The reason for India to want a rapprochement with Pakistan, and vice versa, has nothing to do with feelings of friendship or goodwill. It has to do with survival
Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi says Pakistan is “compiling hard evidence of India’s involvement” in terrorist attacks on Pakistan’s public and its armed forces. If he and the Interior Minister are correct, then we must conclude that the Indians are psychotics possessed with a death wish or, perhaps, plain stupid. While India’s assistance for Baloch insurgents could conceivably make strategic sense, helping the jihadists simply does not.
As Pakistan staggers from one bombing to the other, some Indians must be secretly pleased. Indeed, there are occasional verbalisations: Is this not sweet revenge for the horrors of Mumbai perpetrated by the Lashkar-e-Taiba? Shouldn’t India feel satisfied as Pakistan reels under the stinging poison of its domestically reared snakes?
But most Indians are probably less than enthusiastic in stoking the fires across the border. In fact, the majority would like to forget that Pakistan exists. With a 6 per cent growth rate, booming hi-tech exports, and expectations of a semi-superpower status, they feel India has no need to engage a struggling Pakistan with its endless litany of problems.
Of course, some would like to hurt Pakistan. Extremists in India ask: shouldn’t one increase the pain of a country -- with which India has fought three bloody wars -- by aiding its enemies? Perhaps do another Bangladesh on Pakistan some day?
These fringe elements, fortunately, are inconsequential today. Rational self-interest demands that India not aid jihadists. Imagine the consequences if the Central authority in Pakistan disappears or is sharply weakened. Splintered into a hundred jihadist Lashkars, each with its own agenda and tactics, Pakistan’s territory would become India’s eternal nightmare. When Mumbai-II occurs -- as it surely would in such circumstances -- India’s options in dealing with a nuclear Pakistan would be severely limited.
The Indian Army would be powerless. As the Americans have discovered at great cost, the mightiest war machines on earth cannot prevent holy warriors from crossing borders. Internal collaborators, recruited from a domestic Muslim population that feels itself alienated from Hindu-India, would connive with the jihadists. Subsequently, as the Indian forces retaliate against Muslims -- innocent and otherwise -- the action-reaction cycle would rip the country apart.
So, how can India protect itself from invaders across its western border and grave injury? Just as importantly, how can we in Pakistan assure that the fight against fanatics is not lost?
Let me make an apparently outrageous proposition: in the coming years, India’s best protection is likely to come from its traditional enemy, the Pakistan Army. Therefore, India ought to help now, not fight against it.
This may sound preposterous. After all, the two countries have fought three-and-a-half wars over six decades. During periods of excessive tension, they have growled at each other while meaningfully pointing towards their respective nuclear arsenals. Most recently, after heightened tensions following the Mumbai massacre, Pakistani troops were moved out of North West Frontier Province towards the eastern border. Baitullah Mehsud’s offer to jointly fight India was welcomed by the Pakistan Army.
And yet, the imperative of mutual survival makes a common defence inevitable. Given the rapidly rising threat within Pakistan, the day for joint action may not be very far away.
Today Pakistan is bearing the brunt. Its people, government and armed forces are under unrelenting attack. South Waziristan, a war of necessity rather than of choice, will certainly not be the last one. A victory there will not end terrorism, although a stalemate will embolden the jihadists in south Punjab, including the Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Jaish-e-Muhammed. The cancer of religious militancy has spread across Pakistan, and it will take decades to defeat.
This militancy does not exist merely because America occupies Afghanistan. A U.S. withdrawal, while welcome, will not end Pakistan’s problems. As an ideological movement, the jihadists want to transform society as part of their wider agenda. They ride on the backs of their partners, the mainstream religious political parties like the Jamat-e-Islami and the Jamiat-e-Ulema-Pakistan. None of these has condemned the suicide bombings in Pakistani universities, schools, markets, mosques, and police and army facilities.
Pakistan’s political leadership and army must not muddy the waters, especially now that public sanction has finally been obtained for fighting extremism in Swat and Waziristan. Self-deception weakens, and enormously increases vulnerability. Wars can only be won if nations have a clear rallying slogan. Therefore, the battle against religious extremism will require identifying it -- by name -- as the enemy.
India should derive no satisfaction from Pakistan’s predicament. Although religious extremists see ordinary Muslims as munafiqs (hypocrites) -- and therefore free to be blown up in bazaars and mosques -- they hate Hindus even more. In their calculus, hurting India would buy even more tickets for heaven than hurting Pakistan. They dream of ripping apart both societies or starting a war -- preferably nuclear -- between Pakistan and India.
A common threat needs a common defence. But this is difficult unless the Pakistan-India conflict is reduced in intensity. In fact, the extremist groups that threaten both countries today are an unintended consequence of Pakistan’s frustrations at Indian obduracy in Kashmir.
