HVK Archives: Accusations galore
Accusations galore - The Afternoon Despatch and Courier
Kuldip Nayar
()
24 July 1997
Title: Accusations galore
Author: Kuldip Nayar
Publication: The Afternoon Despatch and Courier
Date: July 24, 1997
The Indo-Pak propaganda war has neither abated in fury nor in invective
Except for a meeting of foreign secretaries from India and Pakistan in
September, there is nothing which would evoke optimism over relations
between the two countries. Both have tested missiles and deployed them near
the border Accusations and counter-accusations are galore. The propaganda
war has neither abated in fury nor in invective.
In India people tend to believe that the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI)
of Pakistan is out to foment violence in their country. They see the ISI
hand behind every bomb blast either in Punjab, Delhi, Rajasthan or Tamil
Nadu. Kashmir is in a different category because there has never been any
doubt about Pakistan waging a proxy war.
Everyone in India believes that Islamabad trains, arms and finances
militants in the valley. And former Bangladesh Prime Minister Khalida Zia's
admission of knowing the presence of the ISI on the border has strengthened
the belief that the insurgency in the north-east has Pakistan's blessings.
Frozen attitudes
The media, particularly the print media, only stokes the fires of
differences. Even a small incident is misinterpreted and highlighted.
Most newspapers have already written off the talks. Some, who have not been
reconciled to the thaw that Prime Ministers Inder Gujral and Nawaz Sharif
have brought about in the frozen attitudes, are out to reverse even a
ripple of relationship.
Still, it is difficult to imagine India and Pakistan wallowing in the
waters of hatred for another 50 years. The last 50 years since independence
have destroyed even a semblance of contact, not to speak of trade or
cultural exchanges. Both countries have spent more money on the means of
destruction than development. The three wars, which the two have fought
against each other, were a catharsis of sorts of the pent-up anger. They
will continue to seek such ways if they do not bury the hatchet. This time
the war may annihilate both the countries because of the arsenal they command.
The talks are the only way out of the impasse they face. They may provide a
peaceful ventilation of grievances. But no dialogue can proceed, much less
succeed, if there is no proper climate. The groups constituted to study the
various problems in depth will not be able to apply their mind
dispassionately if former Pakistan Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto suspects a
sell-out and BJP chief L.K. Advani says that "liberation of Pakistan
occupied Kashmir should be an integral part of our Kashmir policy." These
statements have been made when there is not a single meeting of the groups
held. What would happen If they come to a point where they may to
accommodate each other.
In fact, the two foreign secretaries, when they talked in Pakistan, found
the constitution of groups under different heads tough. Pakistan insisted
on using the phrase of problem of Jammu and Kashmir for the group on
Kashmir. They had to strike a compromise. India had its way when the
word, problem, was dropped. And Pakistan won when India had to agree to
club terrorism with drug, a formulation which does not target the ISI
exclusively.
Matters worsen
Some give and take is inevitable. The very fact that there was a deadlock
for the past decade and now the two sides are talking to each other proves
this. The main thing is the dialogue which both countries, whatever the
provocation, have not allowed to get derailed so far. But it will be tough
going requiring cooperation from all, particularly the media.
If one were to go through the drafts that India and Pakistan exchanged at
Muree before the Shimla Conference in April 1972, one would be amazed to
find how much D.P Dhar, representing New Delhi, and Aziz Ahmed,
representing Islamabad, conceded to produce a statement which was
considered at Shimla by prime minister Mrs. Indira Gandhi and Zulfikar Ali
Bhutto in July. One observation which DP made then is truer today than it
was at that time. He said that India was willing to prove its bona fades
about seeking a permanent peace with Pakistan by decreasing its defence
expenditure. He promised that his government would agree to consider a
proposal of joint inspection of weapons or any other to satisfy Pakistan on
this point.
Nothing like that happened. Still the Shin-da agreement has been able to
keep the two countries from going to war in the last 25 years. Those in
India regretting the opportunity at Shimla for not forcing a harsher treaty
on Bhutto should remember that the Versailles treaty forced on Germany
after the first World War sowed the seeds of the second World War.
Had the line of control been forced on Pakistan as the international
border, It would have probably gone to war by now to avenge its
helplessness at that time. What has saved the situation is the enunciation
in the Shimla agreement that the two governments will discuss the
modalities, "including a final settlement, on Jammu and Kashmir" for
durable peace. It looks as if this hope has sustained Pakistan's faith in
a peaceful solution. The resumption of talks testifies this.
Many in Pakistan - and they constitute an influential lobby - feel that no
durable peace is possible unless Kashmir is part of their country. But they
do not realise that what India is defending in Kashmir is not a territory
alone. It is fighting to preserve the principle of secularism which
sustains the Indian democratic structure. India did not accept partition
ofthe subcontinent on religious grounds. The Muslim-majority areas seceded
from the subcontinent and constituted a sovereign country. Pakistan, for
India to is accept the principle that a Muslim-majority area can secede
from the Union on the basis of religion to destroy its own polity.
Common good
I concede that we have got caught in a situation which we cannot get out of
without causing damage to the systems and structures of our respective
societies. But to reopen the claims and counter claims of partition is
neither feasible nor advisable. We must find a solution to the Kashmir
problem but not on the basis of religion. India still has not been able to
defeat Hindu chauvinistic forces. How can it accept something which will
be palpably communal?
Let Pakistan consider Kashmir the core issue if that is what pleases it.
But there is no harm in free and frequent contacts between the people of
the two countries. We may thus generate an understanding which will help us
solve even the question of Kashmir. We have common culture. common food and
common language. We have shared history and we now share geography. We are
neighbours. We do not need any outsider. But we will need all the restraint
and patience. And above all a congenial atmosphere.
This is the only way to demolish the high walls that fear and distrust has
raised on the borders. Without giving up their separate identities, both
sides will have to work together for the common good. This might usher in
an era fruitful beyond their dreams.
Back
Top
|
