India and Pakistan - the conflicts within
“There’s a little bit of India in every Pakistani and a little bit of Pakistan in every Indian."
A quote by Benazir Bhutto referred by President Zardari during his address to Hindustan Times conference, only a couple of days before the Mumbai terrorist attacks. My challenge here will be not to be influenced by the Pakistani or the Indian in me while I analyze the recent developments and our options going forward.
I know what I am going to say here will not go well with a lot of my friends (on both sides). But I believe in the wake of present circumstances, it is time for some tough and honest talk.
First and foremost, if at all these attacks have any proven Pakistani connection; it is in the best interest of Pakistani to persecute the elements responsible for it. More so, because the past tells us that these elements have proven more dangerous for Pakistan than for anyone else. Also, if these attacks have any Pakistani connection, it is in best interest of all the parties to help Pakistan persecute these culprits. The best way to do it will be not to create hype around this persecution and not to turn it into a matter of Win or Loss.
The fact must also be worth mentioning that post Malegaon, it will be very difficult for Pakistani administration to persecute any Pakistani connection in these attacks.
Having said this, in my honest opinion and analysis, I find it hard to believe these attacks had a Pakistan connection. I say this not because I am Pakistani. Indian authorities and media started trumping Pakistan connection only when “Deccan Mujahidin” accepted the responsibility of these attacks. In my honest opinion, Indians had no option but to blame Pakistan loud to avoid a widespread communal riot between Hindus and Muslims.
For this reason, these attacks put to fore a very dangerous volatility in India - 60 years into independence, India still has not been able to resolve the communal conflict. In fact, it has gone worse over the years.
The problem with both India and Pakistan is their failure to resolve the issue of their national identity. It has been said time and time again about Pakistan that Pakistani's only national identity stems from being Anti-Indian. This is a bitter truth. But a more bitter truth is, India's national identity is nothing but being Anti-Pakistan. Something, no one has ever tried analyzing.
Much has been written, and rightly so, about Pakistan's identity confusion, so I will not delve into that. I would rather be focused on genesis of Indian identity and how it is a matter still unresolved. Jawahar Lal Nehru, the architect of India as we know it today, based Indian identity on two distinct characteristics, past Indian glory dating back to Indus Valley civilization, and Indian Secularism. One of them was outright flawed, the other turning out to be impractical but both cannot hold ground unless the reality of Pakistan is negated.
India was never a nation. In history, it, at the best, has been a continent comprising hundreds of independent states from Kabul to Bengal and from Kashmir to Tamil Nadu. The term India for a nation state (as we know of it today) was coined by none other than the Brits and the purpose was to facilitate their administration of the region as one cohesive entity. Even more so, the talk of Indus Valley civilization and center of civilization is deceiving because neither Indus nor the two landmarks of the civilization (Mohenjo-daro and Harrapa) are in India any more (they are located in Pakistan). So the euphoria with Indian glory of centuries was ill-founded and misplaced. This, along with peoples' crazy obsession with religion (all over the world with all religions) is at the root of Hindutava and rise of Hindu nationalism.
Secularism might have had more chance at succeeding but it failed too. Part of the failure can be blamed on inherent conflict with obsession with historic Indian glory. But there are other factors too. First and foremost is, in the land known as India, people carved out Pakistan. Also, in Nehru's view, it was important for India to have a claim on Kashmir to demonstrate and strengthen its secular credentials. In retrospect, I guess the decision has caused more harm to Indian secularism than good. Then there is this obsession with religion/ communalism of people of subcontinent that did not let India emerge as a Secular state. I am inclined to believe that Sachar commission report exaggerated Muslim's plight. But the problem at heart of that exaggeration is that Muslim economy is not documented because Muslim's have created a world of their own in India comprising undocumented small businesses and gray economy segments and have dissociated themselves completely from the main stream Indian society and economy. Now whether Indian state or Hindu majority is responsible for this or alien attitude of Indian Muslims is responsible for this, both ways it is a sign of failure of Indian Secularism.