To create a future working alliance with Pakistan, and in deference to basic democratic principles, India must therefore be seen as genuinely working towards some kind of resolution of the Kashmir issue. Over the past two decades, India has been morally isolated from Kashmiri Muslims and continues to incur the very considerable costs of an occupying power in the Valley. Indian soldiers continue to needlessly die — and oppress and kill Kashmiri innocents.
It is time for India to fuzz the Line of Control, make it highly permeable, and demilitarise it up to some mutually negotiated depth on both sides. Without peace in Kashmir the forces of cross-border jihad, and its hate-filled holy warriors, will continue to receive unnecessary succour.
India also needs to allay Pakistan’s fears on Balochistan. Although Pakistan’s current federal structure is the cause of the problem -- a fact which the government is now finally addressing through the newly announced Balochistan package -- it is possible that India is aiding some insurgent groups. Statements have been made in India that Balochistan provides New Delhi with a handle to exert pressure on Pakistan. This is unacceptable.
While there is no magic wand, confidence-building measures (CBMs) continue to be important for managing the Pakistan-India conflict and bringing down the decibel level of mutual rhetoric. To be sure, CBMs can be easily disparaged as palliatives that do not address the underlying causes of a conflict. Nevertheless, looking at those initiated over the years shows that they have held up even in adverse circumstances. More are needed.
The reason for India to want a rapprochement with Pakistan, and vice versa, has nothing to do with feelings of friendship or goodwill. It has only to do with survival. For us in Pakistan, this is even more critical.
(The writer teaches Physics at Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad. This article will appear in Pakistan’s Dawn newspaper on Sunday.)
Keywords: Pakistan Foreign Minister, Shah Mehmood Qureshi, involvement, terrorist attacks, CBMs, Line of Control, LeT, JuD, Balochistan
Was Kargil intrusion undertaken by LeT or the so called non-state actors? Where is the line between Jehadis against whom you want India to cooperate and the people who control and rule Pakistan? Where lies the difference between their objectives? Please show me that.
The ultimate and only lasting solution in my opinion is for a 'merger' between divided parts back into a single united India as it was before. Nothing else will work. Pointless nuclear threats and childlike squabbling over Kashmir and LoC is moot. East and West Germany could merge easily, why not South Asia? More importantly, the issue is not just regional security simply for the sake of existence, coexistence, or even common defense. The truly serious case is for long-term regional integrity and national security.
We should build our society and defence as we have been doing for the last 60 years. Truth is with us. In our country Muslims and all other communities are as safe. There is no need for anyone to worry about Muslims in India. Our Constitution takes care of every citizen. As we are becoming stronger economically, our Constitution will be implemented more effectively for the welfare of all Indians.
India should keep talking with Pakistan. Keep meeting face to face. Create an environment of comfort and friendliness. Keep sharing terrorist related intelligence with them. Keep asking them what they are doing about it. Fortify homeland security so that another terrorist attack does not happen and derail this process. Develop joint border patrolling mechanism. Make all borders mainly J&K free to cross and take other things of mutual interests forward from there. Today South Asia has no identity. It is time we created one.
Excellent article sir, Very well written.
A completely new and out of box idea which must be welcomed but how far it can be put into practice is a serious question, furthermore keeping in mind that indo-pak relation doesn't involve only these two countries but china and afghanistan also. but hope for the best.
The article leaves one wondering how very indifferent the "moderate" and an "extremist" positions in Pakistan vis-a-vis Kashmir is.The "moderates" would like to settle for the prize of Kashmir extracted through "negotiations" while warning of the impending catastrophe in cases of the "extremist" takeover; whereas the "extremists" make no bones about the fact that Kashmir is but a milestone in what would be the ultimate dismemberment of India.
One just hopes that the "moderates" in Pakistan are made more poignantly aware of the hopelessness of this entire charade.
Brilliant article. A rare masterpiece
Time has come that traditional enemies -India,Pakistan- can put an end to their animosity. Continued one-upmanship and endless blame games will only keep them apart and it is costing both the countries heavily in terms of increasing defense spending and human lives. There is always room to change and the leaders of both the nations must recognize this opportunity and/or challenge. It is also the choice of the religious fanatics across the boarders to decide what is their long-term choice.
A very good analysis of the Indo-Pak situation. The feelings of the local people should be respected.
A mucn require message conveyed for the benefit of the people of both countries. May this be published in all local newspapers in all languages.
This is frm the heart of a true pakistani...A very well written article.
Very interesting and introspective.I wish all the indian and pakistai politician read this article.
Very nicely laid out points in the article above, but I can't help but feel that it does not go far enough. To truly help Pakistan, India would have to send help to Afghanistan where the heart of the problem lies. Tackling that root problem would be the best common defense policy for both India and Pakistan. I saw a letter addressed to the President of the US at www.lettertothepres.us that nicely laid out this course of action.
it is good but wonder whether money minded politicians of both countries will agree, to this sensible suggestion.
