The Indo-Pak gridlock

http://bagchiblog.blogspot.com

At the formal launch of her book “Fighting to the End. Pakistan Army’s Way in War” C Christine Fair, a noted American scholar on South Asia, told her Washington audience the Pakistan Army does not want resolution of the Kashmir problem as for them it would mean committing hara-kiri. She went on to say, “They (Pakistan Army) are not going to do a settlement on Kashmir. Why would the Army allow a process to go forward that would obviate its own politics?” She added “I really do not expect much out of it (Modi-Sahrif peace initiative). The Army would undercut him (Sharif). All they have to do is to have a Laskar-e- Toiba attack opportunity for spoilers” She further said, “The attack on the Indian Consulate in Herat, which was very likely done by Lashkar-e-Toiba or the Haqqani network, is really a good testing of these waters”.

Ms. Fair has suggested that the best that India can hope for is some version of status quo. She has reasons for that as she asserts “Nawaz Sharif genuinely wants an opening of economic relationship with India. But does he really want to take on the business of shutting down the jihadi groups, there is no sign thereof so far.” She goes on to say that Pakistan’s problems with India are much more “capacious” than the territorial conflict over Kashmir. “Pakistan’s revisionism persists in regard to its efforts not only to undermine the territorial status quo in Kashmir, but also to undermine India’s position in the region and beyond. Pakistan will suffer any number of military defeats in its efforts to do so.”

One has always felt that even if Kashmir is offered to Pakistan on a platter it would not solve its problems with India. Fair’s is one of the more accurate assessments by an American of Pakistan and its Army’s attitude towards their neighbour. That the Pakistan Army calls the shots in most of the issues, more so in respect of those that relate to Kashmir and India, is an open secret. Kashmir is something which they just cannot give up as it is the very basis of their existence – one might even say, their livelihood. Any peace initiative between the two countries, therefore, makes the Army and its Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) sit up and take steps to shoot it down mostly with the help of their proxies, the assorted jihadists. One can recall at least three major instances from among several others where efforts were made to sabotage the emerging peace initiatives. One, of course, is “Kargil” that happened even as Prime Minister Vajpayee travelled to Lahore in a “Friendship” bus, the second major incident was the burning down of the Tourist Reception Centre of Srinagar on the eve of flagging-off of the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus service by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and now “Herat” as Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif travelled to New Delhi for Narendra Modi’s swearing-in. News has just come in that “Herat” was a Lashkar-e-Toiba event confirming the hunch of Ms. Fair.

While the Pakistani establishment has often termed these acts as the enterprises of “non-State” actors, these, in fact, are orchestrated by well-entrenched state actors in the Army. The Army and its ISI have in the jihadists some valuable expendable assets that can occasionally be let loose to inflict wounds on India. They have the “Mullahs” with them who run an assembly line to produce endless numbers of “fidayeens”, extremist, thoroughly radicalised militants who at short notice can head across the country’s eastern borders on suicide missions against the “kafirs”. It is difficult to believe that the civil authority in Pakistan is not aware of these shenanigans of the Army that is theoretically under its control. Nawaz Sharif unsuccessfully did profess ignorance about Kargil. But, was he unaware of “Herat”? One cannot be very sure.

That the Army would not like any softening of attitude towards India became clear soon after Modi’s swearing-in. While political analysts, the media and a significant segment of people across the borders were appreciative of Modi’s invitation to Nawaz Sharif the army men – even the superannuated ones –were not very happy. Invited by Indian news channels, they entered into acrimonious arguments insisting on continuance of the broken-down composite dialogue forgetting the past and not hinging it on to action on conspirators of 26/11 or even continued terror. On the Indian contention that terror and talks could not go together, they claimed they too were victims of terrorism. When reminded that “terror” was their own brain-child they promptly passed on the blame to “a superpower” – an argument that was “no-brainer”.

While the Army, thoroughly radicalised over generations since Zia-ul Haq’s tenure, would always be inimical to India, the civil society in Pakistan too is not well disposed towards their neighbour. One does not know how Sharat Sabharwal, a former High Commissioner to Pakistan, recently said that there is a “growing segment of opinion in Pakistan ...(that is) conscious of the need to build a stable relationship with India for a better future for themselves”. One, however, feels that it is the trade and industry (Inclusive of businessman Sharif) which is more in favour of a harmonious relationship basically for self-enrichment. The PEW Research reported last year that only 22% people in Pakistan are favourably disposed towards India. Years of relentless hostility, false propaganda, doctored history taught in schools and colleges and religious chauvinism inflicted on generations of Pakistanis had to take their toll. Hostility and hatred for the eastern neighbour are overwhelming, with dispassionate and objective voices being few and far between and, in any case, awfully faint to be drowned in the boom of the guns of ISI’s proxies.

Pakistan’s is a progressively regressing society and the country seems to be travelling back in time to the medieval ages. Life is cheap and easily dispensable and killing comes so naturally to those who are thoroughly indoctrinated. Killings for blasphemy are rising – even of those who have the guts and courage to defend an accused. Similar is the case with honour killings and sectarian violence against shias is mounting up. There are occasional voices from within helplessly screaming that the country is a failed state where life, property and honour are not safe. It is only the guns that rule.

The question would, therefore, be whether Modi would be able to break the gridlock with such a violent and intractable country. Even if he is able to arrive at a settlement it was likely to remain unsustainable. Christine Fair is right; stakes are too high for the Pakistan Army and its proxies. It is they who have the guns and the inclination to use them to make the civil authority fall in line. For India, the best bet would, therefore, seem to be to let the sleeping dogs lie till an opportune moment presents itself to break the deadlock.

