[From: DAWN, Feb 20, 1999]
Imagine...
By Irfan Husain
FOR just a little while, imagine a scenario in which relations between
India and Pakistan were perfectly normal; that there was no Kashmir
problem; and both countries therefore did not have to pay for the
bloated defence establishments that currently hobble the two economies.
In this utopian subcontinent, things would be very different than they
are today. Quite apart from the fact that massive amounts would be
available for building the physical and social infrastructure, the
difference in attitudes would be even more marked. For instance,
politicians on both sides would no longer have each other to use as
scapegoats for everything that was wrong in the two countries, and would
hence have to focus on the hard task of delivering good governance
instead of simply mouthing jingoistic slogans.
Pakistan, in particular, would be a very different country. Without the
threat of armed conflict with our giant neighbour, the army would not
have acquired the massive influence it wields today. Indeed, we would
probably not have experienced the three crippling bouts of martial law
that stunted and deformed Pakistan's political development. Taking this
exercise in wishful thinking a step further, it can be argued that in a
non-militarized Pakistan, East Pakistanis would not have felt so
alienated and thus might have stayed on in the federation, sparing
themselves the bloodbath of the 1971 civil war that resulted in the
birth of Bangladesh.
And without Zia's attempts to seek legitimacy through his brand of
Islamization, the genie of sectarianism might still be in the bottle
instead of spreading murder and mayhem across the land. Pakistan may
have been a more forward looking and sane place instead of the madhouse
it has become. India, too, might not have witnessed the upsurge of rabid
Hindu nationalism that is eroding its secular foundations. Without the
hysteria and paranoia that surround relations between the two countries,
parties like the BJP and Shiv Sena may not have found the support that
they have been getting in recent years.
Pleasant though this dream is, it is time for a reality check. The last
52 years have seen a steady escalation of tension between the two
neighbours, punctuated by three wars. A mindless hatred now colours the
discourse between them, and powerful forces on both sides have a vested
interest in preventing normalization of relations.
The demonstrations planned by the Jamaat-i-Islami to protest against the
Indian PM's visit indicate the level of insanity that now governs
relations between India and Pakistan. This knee-jerk reaction is not
unlike Shiv Sena activists digging up a cricket pitch to prevent a
cricket match between the two national teams.
If Nawaz Sharif has been consistent in anything, it is his desire to
improve ties with India. Unfortunately, he has been frustrated by the
fact that he has been forced to use the same old cliche-ridden foreign
office briefs that have got us nowhere in the last five decades. In
addition, he has the defence establishment breathing down his neck.
Consequently, whenever he has talked about improving relations with
India, he has been obliged to repeat the self-determination mantra, and
repeat yet again the UN Security Council resolutions.
For any progress to be made in Indo-Pak relations, we will have to
delink Kashmir from the other elements that make up relations between
sovereign states. Trade, travel and tourism must be opened up; sports
and cultural exchanges need to be promoted; and a free flow of
information, books and newspapers should be encouraged. These measures
will reduce tension and make it easier to deal with the intractable
Kashmir issue after a period of, say, five years. After all, we have
been living with the present status quo for five decades; another five
years won't make much difference. Meanwhile, we can get on with life.
After all, it is not India that is being penalized by our "Kashmir
first" stance: our confrontationist policies are costing us much more.
Pakistanis need to wake up to the fact that in real life, possession is
nine-tenths of the law. Irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the
unending debate over Kashmir, we have to face the reality of Indian
occupation of a large part of the state while we occupy another. This
situation is not about to change, so instead of keeping up the
plebiscite drumbeat the world is deaf to, we might as well get on with
things rather than rant on about the injustice of history and geography.
And while we keep trotting out the well-worn UN resolutions calling for
a plebiscite to determine the will of the Kashmiri people, we
conveniently forget that the same resolutions called for a complete
withdrawal of Pakistani forces from all parts of the state as a
pre-condition to the vote. We never fulfilled this condition, thus
giving the Indians an excuse to back out of their commitment.
Subsequently, India made the contested state a part of the Union, thus
making the UN resolutions null and void in their books.Now we can - as
we have been doing these last fifty years - continue debating the legal
niceties of the whole question until the cows come home. The Indians are
not going to hand us their bit of Kashmir on a platter, and we have
neither the military might nor the international support needed to
change the status quo in our favour. Sooner or later, there will be an
agreement dividing the state along the present Line of Control. Reaching
this understanding sooner rather than later will save us a lot of money
and a lot of frustration.
Obviously, there will be considerable resistance from the large number
of ostriches who inhabit this country. But the Nawaz Sharif government
with its huge parliamentary majority can push the deal through. So when
the two prime ministers meet over this weekend, they would be well
advised to conduct the discussions without the briefs their respective
defence and foreign affairs ministries have prepared for them. If they
really wish to break out of the rigidly sterile positions the two
countries have adhered to for decades and solve problems rather than
just repeat hackneyed cliches, they should be prepared to break fresh
ground and take risks.
Anything less will be more of the same.
© DAWN Group of Newspapers, 1999
________________________________
(2)