the Muslims of
Mumbai refusing to bury the bodies of the nine terrorists who were killed in
the wake of 26/11, calling their activities un-Islamic (indeed, there is no
dearth of Indian Muslims who very well understand that Islamic
theology is not at loggerheads with Indian nationalism). Let our
humanitarian concern for the victims of terrorism in Pakistan not come in the
way of devising a strong policy against those across the border who sponsor
terror against our people, and such a policy can include, if the need be,
covert intelligence operations against terrorists who threaten or have
threatened us, and even creating a ruckus in the United Nations about the biased
and distorted history taught in Pakistan, and that too ensuring that such a
curriculum is not taught at any grade (it is noteworthy that there were huge
demonstrations in China against Japanese textbooks they believed were biased
against the Chinese). Expecting the Pakistani judiciary to take action
against terrorists threatening us is totally futile, given that the judge who
issued a death sentence for the killer of provincial governor Salman Taseer
(Taseer was killed for raising his voice against the misuse of Pakistan’s
blasphemy law against Pakistani Christians) has had to leave Pakistan, and the
sentence has not been carried out in several years now. In contrast, Nathuram
Godse who killed Mahatma Gandhi (for the mahatma had raised his voice for
riot-affected Muslims) was hanged, and hundreds
have been convicted in connection with the anti-Muslim riots in Gujarat in
2002 (some of the infamous massacres for which convictions have taken place were at the Best Bakery, Naroda Patiya, Ode and Sardarpura), and many convictions have taken place
even for the anti-Christian riots in the Kandhamal district of Odisha in 2008
(including of politicians
like Manoj Pradhan) and the
anti-Sikh riots in 1984 (though some prominent politicians in connection with the anti-Sikh riots in 1984 are yet to be
convicted).
We rightly mourned
the killings of innocent children of military personnel in Peshawar,
but do we remember the massacre in Kaluchak in 2002 in which children of our
soldiers perished at the hands of Pakistani terrorists, after which Omar
Abdullah said that India
should retaliate strongly in the face of such an inhuman event? And it’s not
about bearing endless grudges, but about the fact that we, Indians,
irrespective of religion, are all still potential victims of terrorism from or
sponsored from across the border, as the terrorist attacks in Kathua and Samba in
J&K in March 2015 have demonstrated, as also the
terrorist attacks in Kashmir during the elections, in which Kashmiri Muslim
policemen and civilians died (no, there was no attempt by militants to
create any good atmosphere in the valley) and even the blasts in Burdhwan, West Bengal, in October 2014 (the Bangladeshi
Muslims resorting to terrorism, all have their affinity to Pakistan, unlike the
Bangladeshi Muslims rejecting theocracy who were responsible for the Shahbag
protests), in Bangalore in December 2014 and the attack on the police station in Gurdaspur, Punjab, in July 2015. We don’t have to and shouldn’t turn ourselves into irrational
hate-mongers or jingoistic nationalists with bloodlust or irredentist
tendencies, and that would eventually harm us too, especially while dealing
with a nuclear-armed neighbouring country, but we can’t take the very real
threat of terrorism lying down either.