What has happened has happened. What can happen is even more troubling? Blaming Pakistan, Indian government has avoided the communal riots. However, it has raised India Pakistan tension to a point where even a war cannot be ruled out. Indian government cannot afford to look soft on Pakistan yet it has very limited options vis-a-vis Pakistan. For their own interest, International powers want Pakistan Army engaged on Western Frontier with Al Qaeeda. They will pressurize India not to escalate the tension to a point where Pakistan might need to pull troops from its Western Frontier. Also, if India ever decides to go to war, Pakistan might be destroyed, but because of its own internal vulnerabilities (communal and secessionist), India is likely to erupt like anything as well. Any limited, hit and run strike on targets inside Pakistan to sooth domestic audience will either lead to a regime change in Pakistan or will draw a strong tit-for-tat response or will lead to both. Either way, it will not be beneficial for India. Logic and rationale suggests war is unlikely, but usually in times like these, people act in desperation and for this, I cannot rule out the possibility of a war. Luckily, India and Pakistan have in President Zardari and Sonia Gandhi, two leaders at helm of affairs who, because of their position, can afford to be soft and calm. It is to be seen whether these two leaders succeed in preventing the spiral of war and conflict, both overt and covert.
These attacks more than anything are a time to retrospect for all parties. In my personal view, Pakistan is not involved in these attacks. However, this cannot be denied that for past few decades, Pakistani security establishment has been in bed with elements that have brought notoriety to name "Pakistan" and has led to serious security threats for Pakistan itself. No matter how shamelessly Hamid Mirs, Shahid Masuds, and Jamat-e-Islamis of the world deny this, this is a reality facing us. These attacks offer us an opportunity to rethink how to clear name "Pakistan" of these blots and go against these elements - for our own security and survival.
For India, it requires answering the question of how to deal with communal trouble. For too long, India has brushed the communal issue under carpet. From emergency of 70s to Babri mosque, from Mandal Commission to Amarnath Land controversy, from Shah Bano case to Malegaon, the issue has refused to disappear. It is a serious challenge to India's survival and viability and it is about time Indian's start accepting it as a reality and deal with it head-on. For years, a coherent political force of 13%-16% Muslims was barred to emerge in India (at a time when Indian politics is becoming more and more communal around Akalis and Dalits and Hindutva parties), for the main stream of Indian establishment feared it would revoke the scars of partition. What this controlling of know-all planners has led to is a militant response from Dawood Ibrahims and SIMI. Indian society needs to find a way to bring Muslims to the main stream and Indian Muslims need to respond positively to any such efforts. No matter what you do, you cannot eliminate a community of 160 million and neither can a minority of 160 million be in peace while being in constant confrontation with the main stream.
India has progressed leaps and bounds in last two decades. However, if I could point out one area, where we Pakistanis are ahead of Indians; that is our realization of our problems. In Pakistan, Army or national security is no more a holy grail. Neither do we let blame of events get passed to RAW and India without substantial proof. There is a wide spread social realization that left-out social elements like Balochs etc need to be brought to main stream. There is at least a realization that one way or the other the issue of religion's role in the state needs to be fixed (and this is what we are still fighting to get the right answer). I say this as a well wisher of India that if Indians need to succeed in combating challenges facing them, it will require challenging clichés - The cliché of national security and Sher Jawan's, The cliche of India is a perfect secular state, because Hindustan Times or NDTV says so. The worst thing Indians will do to them post Mumbai carnage is giving up on Malegaon probe. It is not about being Hindu or being Muslim, it is about understanding the motives of power of Military Industrial Complex that exists everywhere in the world. It will be naive to assume that Industry, where 15%-30% of our national budgets go, will be immune from vested interests.
And last but certainly not the least, I think the best thing some one can do for both the people of India and the people of Pakistan will be to dissociate them from each other. It is over-obsession with enmity as well as friendship between our two great nations that has made matters worst over the years. Our obsession with enmity has led us to three wars and a Jingoistic fervor. But it is our obsession with friendship that has been equally responsible for continuous deterioration of our relationship right from our creation.
Gandhi and Jinnah were probably only two leaders who could have made mends post partition and create a new equilibrium between the two neighboring states. After them, no one had the stature to sell this equilibrium to these nations. What this euphoria of friendship, coupled with euphoria of jingoism, has done is, it has made us obsessed about each other. Indians see the world through Pakistani prism and Pakistanis see the world through Indian prism. For this obsession, every time there has been talk of peace between the two countries, it has rallied the skeptics to an anti-peace stand even harder. Also, both sides have conflicting reasons to seek peace. In India, for majority peace is required to break the wall of partition (at least imaginatively). For Pakistan, peace means India accepting the truth in rational of partition. So when the matters get worse, the very advocates of peace like HTs and Jang Groups turn the most jingoist. We need to adopt an approach of dissociation which China tried for Taiwan for decades. Even historically, the best phase in Indo-Pak relations was Bhutto-Indira phase post-Simla in 70s when two countries were hardly engaged in any war or peace initiative. For years of contradictions and baggage, we are not ready to make peace right now. So the best approach will be to dissociate ourselves from each other and stop being obsessed with each other. In two to three generations, less obsessed generations might succeed in finding the peaceful equilibrium between them. Some times, it is better to leave something that cannot be done for some better time. But it seems the know-all god-almighty minds find it hard to fathom it. May we be in peace!