The Opinion presents one of the most sensible approach to root out this age-old crisis in South Asia, which in itself has a potential to snuff out a fifth of human population from the face of the earth. However an implementation on such a scale remains fairly elusive in current environment. There is a subtle discontent and mistrust that flows into the veins of the populace on both sides of the border. Also, it cannot be outrightly ignored that this Indo-Pak standoff plays out to a strategic benefit to some of our other deemed-to-be super power neighbors. But if history is anything to go by, many Berlin walls across the world have been razed down by the sheer determination on part of the masses, who are the ultimate victims in such crisis.
No doubt a very good article and very eloquently written. I agree that both India and Pakistan must fight a common enemy - the jihadists. But author seems biased, naturally, towards Pakistan. If the author's accusation about India's involvement in Balochistan is true, then India should stop meddling with Pakistan's internal affairs. Is it solely up to India to stop supporting separatists in Balochistan and to solve Kashmir? All right. India is the hegemon here and they should take the lead. But where is Pakistan's responsibility here? Shouldn't their leaders stop making statements like "Kashmir is in our blood..."? A wise man once said that if Pakistan makes peace with India then that would make the Pakistani army redundant (Who is the enemy to fight?). India has offered numerous olive branches in the past - Vajpayee's visit, several Track-II diplomacy efforts. But Pakistan has never responded in kind. A prosperous Pakistan is good for Pakistanis and Indians, and it will defeat the jihadists. It is time both India and Pakistan's leaders (and the Pakistani military) LEAD Pakistan to prosperity and stop the tit-for-tat rhetoric.
Mr Pervez Hoodbhoy, means well for Indo-Pak ties. But all his opinions amount to nothing in face of wilful deceit and dishonesty that characterizes Pak policy towards India, as planned and executed by Pak army and ISI.
We should be honest in our appraisal of Pak and able to differentiate between intentions of individuals and reality of Pak policy and actions.
Brave move from Prof., but one aspect which was totally missing and should be present in the article is the role of China in Pakistan and role of Pakistan in Afghanistan. Along with that what Pakistan needs more than any thing is a strict and same policy towards insurgents in each and every corner of the holy land(i.e. Pakistan). Because it is sure that the militants helping the army in fighting with the Mehsud's group and Taliban will not be doing this as a part of their social service agenda. Tomorrow they might take the position of today's Taliban. Same thing should be implied for those militants also who are active in Jammu & Kashmir. That will really be helpful in full filling the article's dream of peaceful border and will also help in boosting the relationship between both armies which are already well-known to each other.
I do agree to the fact that this distrust between Pakistan and India can very will be(and is being)exploited by other countries; but, the CBMs can work only when we are sure that Pakistan is doing it's bit.
If we talk about good things one day and hear about cases like those of Headly and Rana, the CBMs are of no use..
Lastly, we all know one thing that the citizens of both the countries are fed up of this long going war and need things to be settled once and for all, and that too keeping in mind the mutual benefit.
Very sensible analysis. Please take note.
Nicely penned opinion on the very truth that very few on the either side of the border realize. A failed state in Pakistan is going to eventually affect India. True that like every single Indian I was hurt from the 26/11 attacks that were orchestrated from Pakistan, but it was clearly an attempt to derail the CBM's and goodwill that was being developed. Maybe, before we even start solving the Kashmir issue we should mature up to a level where we can respect each others existence.
Even so called moderate, rational appearing speeches by Pakistanis always end up demanding that India "do more" in Kashmir. They would like to ignore the fact that their intelligence agencies and their army actively recruits and tarins terrorists whose only goal is to kill as many Indians and Americans. This is a cancer. Until they wake up to this fact, their country will continue to depend on aid from the US or Saudi Arabia. And they will continue in this delusional state of belief that they are "good people" getting a bad deal. It is not a coincidence that Pakistan has been ruled for decades by dictators while India has had democracy for 60 years.
I applaud "The Hindu" for publishing this article. I hope it will appeal to many English newspaper reading population both in India and Pakistan. The progress in the standard of living in both countries has been hurt enormously by the rivalries and proxy wars. Instaed of giving importance to territorial claims,the quality of life of the people living in those territories should have been given priorities. Both should be blamed for not doing enough on this.If India has been part of the Af-Pak strategy, it would have eliminated the fears of Pakistan on India's involvement in Afghanistahn. And a slow but steady negotiations on Kashmir would have allayed the tensions in the eastern front. As long as the hawks on both sides of the border intend to hurt the other, the Jihadhis and the Talibans will grow in strength and number. It is not good for the subcontinent and in particular for India.
I have not read a more sensible, reasonable and intelligent piece of writing than this on Indo-Pakistan affairs. Why not the leaders realise this. The public usually follow leaders. If the leaders shout hatred, the public also hate. Instead, if the leaders speak sensibly, logically as the author has done, they will follow too.
The silent majority on both sides are of the writers opinion. But they continue to remain silent. It is time they woke up.
Please Email the Editor