Author: Rajeev Srinivasan
Publication: Rediff
on Net
Date: August 2, 2000
Cassandra, in Greek mythology,
was the seer who foresaw the fall of Troy to the invading Greeks; unfortunately
she was cursed by Apollo so that nobody believed her. We know what happened
thereafter: the oh-so-innocent Trojan horse, the sacking of Troy. I feel
quite like Cassandra when I suggest that the recent hyperactivity regarding
Jammu and Kashmir amounts to nothing more than a Trojan horse. It is not
in India's best interest.
I was quite uneasy about
the Lahore process, and I said so -- one of the few columnists in the Indian
media who was not beside himself with joy at how we were going to be One
Big Happy Subcontinental Family any minute now. I feel a sense of déjà
vu now -- once again India's ever-gullible 'leaders' are being manipulated
by the marketing-savvy Pakistanis, as well as the ever-vigilant-for-their-own-interests
Americans and other such luminaries.
The main reason for my
concern is the following -- the alacrity with which various and sundry
people have jumped on the bandwagon. As soon as the separatist group Hizbul
Mujahideen announced a 'ceasefire' and willingness to talk about the 'aspirations
of the Kashmiri people', here is the list of those who endorsed it with
great enthusiasm:
· The Pakistani
government
· The All-Party
Hurriyat Conference
· The Americans
· The Nehruvian
Stalinists in the English language media
· The Chinese
(well, to be precise, they haven't yet, but you can expect it soon)
An exercise for the reader
-- what do these people have in common? The answer -- none has India's
interests at heart. The Pakistanis wish to harm India at all costs, as
demonstrated most recently by their remote-controlled Deendar Anjuman group
fomenting communal trouble. The Hurriyat is an American creation with no
grass-roots support. The Americans are playing their version of the Great
Game, looking for a toe-hold in the Himalayas.
The Nehruvian Stalinists
in the media have been editorialising vigorously in favor of these talks.
This is perhaps the surest sign of danger and idiocy; for as Swapan Dasgupta
commented recently in India Today, these are the same worthies who have
just been bowled over by General Pervez Musharraf's charm offensive. Their
fulsome praise for the dictator - just because he invited them to Pakistan
and wined and dined them -- has been particularly offensive.
Furthermore, certain
Indian newspapers -- you know which they are -- are practically mouthpieces
for the Chinese government. The Chinese, of course, are continuing their
'contain-India' campaign on all fronts. I am convinced for instance that
the recent attacks on Christians in India, which got the nation such negative
publicity, were thought up by the clever Chinese as a counterweight to
the positive publicity India gained during the successful Clinton visit.
It is simple logic that
if all these groups, not exactly India's best friends, are happy about
this activity, then it must be the case that it is not a particularly good
thing for India.
I also happened to read
a piece by Ayaz Amir in the Pakistani newspaper, Dawn. This gentleman,
an unusually thoughtful Pakistani commentator, said quite cogently why
these talks were a brilliant diversionary maneuver for them. Conceding
that the entire Kargil offensive had given Pakistan a bad name, he suggested
that ongoing terrorism in J&K, masked by the charade of tasks, are
their most effective weapon.
Amir is right. American
fears about Pakistan being a breeding ground for terrorism have generally
replaced the 'the-Indian-subcontinent-is-the-most-dangerous-nuclear-flashpoint-in-the-world'
mantra popularised by the odious Madeleine Albright. However the 'flashpoint'
view is attempting a comeback, most recently in the form of an essay by
Congressman David Bonior mouthing Pakistan-friendly sentiments in the Washington
Post
It is indeed most effective
for Pakistan to continue to send its terrorists into India and keep J&K
on the boil, while appearing to be sincere about talks. Killing two birds
with one stone for it makes them look reasonable, and also takes the spotlight
away from their cross-border terrorism. Musharraf must have hated the recent
long article on 'Terrorism Universities' (as the author called Muslim fundamentalist
madrasas) in the Sunday New York Times.
Pakistan needs some image-building
in the wake of its saber-rattling; the fact that it is, yet again, a military
dictatorship; and the Clintonian tongue-lashing it received to its chagrin
earlier this year.
