Author: M V Kamath
Publication: Free Press Journal
Date: June 27, 2002
Both Defence Minister George Fernandes
and his Chief of Staff are now saying that cross-border terrorism is definitely
on the decrease. They should know. But consider this: In a gruesome act,
LeT militants shot dead five members of a family and two children and injured
three others at a village in Udhampur district on June 16. A day earlier
armed militants entered a house in Badar village and killed a man, his
wife and two daughters. On the same day three pilgrims returning from the
holy shrine of Sharda Mata were killed by militants near Lharua village
in Doda district.
Similarly, as many as 11 persons,
including eight militants were killed and three injured in separate incidents
in Srinagar. Perhaps they are isolated incidents. Perhaps these incidents
took place without the knowledge or support of the ISI. It is also quite
possible that Gen. Musharraf has no control over certain fundamentalist
outfits bent on creating trouble. But one thing seems clear: the war clouds
are clearing. And within Jammu & Kashmir itself a subtle change seems
to be coming over the majority community.
Apart from the findings of MORI
International which conducted a poll in Jammu & Kashmir in the last
week of April that showed that 61 per cent of those polled felt they would
be better off politically and economically as citizens of India, there
are some other encouraging signs that communal harmony is slowly being
restored in Kashmir. Reports suggest that nearly 15,000 Kashmiri Pandits,
mostly migrants, thronged the Khir Bhavani Temple at Tulmula in Central
Kashmir on 18 June and were "welcomed with open arms" by the majority community.
A Kashmir Pandit leader said that even Muslims participated in the special
Yajna held at the temple for peace and prosperity. Another has been quoted
as saying: "I definitely feel a change in the situation. People are very
courteous and they have not yet forgotten the basics of Kashmiriyat". That
is a healthy sign.
It may be mentioned here that between
3.5 to 4.0 lakhs of Kashmiri Pandits were driven out of their homes by
the majority community between 1990 and 2000 in a major effort at ethnic
cleansing. It now seems as if the Kashmiriyat Muslims are learning how
to get back to their roots. Apart from India withdrawing its warships from
close to Pakistani waters, it does seem that Musharraf is really cracking
down, for example, on the Madrassas. On 19 June Pakistan tightened controls
on madrassas by passing a tough new law forcing the seminaris to join a
national register and declare funding sources. According to the law, all
of Pakistan's 10,000 Madrassas must sign up with the newly created Madrassas
Education Board within six months and those who refuse to register themselves
will not be allowed to operate. Information Minister Nisar Memon has been
quoted as saying that no Madrassa will be allowed to receive financial
assistance, aid or donations from foreign sources and should any Madrassa
contravene the law it will attract closure or fine or both.
The voice of liberal opinion also
seems to be getting heard. A former editor of Pakistan Times, in an exclusive
article to the Chandigarh-based 'The Tribune' (11 June) writes that "public
opinion realises that Pakistan's political about-turn will be a long and
painful process" but is becoming necessary. As he put it: "As regards the
immediate problem, the demand for the cessation of Pakistani elements'
infiltration into the Indian part of Kashmir, the majority of Pakistanis
are ahead of General Musharraf, notwithstanding the noises being made by
the militants and their apologists among retired Generals, amateur politicians
and media moguls.... The change in the average Pakistani's outlook, and
it is a big leap, is the realisation that the strategy of armed militancy
has to be abandoned as it has become unfeasible". Then consider what Ayaz
Amir, writing in Dawn has to say. He wrote: "Pakistan has gone through
enough experiments. Over the last nine months it has suffered enough in
spirit. It needs a period of calm and healing, to regain its buoyancy of
spirit which seems missing in the national mood".
Amir noted that "caught between
an Indian anvil and an American pair of forceps applied relentlessly, we
have finally a farewell to arms in Kashmir. It is to the past we have taken
a gain leap back to 1989, India's policy of intimidations on which it embarked
in December has been thus vindicated". And Amir added: "Let us be rid of
the bluster and the false notions which have plagued our national life
for so long. There is no need to sugar-coat our several U-turns." Or take
what Najam Sethi, editor of The Friday Times has to say. If Pakistan wants
to defeat its ghosts, he writes, it has to look inside than westwards.