_____________

 Photo: From the Internet

Blood on borders makes peace elusive

 http://bagchiblog.blogspot.com

Soldiers on LoC

The latest reports say that the LoC (Line of Control) between Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) and Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK) has cooled down. The cooling has come about after the stern statements made by a mostly mild and a namby pamby Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh. The brutal decapitation of an Indian soldier on the LoC raised the heckles of the people at large, the Opposition and the media – both print and electronic – and there were shrill demands for retaliation. The denial mode adopted by the Pakistani establishment, both military and civil made things worse. On top of that statements given by the Pakistani foreign minister in Washington stoked further anger in India. Her posturing of Pakistan being an innocent victim of Indian hostility and intransigence aggravated matters.  

The government of Dr. Manmohan Singh was left with no alternative but to take serious note of the incident. Demanding that the perpetrator of the brutality should be brought to book, Dr. Singh came out with a statement that roundly said that “after this barbaric act there cannot be business as usual” with Pakistan. This turned out to be one of those rare occasions when the government succumbed to the overwhelming pressure of the people and act according to the prevailing public sentiments. 

The “peace process” was the first casualty. The call for dialogues by the Pakistan Foreign Minister after her rants against India made things more difficult. Dialogues seem to have been pushed indefinitely into the future as far as India is concerned.  The liberalised visa regime, including visa on arrival for senior citizens, agreed to by the Home Minister with his Pakistani counterpart during the latter’s highly controversial visit to Delhi, was stalled. The cross-border buses stopped plying and trade between two parts of Kashmir remains suspended. Cultural and sporting ties took a hit. Plays to be staged by Pakistani theatre group have been cancelled by the host – the National School of Drama. Pakistani hockey players hired by various franchisees for matches in the Hockey India League have been dispatched home. Reports said that even iconic Pakistani cricketers Wasim Akram and Rameez Raja, currently commentating in the India-England cricket series, had been asked to leave. Although they are still around, former India hockey players have demanded their ouster. Clearly, “aman ki asha” (hope for peace), a campaign for peace between the two countries initiated by the Jung Group of Pakistan and Times of India, essentially a Track III sort of connect between common people of the two countries, is under threat. 

It was, however, amazing to see on the TV the number of Pakistani guests staying in India on the invitations of organisations – government and/or private. From singers to artists and actors, to hockey and cricket players and even doctors in large numbers are apparently camping in the country on invitation of some organisation or the other. The “people-to-people” contact apparently has been only a one-way street with hordes of Pakistanis coming to India for programmes of various kinds. Wasim Akrams, Abida Parveens, Ghulam Alis and so on are, more or less, regular fixtures in our sports and cultural spheres. Sur Kshetra, a musical reality show mounted to unearth singing talents in India and Pakistan, was hosted by the Indian Colours channel in which large numbers of Pakistanis participated and an established Pak singer acted as a judge. Indian TV channels routinely get Pakistani commentators on TV shows. No such reciprocity, however, has ever been shown by Pakistan. Even a Pak cricket team was allowed to tour India late last year for the first time after the “26/11” carnage. And, what does the country get in return? A few panches and sarpanches killed in Kashmir and a dead soldier minus his head – followed only by denials despite stark incriminatory evidences?

This is not to suggest that there should be no interaction between the civil societies of the two countries.  Unfortunately, however, efforts to bring about vibrancy between them to promote peace and harmony have yielded precious little. The civil society of Pakistan is powerless; it has hardly any influence over the powers-that-be. A democracy it might be but the Pak army has been calling the shots for a long, long time. Now that it and its Inter Services Intelligence have teamed up with anti-India jihadist and terrorist groups that have congenital hatred for India, hoping for peace between the two countries is futile. Regardless of how much India bends backwards to accommodate Pakistan and regardless of the intensity of the “people-to-people” contacts, it would always remain hostile to India, given the power equations within the country. Besides, there are vested interests in nursing the hostility. The Army-jihadist combine is deadly; even Americans have come to realise its lethality.

And, yet there is what is known as a thriving “peace industry” in this country run by peaceniks comprising politicians, former diplomats, journalists, et al, who insist on continuing talks at any cost. Citing Prime Minister Vajpayee’s dictum that Pakistan was our neighbour and we could not wish it away, they say talk we must and in whatever “track” that yields results. None, however, predicts what good will come out of it. Haven’t we seen that after every confrontation – from Kashmir in late 1940s to the sixties and then in the seventies, efforts were made to normalise relations but hardly to any avail. Every time the mischievous elements in the Army, with active collaboration of terrorist and jihadist outfits, disrupted the process. Whether it was “Kargil” or the hijack of the Indian Airlines flight from Kathmandu or the attack on Parliament or “26/11” attack on Mumbai, Pakistanis always revelled in harming and destabilising our country.  And yet, when confronted with facts Pakistan defends itself with blatant lies, digressions, obfuscations, and indulges in suppressio veri suggestio falsi. Can any civilised country keep talking to such an unscrupulous establishment?

As for talks, in Pakistan whom does one talk to? The civilian government? India could go on talking to it until the cows came home but it would yield no results. At the back of it are the Army and the jihadist-terrorist combine who, together, will never allow any negotiation to fructify and let peace emerge. They can and do scupper everything positive between the two countries.

Having no role in influencing the course of relations between the two countries the civil society is powerless. Hence, where is the point in carrying along with tracks III, IV, and so on and at the same time suffer the beastly acts at the hands of the Pakistani soldiers or jihadists? We have tolerated it earlier – but not anymore. If the government wishes to continue talks let it go ahead with its tortuous diplomatic rigmarole but keep the Pakistanis out of our hair; they are not our well-wishers. It’s now time to treat a spade as a spade and nothing else.

 Photo of LoC from the Internet