India's counter-tactic
should be to make soothing noises about talking to the separatists and
then to make a charade of such talks, including:
· Being completely
clear internally about making no concessions whatsoever
· Not relaxing
its security activities one iota
· Following a
divide-and-conquer tactic -- speak only to the Hizbul Mujahideen, however
much noise the All-Party Hurriyat makes, for instance, about joining in
the talks
· Avoiding including
Pakistan in the talks
· Insisting on
the talks being in the framework of the Indian Constitution
Let us not forget, after
all, that the rights of the terrorist and the insurgent are no greater
than the rights of the average citizen. These separatists have been party
to the savage ethnic cleansing of Kashmir Pandits from the valley; they
have allowed the massacre of quite a few people, including Sikhs and Shia
Muslims; they are morally responsible for the recent killing of Buddhist
lamas in Ladakh.
None of the separatists
in J&K are particularly cuddly. Giving in to their demands is the moral
equivalent of giving into the demands of George Speight in Fiji -- a demonstration
that a group of armed thugs can dictate terms based strictly on their ability
to kill. The Indian government should be firm and resolute, and clear about
the limits of the talks. For instance, the framework of the Constitution,
I suggest, must be a non-negotiable condition.
In the final analysis,
Pakistanis and their terrorists really don't care about the people of Jammu
and Kashmir. They are merely pawns in this chess game. The Pakistanis want
to make the Two Nation Theory true. And they want the land in J&K because
they are worried about the Indus being in Indian hands and their being
downstream. This is a reasonable worry. India should similarly be worried
about the source of the Brahmaputra and the Ganges being in Chinese hands
-- yet another reason to push for Tibetan independence.
All of the Indian negotiators
have to keep in mind the fact that conceding J&K to the Pakistanis
or their proxies is a no-win situation for India. If Pakistan gains control
over J&K, they will simply turn their attention to other parts of India,
for instance Hyderabad, the northeast, etc. It is best to keep them also
focused on J&K, their resources also tied down there.
One of the factors to
be considered is that, all said and done, the Hijbul Mujahideen and other
indigenous groups of people originally from J&K are only marginally
involved in terrorism there. Most of it is perpetrated by Pakistanis and
their mercenary Afghan, Arab and other Islamic terrorists, possibly funded
by the Saudis and China -- for example the Lashkar-e-Toiba, the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen
(nee Harkat-ul-Ansar). The Hijbul Mujahideen don't really count.
Now, it will be most
interesting to see how the Lashkar-e-Toiba, the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, etc.
react to these palavers. My suspicion is that they will cut down on terrorism
in J&K for the moment, as their masters the Pakistanis would like to
get this grand talks-shindig off the ground, as mentioned above, to remove
the spotlight from their terrorist activities.
I must admit, though,
that in the interest of the Indian government to act statesman-like and
indulge in some harmless jaw-boning and theatrics before Prime Minister
Vajpayee goes to the US and addresses the US legislature. No doubt this
has entered into the calculations of the Indian side. The thing to worry
about is to be clear about what is for strictly cosmetic, propaganda purposes,
and what is in fact on the negotiating table. Alas, our guys are no champions
at negotiations. As I keep suggesting, these foreign office folks need
to be trained in game theory.
Postscript
There is considerable
evidence now that the attacks on Christians in India, which got huge international
headlines and created such debate in the 'secular' 'progressive' media,
were perpetrated by Pakistan. Why, then, aren't Dan Burton and Dana Rohrabacher
in the US Congress now calling for Pakistan to be named a rogue state for
attacking Christians? Why is the Pope so silent? Why isn't he summoning
Musharraf to Rome to apologise to him?
Why is the Indian media
so quiet? Those who had decided, with no evidence, that 'Hindu fundamentalists'
(despite the fact that the term itself is an oxymoron) were doing the damage,
are now thunderously silent about the apparent fact that a Pakistani Muslim
outfit seems to have been doing all this. Why? I'll tell you -- the 'secular'
'progressives' are unabashed hypocrites, that's why. I admire their chutzpah
and thick skin.
Post-post script
In yet another example
of craven kowtowing, the UN has snubbed His Holiness the Dalai Lama by
not inviting him to the UN Millennium World Peace Summit, August 28 to
31 in New York. According to UN spokesman Fred Eckhard, His Holiness was
left off the list 'for fear that his presence would draw a strong protest
from China.' That is, the Chinese didn't even protest, it was self-flagellation
by the UN! Shame on you, UN!
Over 1,000 religious
people were invited, but not the Dalai Lama, possibly the most spiritual
human being on earth. If you believe this was wrong, please feel free to
write to His Excellency Mr. Kofi Annan, Secretary General, UN, at kannan@unitednations.org
and ecu@un.org