Pointing out that "scores of highly qualified and public-spirited doctors
have been killed in Karachi" Sethi pointed out that the groundswell of
support for Musharraf when he first came to power in 1999 "had sprung from
the citizen's desire to see the military putting an end to Pakistan's internal
anarchy".
In that sense according to Sethi,
Musharraf has been a failure. As he put it: "Unfortunately, state and society
have both become more undermined since 1999 and the country is clearly
unable to withstand external challenges while the government is unable
to protect it from internal dangers. As the Musharraf government faces
off with India, it would do well to remember that the greater challenge
is at home". Economically Pakistan in desperate trouble. It has hiked its
defence budget by 3.5 per cent when already its balance of payments position
is in a precarious condition. The hefty Rs 15 billion hike over last year's
revised budget marks more than 14 per cent increase in Islamabad's defence
spending which it just cannot afford and some fear that like the Soviet
Union it may collapse overnight. Meanwhile another development of great
significance is under way. A security apparatus to restrain India and Pakistan
from going to war is quietly being put together at the initiative of the
United States involving the full participation of Russia, Britain, France,
and even Japan and China. Bush's national security adviser Condolleezza
Rice has been quoted by the New York Times as describing the emerging arrangement
as a "common security framework" in which the Great Powers "share a common
security agenda".
More than a fear of an Indo-Pak
war is the fear of Jehadi elements in Pakistan seizing the country's nuclear
weapons. No matter what Musharraf says about his country's military power,
the fact remains that the man is in grave trouble internally. India may
wish to see him collapse under the strain in the belief that it serves
him right, but will it help us in the long run? The tragedy is that Musharraf,
in the past has showed that he is extremely untrustworthy. Kargil is an
immediate example. But can it be that he has learnt his lesson? Should
India at last hold talks with him in order to help him save his face? Should
India seek the mediation of a third power or group of powers? The United
States would like to help. So would Russia, or, for that matter, Britain.
Delhi is presently standing on prestige. For one thing, a mediator may
play a double game and lean towards Pakistan to India's dismay.
India in the past, had a terrible
experience in relying on fair play from western powers. So it is chary
of getting the United States involved. But times have changed. The United
States no longer is inclined to pacify Pakistan. But India nevertheless
is wary. That is a sound attitude but calls for fresh study. The US, Russia,
Britain and France can work behind the scenes and arrange to stand guarantee
against future Pakistani aggression. These powers can even work out an
understanding on settling the Jammu & Kashmir issue to India's own
satisfaction. If that can be done behind doors, India, by then knowing
Pakistan's position, can publicly agree to outside intervention, without
losing face. This calls for high-level diplomacy. There is no harm in seeking
international guarantees against future Pakistani support to terrorism.
Indeed that may be the best guarantee for lasting peace in south Asia.
It may even be argued that the best
way to guarantee peace is to invite foreign mediation. With Kashmiris themselves
sick of blood-letting after over ten years of futile cross-border terrorism
and in a mood to compromise with Delhi, with Pakistanis sick of internal
division and sectarian conflicts and western powers coming to their own
realisation that it is in their own interest to put down Islamic fundamentalism,
the time seems to have come for a dialogue between India and Pakistan.
India does not have to let down its defence; it does not need pretend to
be accommodative. Indira Gandhi did that in Simla and the country had to
pay for showing a sense of decency towards a fallen enemy.
India necessarily has to be firm
on what it wants and how far it is willing to go. But if it could get the
signatories of Great Powers to whatever is agreed upon, then Pakistan dare
not renege on what it has committed itself to. That is a point worth remembering.
Too long has India stood on prestige even if it is conceded that it has
behaved like a person once bit twice shy. But India must currently rise
to the occasion. Hopefully Pakistan by now has learnt what is possible
and what is not, in its pursuit of the fulfillment to the futile Two Nation
theory. Pakistan has now come to the end of the road. It can only retrace
its steps. The Pakistanis are realising that they can never get Kashmir.
The Kashmiris themselves are fed up with endless terrorism. Now is the
time to settle the Kashmir issue, preferably with the help of third parties.
That will be good for India, good for Pakistan and good for the peace and
prosperity of all of south Asia. And who knows, even the LTTE in Sri Lanka
may come to terms with Colombo, learning from Pakistan's experience. All
things are possible - and we should help in making them happen.
