Author: Swapan Dasgupta
Publication: The Pioneeer
Date: December 28, 2008
URL: http://www.dailypioneer.com/146523/Unreal-to-hope-from-Pakistan.html
There is an astonishing sense of déjà
vu that confronts any half-detached observer of the post-26/11 mood in India.
After the attack on Parliament seven years ago, Atal Bihari Vajpayee spoke
menacingly of an aar paar ki ladai and ordered full military mobilisation.
This time too India has swung between decrying war-talk and keeping "all
options open". The romantic candles of sadbhavna have been snuffed out
by the torches of assertive nationalism.
One of the main casualties of this national
anger is the belief that Pakistan and India have a common destiny. Bolstered
by elaborate people-to-people contacts, cricket matches and cultural exchanges,
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh insisted at the NAM summit in September 2006
that India and Pakistan were co-victims of terrorism. Coming within months
of the Mumbai train bombings that killed 250 people, this was an exemplary
expression of dhimmitude.
Days before the Mumbai attack, President Asif
Ali Zardari repeated the hackneyed formulation that there was a part of Pakistan
that was forever Indian and vice versa. Despite the anger in Indian official
circles at the ISI involvement in the bombing of the Indian Embassy in Kabul,
liberal hearts melted instantly. There was a flurry of punditry suggesting
that Zardari was India's newest best bet after Pervez Musharraf.
Ever since the West threw its weight behind
the peace process, the strategic community in India has been divided between
those in search of the "good" Pakistani and those who believed that
Pakistan was inherently "bad". That there was a section in Pakistan
disgusted by the drift to extremism and anxious to rekindle Mohammed Ali Jinnah's
vision of a modern, Muslim (but not Islamic) country, wasn't in doubt. But,
were these voices of enlightenment akin to the Good Germans under Hitler?
Were they consequential enough to impose correctives on State policy? Or were
they the "useful idiots" expediently wheeled out during moments
of international exasperation to tell the world that ordinary Pakistanis were
innocent of crimes that were invariably the responsibility of someone else?
The issue has come to a head in the aftermath
of the 26/11 attack. Liberal Pakistanis still insist that they were as shocked
and as outraged as Indians at the brutality of the terrorists. They may well
be right. Yet, why has Islamabad been so squeamish in admitting that the Mumbai
attack was an operation originating in Pakistan? Why has it equated the criminality
of 'non-State players' with the sovereignty and national honour of Pakistan?
Why does it take the spilling of Indian blood to unite Pakistan?
While the world was extremely generous in
extending a helping hand to a fledgling democracy in Pakistan, it expected
the democratic Government to responsive in addressing global security concerns.
There was never any suggestion that either President Zardari or the late Benazir
Bhutto's friends who occupy high office in Pakistan were responsible for either
the Mumbai attack or the Kabul bombing in September. The finger of suspicion
was always pointed at jihadi groups and ISI.
The feeling that Pakistan was fast emerging
as the new epicentre of global terrorism and threatening the security of countries
as diverse as Afghanistan, Britain and India, should have triggered a domestic
churning. It should have offended the self-respect of Pakistani elite at least
to hear their country described as a "migraine".
Yet, there have been few voices of consequence
from within Pakistan willing to tell the political and military establishment
that enough is enough and that it is time to flush out the jihadis and the
rogues who run them. Those who spent last summer telling the whole world that
democratic Pakistan was bursting with exhilarating creativity that would leave
India in the shade have abruptly chosen to maintain radio silence. All we
have heard is vague talk about making steady, incremental gains in the fight
against fanatics. Like the Good German, the Good Pakistani has couched his
acquiescence in either silence or sophistry.
It is the sophistry that tells the tale of
denial. After 26/11, there were many intellectuals from the South Asian diaspora
eager to shed tears for a Bombay they imagined had perished in the fires at
the Taj. They filled many column inches of iconic liberal publications. Curiously,
their remorse was invariably couched with gratuitous references to how badly
India treated its Muslim minority, how Babri Masjid and Gujarat have kindled
a fierce desire for revenge, and how Kashmir remains the core dispute.
Cut out the mandatory allusions to the Sea
Lounge at the Taj and the vibrancy of Bollywood, and you are left with the
stark judgment: India had it coming.
The Good German claimed ignorance of the concentration
camps and the Final Solution. The Good Pakistani is better informed. He has
seen the devastation of the Marriot Hotel in Islamabad; he has watched the
siege of the Lal Masjid; and he has experienced the growing hold of religious
bigots on Pakistani society. He knows what the ISI is all about much better
than we do. And he is too painfully aware that Pakistan is sleep-walking its
way to disaster. Yet, when it comes to India, ordinary decencies have effortlessly
yielded to the brusque message for India: You had it coming.
Earlier, the Good Pakistani was a social distraction,
an embellishment of liberal Hindu self-flagellation and Indian Muslim angst.
Today, he has become a red herring and a diversion from the urgent business
of confronting the threat frontally. With infinite patience India is still
trying to not be beastly to the Good Pakistani. Our Establishment is still
hoping Pakistani "civil society" becomes truly civil.
It's likely to be an indefinite wait. In the
war on India, the Good Pakistani has invariably sided with a Bad Pakistan.
Only the naïve and the foolish should be surprised.