Author: G Parthasarathy
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: June 6, 2002
The United Nations University in-hosted
a Conference on South Asia on May 27-28 in Tokyo. Not surprisingly, the
focus of attention was almost exclusively on the escalating tensions between
India and Pakistan. Delegates from South Asian countries, including Afghanistan,
and South Asian specialists from around the world participated in the conference.
While former Prime Minister IK Gujral, who was unable to attend, sent a
tough message condemning cross-border terrorism, the Pakistani delegates
present, including a former Foreign Minister and Foreign Secretary, remained
true to form, criticising India for its actions in Junagadh, Hyderabad
and Jammu & Kashmir (J&K), and labelling it a country unable to
live at peace with its neighbours.
Unfortunately for the Pakistanis,
their speeches were made at a time President Pervez Musharraf was delivering
a belligerent and uncompromising address to his people and to the world,
claiming that "we are not allowing any infiltration across the Line of
Control (LoC)". The Japanese were not amused. Their Foreign Minister Yoriko
Kawaguchi asserted: "Japan strongly expects Pakistan will take all steps
to stop and prevent terrorist activities including the infiltration across
the LoC." Speaking of India "in the light of its position as a major player
in the region", the Foreign Minister appealed to New Delhi to "exhaust
all diplomatic efforts and work towards de-escalation". The Japanese joined
the world community in criticising Pakistan's ill-advised and ill-timed
missile tests and reacted with horror when Pakistan Ambassador Munir Akram
spoke in the UN, ever so casually, about Pakistan's readiness to cross
the nuclear threshold.
Within the conference, the testing
of the missiles named Ghauri, Ghaznavi and Abdali evoked amusement and
derision. Everybody was aware that Ghauri was none other than the North
Korean 'Nodong" missile. The Ghaznavi and the Abdali were merely replicas
or variants of the Chinese M11 missile. A Japanese delegate remarked that,
given the origin of these missiles, it would have been more appropriate
if they were christened Kim Il Sung, Deng Xiaoping and Jiang Zemin! Amin
Saikal, an eminent scholar from Afghanistan remarked that Mohammad Ghauri,
Mahmud Ghazni and Ahmad Shah Abdali hailed from Ghor, Ghazni and Kandahar
in Afghanistan. He sarcastically asked whether Pakistan was now intending
to lay territorial claims to parts of Afghanistan. I reminded the former
Pakistan Foreign Secretary that Ghori, Ghazni and Abdali had first sacked
Pakistani cities like Multan and Lahore before indulging in pillage at
Somnath and elsewhere in India, and asked him why Pakistanis were choosing
to extol those who had looted and destroyed the homes of their forefathers.
There was no credible reply.
While the Pakistanis love Japanese
financial doles, the voice they listen to and cannot ignore is that of
the US. In an unprecedented rebuke, President Bush said on May 27 that
he wanted "results, in terms of (Pakistan) stopping people from crossing
the LoC." Musharraf's buddy, General Colin Powell, proclaimed on June 2:
"We are pressing President Musharraf to cease all infiltration activities
on the part of terrorist organisations across the LoC".
The European Union, the Russian
Federation and the G-8 have expressed similar sentiments. Pakistanis have
an almost naive tendency to believe that China will forgive them for all
their errors of omission and commission and support them blindly against
India. China's response on May 30 could not have warmed Pakistani hearts.
While condemning terrorism, the Chinese Foreign Office Spokesman said that
Kashmir is an issue left over by history and needs to be resolved through
peaceful means. China seems to be on the horns of a dilemma. It is concerned
about the increasing American influence and presence in South Asia, but
is unable to do anything about it.
Apart from exaggerated expectations
of Chinese diplomatic and military support, the Pakistanis also have illusions
about their indispensability to the so-called Islamic Ummah. Kashmir is
constantly projected as an Islamic issue and equated with Palestine. The
Arabs are now realising that this is a self-serving Pakistani ploy. In
the past, Pakistan infiltrated the OIC Secretariat, routinely condemned
India on any issue the Pakistani staff wanted. On June 2, the OIC Secretary
General for the first time condemned terrorism in all its forms and called
on the world community to act decisively to prevent the escalation of India-Pakistan
tensions.
Not a single Islamic country has
come out openly in support of Pakistan or criticised India. Most have either
chosen to remain silent or called for restraint and de-escalation, formulations
that New Delhi can comfortably live with. Sudan has condemned the terrorist
attack on the Kaluchak Army camp. New Delhi can thus be pleased with the
results of its post-December 13 diplomatic offensive in the Islamic World.
New Delhi should realise that it
is dealing with an internationally isolated and domestically discredited
ruler in Pakistan. Musharraf's rhetoric of May 27, Munir Akram's threat
of nuclear war, Musharraf's subsequent retraction of this threat and the
missile tests were all attempts at psychological warfare by a military
ruler. While the moves have boomeranged internationally, they have nevertheless
engineered some domestic support for the cornered General. They have also
led to a measure of panic internationally, resulting in the Americans taking
the lead in evacuating their citizens. It is, therefore, imperative that
India explain its strategy frankly and transparently to the international
community.
Despite all their bluff and bluster,
Pakistan's military rulers know that while a nuclear exchange could cause
grievous damage to India, it would lead to Pakistan's annihilation. Pakistan's
Generals are not suicidal. The Pakistanis are also aware of the eagle's
eye the Western world maintains on their nuclear arsenal and delivery platforms.
There can be no question of New Delhi pulling its armed forces back from
the borders, till there are firm indications that Pakistan's use of terrorism
as an instrument of state policy has irrevocably ended. While eschewing
rhetoric, we should make it clear to the Americans and others that the
General should be kept on a tight leash whenever economic assistance is
extended to Pakistan. In other words, aid should be linked to its performance
in irrevocably ending support for cross-border terrorism. This message
will no doubt be firmly conveyed to American envoys like Richard Armitage
and Donald Rumsfeld when they visit India.
There is little doubt that, in the
short-term, General Musharraf will be compelled to reduce the·profile
of cross- border terrorism. A face-saving way would be to get the ISI-sponsored
United Jihad Council in Muzzafarabad to announce a short-term ceasefire.
This will enable the ISI to calibrate the level of violence in J&K
and also keep its cadres active in intimidating those who wish to participate
in the forthcoming State Assembly Elections. Even those Hurriyat leaders
who earlier showed signs of being persuaded to join the democratic process
now seem to lack the courage to participate in the elections, after Abdul
Ghani Lone's assassination. Pakistan's entire strategy in the coming months
would be subvert democratic processes in J&K.
New Delhi appears to have substantially
succeeded in its diplomatic efforts to get the international community
to turn the heat on General Musharraf to end cross-border terrorism. But
the more daunting task that it now has to address is the effort to mobilise
public support within J&K to overcome fear of the terrorist gun, reject
violence and participate in elections in October. Given the fear of terrorist
violence that pervades the minds of people after Lone's assassination,
it remains to be seen whether this can be achieved.