A quote by Benazir Bhutto referred by President Zardari during his address to Hindustan Times conference, only a couple of days before the Mumbai terrorist attacks. My challenge here will be not to be influenced by the Pakistani or the Indian in me while I analyze the recent developments and our options going forward.
I know what I am going to say here will not go well with a lot of my friends (on both sides). But I believe in the wake of present circumstances, it is time for some tough and honest talk.
First and foremost, if at all these attacks have any proven Pakistani connection; it is in the best interest of Pakistani to persecute the elements responsible for it. More so, because the past tells us that these elements have proven more dangerous for Pakistan than for anyone else. Also, if these attacks have any Pakistani connection, it is in best interest of all the parties to help Pakistan persecute these culprits. The best way to do it will be not to create hype around this persecution and not to turn it into a matter of Win or Loss.
The fact must also be worth mentioning that post Malegaon, it will be very difficult for Pakistani administration to persecute any Pakistani connection in these attacks.
Having said this, in my honest opinion and analysis, I find it hard to believe these attacks had a Pakistan connection. I say this not because I am Pakistani. Indian authorities and media started trumping Pakistan connection only when “Deccan Mujahidin” accepted the responsibility of these attacks. In my honest opinion, Indians had no option but to blame Pakistan loud to avoid a widespread communal riot between Hindus and Muslims.
For this reason, these attacks put to fore a very dangerous volatility in India - 60 years into independence, India still has not been able to resolve the communal conflict. In fact, it has gone worse over the years.
The problem with both India and Pakistan is their failure to resolve the issue of their national identity. It has been said time and time again about Pakistan that Pakistani's only national identity stems from being Anti-Indian. This is a bitter truth. But a more bitter truth is, India's national identity is nothing but being Anti-Pakistan. Something, no one has ever tried analyzing.
Much has been written, and rightly so, about Pakistan's identity confusion, so I will not delve into that. I would rather be focused on genesis of Indian identity and how it is a matter still unresolved. Jawahar Lal Nehru, the architect of India as we know it today, based Indian identity on two distinct characteristics, past Indian glory dating back to Indus Valley civilization, and Indian Secularism. One of them was outright flawed, the other turning out to be impractical but both cannot hold ground unless the reality of Pakistan is negated.
India was never a nation. In history, it, at the best, has been a continent comprising hundreds of independent states from Kabul to Bengal and from Kashmir to Tamil Nadu. The term India for a nation state (as we know of it today) was coined by none other than the Brits and the purpose was to facilitate their administration of the region as one cohesive entity. Even more so, the talk of Indus Valley civilization and center of civilization is deceiving because neither Indus nor the two landmarks of the civilization (Mohenjo-daro and Harrapa) are in India any more (they are located in Pakistan). So the euphoria with Indian glory of centuries was ill-founded and misplaced. This, along with peoples' crazy obsession with religion (all over the world with all religions) is at the root of Hindutava and rise of Hindu nationalism.
Secularism might have had more chance at succeeding but it failed too. Part of the failure can be blamed on inherent conflict with obsession with historic Indian glory. But there are other factors too. First and foremost is, in the land known as India, people carved out Pakistan. Also, in Nehru's view, it was important for India to have a claim on Kashmir to demonstrate and strengthen its secular credentials. In retrospect, I guess the decision has caused more harm to Indian secularism than good. Then there is this obsession with religion/ communalism of people of subcontinent that did not let India emerge as a Secular state. I am inclined to believe that Sachar commission report exaggerated Muslim's plight. But the problem at heart of that exaggeration is that Muslim economy is not documented because Muslim's have created a world of their own in India comprising undocumented small businesses and gray economy segments and have dissociated themselves completely from the main stream Indian society and economy. Now whether Indian state or Hindu majority is responsible for this or alien attitude of Indian Muslims is responsible for this, both ways it is a sign of failure of Indian Secularism.