In fact, a large
section of our secularists, by choosing to act as peace-mongering jokers, have
ceded the legitimate space for the demand for a tough stand against the
Pakistani establishment to the Hindu rightists, thus strengthening the latter,
though the extreme Hindu rightists actually have nothing meaningful to offer in
this respect but for empty, crass and even counterproductive sloganeering. Lal
Bahadur Shastri and Indira Gandhi, who can’t in the least be accused of
anti-Muslim bias in their governance within India (leave aside what Pakistani
conspiracy theorist loonies have to say!) have been the toughest on Pakistan
among our prime ministers, even more than Vajpayee, who neglected
more than 40 intelligence reports suggesting cross-LoC infiltration and
still went ahead with the Delhi-Lahore bus service (I made this point in a televised debate on Times
Now sitting right next to a BJP spokesman, whom I personally respect), or
so far, even Modi, as the eminent strategic analyst Sushant Sareen points
out in this
article, and the recent incident of VK Singh, a minister, attending a Pakistani
High Commission event on Pakistan Day (23rd March, also the anniversary of
the martyrdom of Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev in 1931, as also the
assassination of 24 Kashmiri Hindus in the village of Nandimarg in 2003) in the
wake of the then very recent terrorist attacks in Kathua and Samba in J&K (and no minister having visited the kin of the
victims of terrorism) only reinforces that stand, though on a different note,
Modi has not in the least been found wanting when it comes to goodwill gestures
with Pakistan, be it offering assistance for flood relief in POK, releasing Pakistani fishermen during Ramzan, having Indian
schools observe silence for the terrorist attack in Peshawar, wishing Pakistan luck for the cricket world cup or offering financial assistance to the Pakistani hockey federation. An effective foreign policy is actually
about incisive planning, not an image of being a religious hardliner or just
offering powerful
oratory in election rallies or strong tweets before elections! This is not
to say that I am advocating support for the Congress, which I am also very
disappointed with on many fronts, including its Pakistan policy, such as
resuming talks with Pakistan after having suspended them in the wake of 26/11,
but the blind belief of many people to the effect that the BJP, given its Hindu rightist image, is the best
bet for national security, is highly misplaced. Other than the facts I have
mentioned earlier in this paragraph, it may also be added that it was during
the tenure of the previous Vajpayee-led NDA regime that a senior political
leader, Bangaru Lakshman, was caught on camera taking a bribe compromising
national security, and during that very tenure did the Kargil coffin scam take
place and following the attack on parliament (by the way, the BJP being in
power in the centre or the states has never been a guarantee against terrorist
attacks), in the Indo-Pak border skirmishes, more
of our soldiers lost their lives on account of not being supplied bulletproof
vests and other protective gear!
And indeed, at any
rate, we cannot allow India
to become another Pakistan
in terms of civil liberties (religious freedom being one of them). Dehumanizing
a minority (I would again refer the readers to my
e-book aimed at addressing and dispelling anti-Muslim prejudices in the Indian
context) and accepting an exclusionary brand of nationalism, especially
with blind hero-worship of a political leader, can, in the long run, pave the
way for a breakdown of democracy, eventually proving to be violative of
everyone’s human rights, for one goes down a slippery slope. We saw that in Germany, for
example, and Pastor Martin’s following quote about the Nazis is famous in that
regard-
“First they came
for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came
for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist. Then
they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a
trade unionist. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out
for me.”
Likewise, in Pakistan,
Muslim extremists initially only targeted Pakistani Hindus, Christians, Jews
and those they regarded as following deviant sects of Islam, but now, the
average Pakistani Sunni going to a mosque or market too faces the threat of
being bombed! Similarly, the elements in India that wish to promote
undemocratic ideas like the prohibition of apostasy from Hinduism, prohibition
of inter-religious marriages (for them, every instance of a
marriage between a Muslim man and a Hindu woman amounts to “love jihad”,
overlooking how very many Muslim women have married Hindu men and changed their
religion and name, prominent examples being sitarist Roshanara Khan, model
Nayyara Mirza and actress Nakhat Khan, who on getting married, changed their
names to Annapurna Devi, Nalini Patel and Khushboo Sundar respectively), seek
to impose their version of history on us, and often have an aversion to the
English language and other cultures, should be kept in check. But the
secularists who want to keep them in check cannot do so if they act as
peace-mongering clowns when it comes to our hostile western neighbour, thus
strengthening the Hindu right that is then seen as tough.
*Pakistan-sponsored
terrorism also led to the exodus of most of the Kashmiri Hindus from their
homeland in 1989-1990, and those resorting to conspiracy theories to deny the
same or to give left-liberal class struggle rationalizations for the same
should read this
article; also, that the pain of the Kashmiri Hindus is misused by some to
dehumanize Muslims is no valid reason to overlook their pain, and for those Hindus who believe that Hindus must shy away from talking
about Muslim communalism to not strengthen Hindu communalism, I ask – according
to them, should Muslims, by the same logic, also shy away from talking about
Hindu communalism to not strenghten Muslim communalism, that has manifested itself in vterror attacks by the Indian Mujahidin?
Karmanye Thadani
Karmanye Thadani