Author: Arvind Lavakare
Publication: Rediff on Net
Date: June 24, 2003
URL: http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/jun/24arvind.htm
It may seem absurd and outlandish,
but it's a fundamental question nonetheless: 'Why should
India at all extend a hand of friendship
to Pakistan?'
One argument has been that we can
change our friends but not our neighbours. But why must we necessarily
be pally with that neighbour? If your next-door neighbour is quarrelsome,
has an evil eye on you and your property, and has a pathological allergy
for you, you can certainly choose to keep him at an arm's length, can't
you?
Indeed, being aloof from their immediate
neighbours is the choice of millions in our towns and cities. In no way
does that attitude prevent the welfare and happiness of the practitioners
of that choice. So why must India believe that peace and friendship with
Pakistan is essential for retaining and enhancing India's high international
status?
Is the fear of an attack by your
neighbour a cause for wanting to be friendly with him? Yes, but that's
for cowards and/or for those with a guilt complex of some sort. Now India
isn't a coward, is she? Nor does India harbour guilt of any kind -- not
vis-à-vis Pakistan nor with the rest of the world. So why must we
offer peace and a hand of friendship to a neighbour who, even after we
offer him friendship, thinks nothing of insulting us publicly and casting
aspersions on our trustworthiness?
Why offer friendship to someone
who grabbed part of our property 56 years ago, who not only refuses to
part with it but also wants some more of it by threatening us? Either we
live with that theft -- as we have done for 56 years now -- or fight by
entering his home to reclaim what has legally been ours all along. If,
on the other hand, we have assessed that that stolen property is just not
worth a bloody fight in recovering it, why not remain indifferent about
it all? Why not simply dismiss that loss as an NPA -- the way banks and
other financial institutions do -- and go about our lives?
What about the rats and roaches
and lizards that your neighbour covertly releases into our property? Well,
just go on killing them, developing newer poisons and strategies for trapping
them and by being more vigilant. Crushing those insects into Hades and
throwing them at your neighbour's doorstep might be a good idea too. But
what about those amongst our family who suffer because of those insects?
Sad, but can't be helped really, especially if some of them who suffer
belong to the disloyal kind who feed sugar and cheese to those insects
-- almost like 'serves them right,' you know.
In any case, what's the guarantee
that any handshake or agreement with a genetically diseased neighbour is
going to be honoured by him? At least his record in keeping his word has
been so utterly dismal that even his great guarantor for so long has now
refused to counter-guarantee his vow of good behaviour. One Mr Armitage
will tell you why.
That great guarantor has, for five
years now, believed that our locality has become a fatal 'flashpoint' because
of the continuing strain between our neighbour and us. Well, we are the
ones, not our neighbour, who has given the word that we shall not be the
first to explode, say, a gas cylinder on our quarrelsome neighbour or anyone
else in our locality and beyond. And we always keep every word we give
to all and sundry -- we are, after all, of an ancient and cultured civilisation.
So, if the great guarantor is worried about a fatal 'flashpoint' in our
locality, it ought to be his job to discipline our neighbour and not to
hustle us, instead, into a handshake with the thief who raided and ran
away with our property, aided and abetted by the perverse police system
of the world.
Just see the profile of that neighbour
of ours, Pakistan.
Although much smaller in size than
India, Pakistan's literacy rate is 44 per cent against India's 66 per cent;
while 55 per cent of Indian females are literate, that proportion is 32
per cent in Pakistan (http://www.saag.org/paper8/paper710.html) Further,
the base of the education system there is frighteningly fundamentalist.
