Author: R. Balashankar
Publication: Organiser
Date: July 30, 2006
URL: http://organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=141&page=3
The Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh spoke
out of the box in Mumbai last week. Four days later, back from the G-8 summit
at St. Petersburg, Dr Singh is subdued again, back in the box.
The national indignation and anguish in the
aftermath of the serial blasts was such that everybody except for a few confirmed
terror apologists thought out of the box. The conventional wisdom and political
correctness had no takers. The nation screamed for action. But it did not
take long for a determined lot in the media to introduce obfuscation to shift
the focus. Flogging the now familiar theme of communal harmony, the spirit
of the maximum city, resilience and so on.
The security forces have nothing to show so
far. Even they have grown lethargic in Mumbai, guarding dance bars and lining
up for VVIP security. Some politicians even found time to bring a privilege
motion against a senior Mumbai police officer who did some plain talk on MLA's
links with jehadis. The Congress left speechless for a while, brazenly hanged
on to that shameful chapter in India's encounter with terrorists in Kandahar
narrated in "A Call to Honour" by the then External Affairs Minister
Jaswant Singh. Does the Kandahar episode justify the UPA inaction, rather
abetment to divisive politics in the country? And is it the Congress case
that 256 innocent passengers in the Indian Airlines plane should have been
allowed to be perished in the Afghan desert? The timing of the controversy
is debatable. For, it also helped distract the national focus from the core
issue thrown up by the serial blasts.
The reactions to the Mumbai blasts in the
foreign media should help us realise one thing. India will have to fight its
war against terror almost single handedly. No one fights anyone else's battles.
We say this because the Western media largely echoed the Pakistani position
on Kashmir, while analysing the causes for Indian terror attacks. They seem
to suggest that if Kashmir problem is solved to Pakistan's satisfaction India
would become safer. Then what about the terrorist strikes in Madrid, London
and New York? The West has a double standard when it talks of fighting terror
unitedly with India. The US is asking for evidence from India on Pakistan's
involvement. But the US President stoutly defended the Israeli offensive against
Lebanon. Will the US support India, a victim of cross-border terrorism for
the last two decades, if India reacts like Israel?
In fact, many in India suspect the US design
in signing the N-deal, as it cripples India's deterrent capabilities even
as a rogue state like Pakistan leads an armamental race in the region with
US aid and abetment. The US pretends that terror attacks in Kashmir are different
from those in Mumbai. And it only underlines the fact that it will take long
for Indians to consider US a dependable friend. It remains highly insensitive
to India's national aspirations.
The Prime Minister's latest soft line that
the destinies of the people of South Asia are interlinked with his expression
of eagerness for peace talks with Pakistan are very much inspired by the US
demand for evidence. Is India's Kashmir policy getting increasingly influenced
by the Western colonial thinking? We cannot forget that the first Pakistani
intrusion into Kashmir in 1948 was with British assistance. Then they annexed
a portion of the state. Pakistan also tried on a different tack by instigating
the Khalistan separatists and failed again. The 1998 Kargil infiltration was
another instance of their declared objective of completing the "unfinished
business of partition." The tragic fact is that this business is continuing
through the terrorist attacks on India, which indeed is a declared war. Only
that we are not heeding it. Terror apologists conspicuous by their haughty
perseverance will tell a different story. Perhaps the Prime Minister's initial
response was in resonance with the national mood.
In a free society it is natural to have differing
viewpoints. But the reality of terror will not spare anybody. True, the plotters
take special care to target a particular community. Even in the heart of Srinagar,
only Hindu tourists fall prey to grenade attacks. They choose pilgrims to
Amarnath, crowded Hindu holy sites like Varanasi, Akshardham, Deepawali shoppers
in Sarojini Nagar and Paharganj, devotees from Ayodhya in a train bogie in
Godhra, or first-class train compartments in Mumbai after office hours. This
is meticulous, mischievous and communal. To pretend that they are misguided
cowardly acts of a few is to miss the point. The culprits never get caught
because of the good local support they enjoy and their cross-border access.
They are resourceful. And receive sophisticated advice. Clearly, there is
a master brain supporting the network. Jehadi ideologues masquerading as intellectuals
in India introduce new theories as if terrorist attacks are only a reflection
of the frustration of the poor against the burgeoning middle class. The idea
is to give jehadis an egalitarian clout.
War is often an inevitable consequence of
failed peace process. India has been a victim of five wars, which it really
did not expect. The history of all wars shows that there was the insatiable
greed of one aggressor and there was the bottomless prevarication of the other
that resulted in the disaster.
Till mid-90's India was winning the war on
terror. The successive governments started softpedalling. From a stand that
Kashmir is an integral part of India, they placed it on the negotiation table.
We have to make our stand on Kashmir clear. That giving land will not bring
peace has been proved by the lesson of partition. Kashmir is not Pakistani
target, but it is the entire India. The jehadis make no secret of their aim
when they proclaim that their goal is to Islamise India through a terror-cum-demographic
explosion.
We agree with the Prime Minister when he says
that anything that gives the peace process a setback makes one sad. But as
he said earlier the process can move forward only if Pakistan stops helping
terrorists. For this Pakistan, nay, Islam has to abandon its expansionist
designs. For who does not know that Dawood, Mohammed Azhar, Zargar, Omar Sheikh
(now in jail) all operate from Pakistan? Peace is not a one-way street.
There are nations, which make a living by
recruiting, harbouring and sponsoring terror. When the then Home Minister
L.K. Advani gave a list of terrorists holed up in Pakistan, General Musharraf's
response was he did not know about them. Then he said not a single Indian
was in Pakistani prisons. Later, many prisoners were released by both the
countries.
Pakistan's claim to Kashmir is one such. They
project it as the core issue. Even a chastened Benazir Bhutto in a recent
interview with Karan Thapar repeated it. In fact, she went back on her early
exile days overtures to India, in the sight of a return to active politics
in Pakistan. Pakistani leaders suffer from a Hitlarian hyperbole. They look
at every Muslim-majority area in India as the unfinished business of partition.
That is why peace with Pakistan is a chimera.
