Author: Wilson John
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: April 30, 2003
Suddenly everybody is talking about
Kashmir. I know it happens every Indian summer. The other day, Prime Minister
Atal Bihari Vajpayee let off a weather balloon in Srinagar. He said he
was willing to talk to the General next door. Forgive me if I am nitpicking.
Didn't his Foreign Minister, just a few days before, spew fire and venom
on the same General, almost threatening to nuke the neighbourhood? And
did not the General and his cronies rise up in one voice, amidst all that
heat and dust of the Iraq war, to assure a befitting response if anyone
dared attack their country? In the past five decades, even our rhetoric
has not changed.
What, then, has really changed in
the past fortnight for the Prime Minister to have made that statement?
Has cross-border terrorism stopped? Has the General dismantled terrorist
training camps and locked up terrorist heads? Have the terrorists turned
over a new leaf? Or are they all dead? I can't figure out how anyone can
answer any of these questions in the affirmative. Terrorists are still
trickling in. There is a renewed spurt in terrorist activity. Terrorist
training camps are flourishing, not only in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir and
Baluchistan, but also in the Punjab and Sindh provinces of Pakistan.
Lashkar-e-Toiba chief Hafiz Saeed
is roaming free, whipping up passions across the countryside, and spreading
hatred against India. Jaish-e-Mohammed leader Azhar Masood is lying low
but free to reorganise terror activities. I suspect he has been coopted
by Osama bin Laden to regroup the broken Al Qaeda.
The United Jehad Council's Syed
Salahuddin is free. So is Al Mujahideen leader Mushtaq Ahmed Zargar (the
Pandit Killer). He was last seen in Islamabad, before the ISI whisked him
off to safety. Maulana Azam Tariq is also a loose cannon. As is Maulana
Samiul. Maulana Fazlur Rehman is free. And some of these Maulanas, founding
fathers of jihad and the Taliban, are honourable members of the National
Assembly or the Senate. The General has even allowed them to work under
a political entity called the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal. Jihad is today part
of Pakistan's politics.
So what has changed in Pakistan
that we should reinitiate the process of dialogue with the adversary? Nothing?
You need to scratch the surface a bit to see that today's Pakistan is nothing
but a malevolent baby being fed and propped up by the Bush Administration.
Am I being paranoid here? In the past two years, Mr George W Bush has doled
out several hundred million dollars, waived off a billion or two more to
help the General keep his economy intact and kept the latter firmly in
place. Barring an occasional reprimand, Washington has been indulgent with
the General, even though his army of terrorists has been mercilessly killing
innocents in Kashmir.
The reality is: After ransacking
Iraq and turning it into another Afghanistan, Washington has turned its
attention to Kashmir. For those who plan policies for South Asia (an inane
generic term), Pakistan and Kashmir are not very different. Pakistan has
survived as a nation using Kashmir as a bogey. Washington is merely perpetuating
its policy of keeping Pakistan alive by using Kashmir.
This is where we must differ with
the US. We must make it clear that Kashmir is not on the agenda. I am not,
on principle, against talking to Islamabad. We have to talk. There is no
point in keeping the army standing and waiting for months on the border.
It drains both the exchequer and morale. And that is highly unavoidable.
The single most important lesson we can learn from Operation Parakram is
not to repeat it. The next time we plan such a mission, let us be clear
about its objective. Let us not indulge in mock exercises any more. That
has only emboldened the adversary and demoralised our brave soldiers. Since
we have not yet made up our mind on how to deal with Pakistan, the only
alternative is to find a honourable way to engage in meaningful dialogue.
I know I am indulging in diplomatic jargon, which most of the time has
no meaning. Jargon is not meant to have meaning, in any case.
Now that Pakistani Prime Minister
Mir Zafarullah Khan Jamali has found time to call up his Indian counterpart,
Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee, without doubt this exceptional call will be followed
by one from the General in the next few days. That will be followed by
one from US Secretary of State Colin Powell and maybe even by President
Bush. In the weeks that follow, we cannot remain tongue-tied. Before setting
the agenda for talks, let us get two things clear: No one gives a damn
about cross-border terrorism, except us. And we don't matter. Second, Mr
Bush wants us to talk. And we cannot do a damn thing about it.
The agenda will be Kashmir-Islamabad
will insist on it. Washington will nudge us to accept it. The UN might
get its voice back and display a rare spasm of courage and insist on intervening
in the issue. By default, we will have to talk to Islamabad with at least
Kashmir figuring on the list of talking points. We cannot avoid it. There
is no point in feeling bad. There is no point in blaming Mr Bush or his
cronies in the White House. It is the burden of history we have to carry.
So instead of carping and crying
about it, let us play the game as they (US and Pakistan) want it. Need
I say more? Whatever we say, it will resemble the game which schoolchildren
play with such abandon: Dumb charades. Handshakes, poetic words, talks
of opening the air space, running bus services and playing cricket can
be dutifully acted out for the world. Do we have any other alternative?
Flush with the victory over Iraq, Mr Bush and men will not take much time
to smell out a WMD in Bareilly or Barauni. It is another matter that their
troops, numbering a few lakh, armed with GPS and all the technical gizmos
they can conjure up, have yet to come up with even the fig leaf of a WMD
in Saddam Hussein's backyard.
As for us, let us stop whining and
cringing every time Washington plays some diplomatic trick or mollycoddles
the neighbourhood General, ignoring his terrorist agenda. We must grow
up. The Americans will always have a soft corner for Islamabad. It is the
most pliable, if not reliable, ally. Besides, there will always be unstable
military dictators like Zia and Musharraf for Washington to play around
with. The Americans cannot expect similar opportunities in India. Even
the worst of coalitions will find it difficult to sell this country's interests
to Washington. The memories of centuries of slavery are still too fresh
in India. Not so in Pakistan where Independence happened by deceit and
default. The bottom line is that the Americans will always a soft corner
for Pakistan, and we must learn to live with it. We have to deal with the
Americans by ignoring the Pakistan factor. There is no point in wishing
otherwise.
Being pragmatic about the changed
geo-strategic environment in the world is the first mature step towards
finding an honourable place in it. The second is to look within and to
realise the stupid games we play in the name of diplomacy. After playing
such games for more than five decades, aren't we tired, if not ashamed,
of the futility of it all? If our entire strategic thinking is focused
on Pakistan, then let us not pretend to be otherwise. Let us have a mission
objective before we even plan another mission.
Till then, please stop talking about
pre-emptive or surgical strikes. If aggression is our mission, then we
need to look beyond an armed assault. We neither have the gumption nor
the troops strength to undertake an invasion the way the US did in Iraq.
It is equally futile to plan an attack across the border (apart from its
being too expensive), since we cannot-even if we defeated the adversary's
troops-hold Lahore or Islamabad for more than a few hours. There is, therefore,
no point in such an exercise. What we need is a five to 10-year plan to
cripple the General's Pakistan in such a manner that the only agenda of
talks between India and Pakistan would be peace. And nothing else.
