WAR AND PEACE
by Anand Patwardhan [ 26 June 99]
Undeclared war rages on the Indo-Pak border and threatens to expand into
full fledged declared war with the ever-present danger of nuclear
holocaust. But even if the unthinkable is averted and the war is contained
>from here on, untold damage has been already done to the peace process.
What do we, on both sides of the man-made divide, who count ourselves
amongst a vocal minority of peace advocates, do at this juncture, when all
around is sound and fury? How do we begin to reach out to that silent
majority on both sides that perhaps guesses in its heart of hearts that
only peace between neighbours can bring economic justice and political
freedom?
Today in both countries, the very forces that caused the poor to become
poorer by selling land, air, water and sovereignty, have draped their
ugliness in the flag. In India, the Bofors gun, hitherto the symbol of
Congress corruption is now a weapon of pride. And the BJP whose hardline
was totally discredited has emerged as a direct beneficiary of the war. In
Pakistan a similar process of empowering hatred and rewarding corruption is
taking place.
In this atmosphere who can dare come out on the street and say "Stop this
war now!" or "Begin unconditional dialogue for peace" when the media daily
flashes a heartrending story of a brave jawan's family that vows upon his
body to send every available son to the front as soon as he comes of age?
No TV channel or newspaper, private or public can afford to steer clear of
the path of patriotic fervour. On the airwaves as the death toll rises Lata
Mangeshkar's "E mere watan ke logon, jara aankh me bhar lo paani" replaces
even the national anthem as the song of choice. Politicians rush to be
photographed by the side of the bereaved, businessmen rush to publicly
declare how much they are donating for the war effort and multi-national
corporations rush to advertise their products in tricolour or in green
depending on their geography. Even the stock market rises to the occasion
demonstrating that for tumescence, confidence is more important than health.
Hundreds of young lives have been lost on the icy slopes of Kargil and the
suffering caused to their families will last long after public memory
fades. But if there is one victim that remains completely unmourned it is
the peace process itself.
Five years before Vajpayee set out to Lahore on his goodwill bus journey to
meet Nawaz Sharif, peace activists from India and Pakistan had been
crossing the border annually to hold large peace conventions, exchange
ideas, literature, films, and to make joint recommendations to their
respective governments to restore trade, travel, and communications between
the two countries, to eschew the nuclear path and make phased, parallel
cuts in defense expenditure and to resolve core issues, including Kashmir,
across the table rather than await another war.
All those who made these trips across the border were struck by the
overwhelming desire for peace that ordinary people in both countries
spontaneously demonstrated. When Pakistanis visited India they were struck
by the outpouring of love and affection that Indians showered on them and
likewise it was when we visited Pakistan, all this in marked contrast to
the hate politics that prevailed amongst certain political groups in both
countries and the cautious, even suspicious tone adopted by sections of the
media.
Many have argued that Vajpayee's visit to Pakistan and the fact that Nawaz
Sharif met him there with open arms was not an event that either of them
initiated out of personal conviction but an event that took place because
in the wake of the nuclear misadventures of May 98, a groundswell of public
opinion already felt that peace was no longer a luxury but a necessity.
What we failed to see was that peace in the hands of politicians is not a
peace that can be relied upon. Vajpayee and Sharif are both products of
hate politics and cannot themselves be the antidote of the very poison that
brought them to power. Sadly, that poison is no longer the monopoly even of
the parties that first began to use it. Other parties learned the power of
poison (a Sonia Gandhi poster vows to make mincemeat of any intruder in
Kargil) and the war hastened its spread into the brains of the urban middle
class and elite. The enemy has become an undifferentiated target of hate.
Afghan mercenary, ISI agent, Kashmiri militant, Pakistani soldier, all are
equal, all are a sub-species deserving of extermination. As the poison
makes its way further, soon the undifferentiated target will include all
Pakistanis and all Indian Muslims who do not take a public and publicized
patriotic stand and it will eventually include all those, Muslims and
non-Muslims who do not bay for the blood of the enemy.
Where then lies the hope for peace and sanity? Clichéd though this may
sound, it undeniably lies in the very areas where our modern economy and
its hand-maiden politics of hate have not fully penetrated, in our villages.
Some weeks before Kargil hit the headlines, on May 11 (the day of India's
nuclear test) a peace march began from the village of Khetolai , near the
nuclear test site. It is winding its way slowly through the countryside of
Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh to conclude three months and 1500 kms later on
August 6 (the day in 1945 when the USA dropped its atomic bomb on
Hiroshima) in Sarnath where the Buddha once spread his message of peace and
compassion. Having spent a few days with the marchers, I know from our
interactions with local communities that humanity is alive and well though
this is a glimpse that is rarely visible anymore in the urban jungle.
Those who have read this piece so far will doubtless be concerned why the
rights and wrongs of Kargil and Kashmir are not its primary subject. For
the record I will say that the violation of the LOC by Pakistani or
Pakistan supported intruders was both morally and politically wrong. The
torture of soldiers and combatants is reprehensible. The loss of young
lives on the border is tragic. I will also say that I believe that a long
term just and viable peace can be won in Kashmir and for that matter
anywhere in the world, including Kosovo and Iraq, through democratic rather
than military means. The battle of Kargil may end in diplomatic and
military victory. But the war will be lost if we continue to believe that
winning territory through the force of arms is more important than winning
hearts and minds through the force of reason.