What has happened has happened. What can happen is even more troubling? Blaming Pakistan, Indian government has avoided the communal riots. However, it has raised India Pakistan tension to a point where even a war cannot be ruled out. Indian government cannot afford to look soft on Pakistan yet it has very limited options vis-a-vis Pakistan. For their own interest, International powers want Pakistan Army engaged on Western Frontier with Al Qaeeda. They will pressurize India not to escalate the tension to a point where Pakistan might need to pull troops from its Western Frontier. Also, if India ever decides to go to war, Pakistan might be destroyed, but because of its own internal vulnerabilities (communal and secessionist), India is likely to erupt like anything as well. Any limited, hit and run strike on targets inside Pakistan to sooth domestic audience will either lead to a regime change in Pakistan or will draw a strong tit-for-tat response or will lead to both. Either way, it will not be beneficial for India. Logic and rationale suggests war is unlikely, but usually in times like these, people act in desperation and for this, I cannot rule out the possibility of a war. Luckily, India and Pakistan have in President Zardari and Sonia Gandhi, two leaders at helm of affairs who, because of their position, can afford to be soft and calm. It is to be seen whether these two leaders succeed in preventing the spiral of war and conflict, both overt and covert.
These attacks more than anything are a time to retrospect for all parties. In my personal view, Pakistan is not involved in these attacks. However, this cannot be denied that for past few decades, Pakistani security establishment has been in bed with elements that have brought notoriety to name "Pakistan" and has led to serious security threats for Pakistan itself. No matter how shamelessly Hamid Mirs, Shahid Masuds, and Jamat-e-Islamis of the world deny this, this is a reality facing us. These attacks offer us an opportunity to rethink how to clear name "Pakistan" of these blots and go against these elements - for our own security and survival.
For India, it requires answering the question of how to deal with communal trouble. For too long, India has brushed the communal issue under carpet. From emergency of 70s to Babri mosque, from Mandal Commission to Amarnath Land controversy, from Shah Bano case to Malegaon, the issue has refused to disappear. It is a serious challenge to India's survival and viability and it is about time Indian's start accepting it as a reality and deal with it head-on. For years, a coherent political force of 13%-16% Muslims was barred to emerge in India (at a time when Indian politics is becoming more and more communal around Akalis and Dalits and Hindutva parties), for the main stream of Indian establishment feared it would revoke the scars of partition. What this controlling of know-all planners has led to is a militant response from Dawood Ibrahims and SIMI. Indian society needs to find a way to bring Muslims to the main stream and Indian Muslims need to respond positively to any such efforts. No matter what you do, you cannot eliminate a community of 160 million and neither can a minority of 160 million be in peace while being in constant confrontation with the main stream.
India has progressed leaps and bounds in last two decades. However, if I could point out one area, where we Pakistanis are ahead of Indians; that is our realization of our problems. In Pakistan, Army or national security is no more a holy grail. Neither do we let blame of events get passed to RAW and India without substantial proof. There is a wide spread social realization that left-out social elements like Balochs etc need to be brought to main stream. There is at least a realization that one way or the other the issue of religion's role in the state needs to be fixed (and this is what we are still fighting to get the right answer). I say this as a well wisher of India that if Indians need to succeed in combating challenges facing them, it will require challenging clichés - The cliché of national security and Sher Jawan's, The cliche of India is a perfect secular state, because Hindustan Times or NDTV says so. The worst thing Indians will do to them post Mumbai carnage is giving up on Malegaon probe. It is not about being Hindu or being Muslim, it is about understanding the motives of power of Military Industrial Complex that exists everywhere in the world. It will be naive to assume that Industry, where 15%-30% of our national budgets go, will be immune from vested interests.
And last but certainly not the least, I think the best thing some one can do for both the people of India and the people of Pakistan will be to dissociate them from each other. It is over-obsession with enmity as well as friendship between our two great nations that has made matters worst over the years. Our obsession with enmity has led us to three wars and a Jingoistic fervor. But it is our obsession with friendship that has been equally responsible for continuous deterioration of our relationship right from our creation.
