Short-term justifiable pique at wanton and repeated terror attacks on our soil should not blind us to what is at stake here. India must legitimise and deal with those in Pakistan who seek cooperation
New Year 2016 for India has been threatened already by thefidayeen attack at Pathankot air base, just 40km from the border with Pakistan. And this, predictably, and true to past form, just days after Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s impromptu goodwill visit to lahore on December 25, 2015.
Not only was the terrorist intention to destroy parked aircraft in the technical area of the massive 1,600 acre forward base thwarted, but the six intruding fidayeen from Bhawalpur were all killed. Their offensive mission was an utter failure.They were able to kill seven brave Indian soldiers, but at random. That there were Indian facilitators on our side of the border is a much more worrying thought.
However, if the point of the attack on the part of the alleged Jaish-e-Mohammed planners was to destabilise the fresh attempt to resolve differences between India and Pakistan — it remains to be seen if the Indian Government goes ahead with Foreign Secretary-level talks scheduled for January 15. All cold logic seems to suggest that the India-Pakistan talks should go on, despite this atrocity and others expected in future. To let the rag-tag and fanatical fidayeen set the diplomatic agenda between the two neighbours will be a mistake.
The endeavour, on both sides, should be to reduce the space in which those who would perpetuate enmity between our two nations can manoeuvre. This can come about in incremental stages. It could begin with creating vested interests on both sides of the border in favour of increased trade and commerce, cultural exchanges, and bilateral cooperation to the extent possible in advancing the affairs of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation.
Though the medium-term goal should undoubtedly be to settle the Kashmir dispute once and for all. This, probably by turning the line of Control into a fait accompli border by tacit understanding, and allowing free, if supervised, movement of people and goods between Jammu & Kashmir and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.
The danger at this point, which the Modi Government seems to have grasped after several false starts, is that there are those in Pakistan who want peace, just as there are people in India who also want it. At the same time, both countries have those who want the hostile atmosphere to perpetuate.
In India, the anti-talks sections are mainly political entities, some in the Opposition, and others in the ruling National Democratic Alliance. While in Pakistan, it is supposed that they include the powerful Pakistan Armed Forces, its accomplished intelligence agency, the ISI, and, of course, the many terrorist organisations and loose cannon ‘non-state actors’.
The developed world, led by the US, is keen that the two nuclear powers reduce tensions at the earliest, and find common ground to do so. It has long been trying to facilitate dialogue between the two countries from behind the scenes, and has exerted quite a bit of subtle diplomatic pressure to this end.
The other worthwhile dividend, not only for India and the West, but other vulnerable peoples elsewhere with large Muslim populations, is to refuse the extremists a chance to takeover the centre- stage. Pakistan’s terrorists not only attack and foment jihad against India, Afghanistan, China, and the West, but they also attack the Pakistani establishment from time to time. They constantly attempt to radicalise the polity to adopt fundamentalist Islamic tents favoured by the harsh Salafi/Wahhabi sects from Saudi Arabia. Another unpleasant aspect, apart from their acute bloodthirstiness, is that they are often deeply hostile to women and their emancipation.
All this red hot fanaticism, in a country armed with nuclear weapons is very dangerous for the world at large. The extremists will not listen to anyone if they get hold of nuclear weapons, and have no apparent fear of mutual annihilation.
For India, not to talk to the saner political voices from Pakistan, will be a huge and historical mistake. Short-term justifiable pique at wanton and repeated attacks of terrorism on our soil should not blind us to what is at stake here. We cannot afford to tar the whole of Pakistan and its people with the terrorist brush. This would be playing into the very hands we should seek to avoid. Therefore, India must not assume that the Pakistani state is necessarily in league with the jihadis anymore. This, even though we have been proved wrong time and again in the past.
The time may have come at last when we are looking at a post-binary scenario. The Pakistani reality now contains too many spokes of the wheel of power aimed at its centre. This time Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif seems to be reaching out with the approval of the Pakistan Army top brass. A recent solo visit to America by Pakistan Army chief Raheel Sharif seems to also suggest this, because it just preceded the India-Pakistan thaw. The formidable ISI is also a creature of the Pakistani state and Army, and has no choice but to fall in line if the policy changes. The fact that the loC and other border areas have been silent and free of any cross-border firing since the Modi-Sharif meetings in Ufa and Paris, is perhaps indicative of change.
Having said this, there may still be rogue elements at play, particularly amongst those recently retired, and now in cahoots with terrorist outfits such as the Jaish-e-Mohammed and the lashkar-e-Tayyeba. Most fidayeen are very well armed, and reasonably well trained by ex-Army trainers. But their deadliest feature is their willingness to die for the cause in multiple suicide missions. This degree of commitment is largely absent in the regular Pakistan Army, that has not generally come off better in encounters with the Indian Army.
But terrorism internationally is a blood-soaked business, reverberating with fanatical ideology in the minds of ill-educated and poverty-stricken youngsters, all dreaming of glory and death. Prime Ministers Modi and Sharif are standing once again at the crossroads, with a chance of fostering a lasting peace between the two countries.
However, nobody in his right mind can suggest that it won’t be a rocky road, replete with betrayals and set-backs. But geographical neighbours, particularly nuclear weaponised ones, have no choice but to come to an understanding. Israel, which has nuclear weapons, surrounded as it is by hostile Arab neighbours, lives with an uneasy truce, despite its disciplinary forays outside its borders, even though none of its neighbours are, as yet, nuclear powers. India’s choice is to legitimise and deal with those in Pakistan who will make peace and seek cooperation, rather than have to confront those who seek to destroy us, even if it means certain obliteration in return.