Proof of this accusation lies in
the work of historian K K Aziz, who studied, lived and taught outside Pakistan
for most of his life. Based on the scrutiny of 66 textbooks used in the
schools and colleges of Pakistan by students of classes of 1 to 14, the
manuscript of one chapter he wrote for a book was published as a series
of 11 lengthy articles in The Frontier Post of Pakistan in April and May
1992. Reacting to those articles, a letter by one Professor M I Haq in
that newspaper of May 11, 1992 said, 'The cumulative effect of these shoddy
textbooks, as summed up by Mr Aziz, is horrifying and stunning. The inbreeding
from these repetitive, incoherent and subjective books compulsorily prescribed
in all schools and colleges of the country generates hypocrites, blindfolded
zealots, fundamentalists, intriguers, time servers and ignoramuses with
the highest degrees.' (Page 258, The Murder of History, Vanguard Books
Pvt Ltd, Lahore, 1992, by K K Aziz).
Three years earlier, on April 29,
1992, The Nation, another Pak newspaper, had written, 'It is time our books
imparted some knowledge rather than continuously concentrating on indoctrination
and creating a hostile world-view among our students.' Would you want your
children to be friendly with such children of such a neighbour of yours?
There is no reason to believe that
that scenario has changed since 1992. The result can therefore only be
an increasingly radical Islamist leadership in all walks of life. Thus,
even if they are gifted the Kashmir valley there is no reason to believe
that the Pakistani leadership's pathological hatred of predominantly Hindu
India will cease until a divine miracle makes those blokes out there re-
interpret Islam as a doctrine of 'live and let live.'
Already has Pakistan been given
derogatory labels. Below are some pointed out by Arindam Banerji in his
saag website paper cited above.
* 'Pakistan is the most delinquent
of nations' -- Bernard Henri-Levy
* 'Pakistan is a platform for terror'
-- Nancy Powell
* 'A dysfunctional nation or Problemistan'
-- Richard Behar of Fortune
Nine months ago, in a feature article
based on the contents of some 50 cited references from India, Pakistan,
the UK and the US, Narayanan Komerath wrote, 'Reports from diverse sources
describe a Pakistan role in most foreign terrorist attacks directed against
the United States in the past decade.' Narayanan's article also points
out that Pakistani terrorists have been caught in almost every part of
the world including UK, US, Spain, France, Algeria, India and Kuwait. The
arrest of 34-year-old Iyman Ferris announced by the US authorities is the
latest catch.
The America of George W Bush voices
a different view of course. Well, then, he is welcome to bear hug Musharraf
at Camp David, to give him a dozen or two of F-16s, to tip him an extra
billion dollars and write off two billion more of his debts -- all for
services rendered to America's so-called war against terrorism. But we
know what we know, and the rest of the world knows it too. And perhaps
the truth about Pakistan will dawn on the America of Bush and Powell only
when the Brooklyn Bridge is blown to bits by Iyman's ilk in Pakistan. Meanwhile,
who wants a terrorist as a friendly neighbour?
Then there's Pakistan's political
regime --- such as it is. Almost always a military junta that is simply
scared of democracy unless it be of the manipulated kind, there is presently
the unique reality of an all-powerful president being also being the chief
of the army.
Commenting on the recent Lahore
high court judgment upholding the perverse brand of 'dual citizenship'
enjoyed by Musharraf, the Pakistan People's Party said, 'This ruling accords
the dubious distinction to Pakistan as being the first state to declare
that democracy and civil rule is the same as military citizenship.' (The
Hindu, June 13, 2003). Should we be friendly with such a Jekyll and Hyde
neighbour?
Our industry associations believe
that peace and friendship with Pakistan will greatly benefit us. Maybe,
maybe not. But if the neighbour hasn't reciprocated our Most Favoured Nation
treatment we gave it years ago, we shouldn't be begging for its trade when
we are, head held high, on the way to become a trillion dollar economy
by the end of this decade despite the 'nuclear flashpoint' of the 'Kashmir
imbroglio.' The world market is big enough for us without the peanuts from
Pakistan's small and struggling economy where the army is perhaps the single
biggest entrepreneur.
In short: Why not keep our Western
neighbour at arm's length? The 'hello-hello' of mundane diplomatic relations
is good enough. Let's just watch Pakistan stew in its own juice. And let's
also watch the truth dawn upon America, as it eventually will one day.