Gandhi and Jinnah were probably only two leaders who could have made mends post partition and create a new equilibrium between the two neighboring states. After them, no one had the stature to sell this equilibrium to these nations. What this euphoria of friendship, coupled with euphoria of jingoism, has done is, it has made us obsessed about each other. Indians see the world through Pakistani prism and Pakistanis see the world through Indian prism. For this obsession, every time there has been talk of peace between the two countries, it has rallied the skeptics to an anti-peace stand even harder. Also, both sides have conflicting reasons to seek peace. In India, for majority peace is required to break the wall of partition (at least imaginatively). For Pakistan, peace means India accepting the truth in rational of partition. So when the matters get worse, the very advocates of peace like HTs and Jang Groups turn the most jingoist. We need to adopt an approach of dissociation which China tried for Taiwan for decades. Even historically, the best phase in Indo-Pak relations was Bhutto-Indira phase post-Simla in 70s when two countries were hardly engaged in any war or peace initiative. For years of contradictions and baggage, we are not ready to make peace right now. So the best approach will be to dissociate ourselves from each other and stop being obsessed with each other. In two to three generations, less obsessed generations might succeed in finding the peaceful equilibrium between them. Some times, it is better to leave something that cannot be done for some better time. But it seems the know-all god-almighty minds find it hard to fathom it. May we be in peace!
Comments
Came across your blog via your facebook updates. What you say is thoughtful and reasoned, but is surely a minority opinion and a muted voice in the din of angry jingoism on either side.
That said, there is mounting evidence that terrorist outfits operating freely inside Pakistan were responsible.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122823715860872789.html
Crude Indian media reports seem to conflate independent irrational agents with the state, and the Pakistani government is to be commended for adopting a civil and measured tone despite this.
Internal conflicts within the Indian that body cannot be denied. It is indeed a miracle that a multicultural, plural, markedly skewed society that India is chugs along despite the simmering tensions and occasional domestic conflagrations (even the dastardly ones). Bureaucratic inertia may be responsible for this in a contorted way. However, local grievances, while resulting in domestic terror and disturbance, can rarely pool the resources need to mount a threat to the very existence of a nation or people. Virulent domestic threats soon die out in the vacuum of greater nonchalance. This is what history has shown not just in the last few decades, but in the centuries since city-states have begun to exist.
Fundamentalist ideology is a far far greater and graver threat because of the resources and willing disaffected it can marshal and utilize. The threat escalates with their reach into zones of strife around the globe. The threat offered is the same in variety and is surely fueled by the same emotional disenchantment that fuels India's domestic troubles, but the scale these threats assume is far higher. Pakistan's idea behind asymmetric warfare made sense in the earlier fundamentally senseless (for both sides) struggle for land. However, the malevolence unleashed in that period has just gone feral and seems to pose a threat to Pakistan too. To the neutral observer, there is no bigger threat than this and an attempt to overemphasize the magnitude and underscore the essential sameness of all disturbances are exercises in theory and logic.
The countries got partitioned a long time ago. And Gandhi and Jinnah are dead. Both agreed that they made a mistake.
But this does not change the fact that terror camps are alive in POK. I do not disagree that communal sentiments run high here. But there is a lot that people miss out on. During the gujarat earthquake,both sides came forward to lend blood, unmindful of religion. Our president, our cricket capt.,and the top 4 bollywood money makers have all been muslims.We love them unconditionally. I knw that in Ajmer,during Eid, the hindus gv safe passage to the muslims as the dargah is on their side and during diwali the muslims light lamps so hindus can go to the temple which is on the other side. As a person, i celebrate Eid every year.Love the food and during diwali my friends come down to burst crackers and dance the dandiya.:)
The common man doesnt gv a damn about hate or religion.But he can be made too.
The mumbai riots ended with people of both communities coming out and holding hands,protecting anyone who came to them and thats how the riots ended.Mumbai has never gone down that road again. Even though i knw the terrorists wanted a '92 situation,all they got was candle marches this time.
Speaking of terror,the international agencies have confirmed that the terrorists were from pakistan. I don want to say they were pakistanis. They are terorists. But at such a sensitive time,i think the paki media is being very insensitive in their msg to the pak masses, about the attack being home grown hindus and an fake act.Killing our best guys,def. wouldnt hv been part of the plan. Saying bad things about the indian army is nt the best stance.i don knw if the media is gvt.controlled, but they are nt helping the situation.So i hope the pak govt. does smthng. Makes a good decision. Even with the Pak war, the pak govt. denied it was their army, tothe extent of nt coming back for the bodies of the soldiers. it ws later that musharraf agreed that that army was involved.Pak needs good PR.They always seem to nt be able to control their internal situation. Bhutto's death, bombings, madrassas..something needs to give. neways i got to study, hv exams xmg up....ciao.. cya around. gnite!