Two steps backward, no step forward

Head of PPP Media Cell

Indian Interior Minister Rajanath’s bluster of dividing Pakistan into ten parts was a sickening statement reflecting Indian leadership’s bankruptcy that was totally devoid of even lower level of sense of proportion and civility. Its mindset, not prone to decency and diplomatic norms, was asserting nonsense rather than common sense. Earlier, its detestable treatment meted out to the Pakistani delegation during the “Heart of Asia Conference” spoke volumes of their narrow-mindedness and utter disregards to the accepted norms of diplomacy and hospitality.

Pro India-Pakistan friendship lobbies in this country were discouraged and terribly frustrated over Modi government’s hostile attitude towards Pakistan during the deliberations of the Conference in India. It may be mentioned here that in Pakistan there was almost consensus to have good neighbourly relations with India based on mutual respect and interests. But, ironically, the Indian government had been persistently endeavouring of treading on the trajectory of two steps backward and no step forward.

On the contrary, Pakistan decided to participate in the Heart of Asia Conference despite India’s unbecoming role in pressurising the other regional countries not to participate in the Saarac summit scheduled to be held in Islamabad in the month of November this year. No-hold-barred when India treated Pakistani delegation during the Conference. However, the Pakistani delegation exercised remarkable restraint not to vitiate the atmosphere of the conference. It was good thinking in the face of Indian maltreatment that was against the norms that host country was required to observe by extending hospitality to the visiting delegates. Pakistan’s unflappable and composed response to Indian bellicosity was commendable. It was easier for Pakistani delegates to create an untoward scene during the conference if it had boycotted the deliberations over the Pakistan’s bashing by India and Afghanistan at the forum that was meant for finding ways and means for seeking out solution of Afghanistan imbroglio. Targeting Pakistan was totally uncalled for because it had nothing to do with the agenda of the conference. 

Co-Chairman of PPP Asif Ali Zardari strongly criticised the claim of the Indian interior minister as totally hollow with caveat that Pakistan was quite capable of defending its territorial integrity in absolute terms, and enemy’s underestimation of Pakistan would cost it the price the imagining of which would send shivers down the spine. No enemy could cast an evil eye on Pakistan in the face of full-spectrum defence capability of the country. The Indian government may not be misled behind the façade of its hegemonic designs and should desist from hurling threats to the neighbouring countries, especially Pakistan. Display of soft power might accrue propitious results than the strong arms tactics.

The ground reality on the horizon of the sub-continent is that India and Pakistan have no other option but to learn to co-exist. Peaceful co-existence will surely pave the way for the realisation of the aspirations of the people of the two countries, while open-ended confrontation will nudge them to the edge of the abyss. Both the countries might have learnt the indispensability of peaceful co-existence as the only way forward much earlier but, sadly, their obstinacy had been making them to keep on treading on the beaten tracks of open-ended acrimony.

The blighted people of the two countries were the victims because poverty, illiteracy, disease and acute lack of basic facilities were a dream that did not come true even after the seven decades of independence. The appalling ratio of the people living below the poverty line in the countries failed to nudge their thick-skin leadership to take stock of the miseries of their people and strive for extricating them from the vicious cycle. It seemed that deprivation, hopelessness and alienation was their fate written in stone. The successive leaderships’ relentless pursuit based on hare-brained policies had brought cascade of miseries for the people since independence. The hopes of better days had faded in view of the two countries’ relentless and futile pursuit fueled by nationalistic and religious sentiments.

Diplomacy should have taken the central stage to normalise relations between the two countries especially after their nuclearisation because this stymied the option of solving the mutual disputes through the military might. Military superiority based on conventional weapons became redundant after 1998. War was no more a viable option. This warranted diplomacy to take the full charge of bringing the two nuclear powers to do the business on the table rather than in the war zone with the spirit of providing level playing field to each other.

Nuclear weapons were produced to serve as deterrence because the narrative of ‘Mutual Assured destruction’ prohibited their actual use. The same applied to Pakistan and India those had sufficient number of war heads to wreak havoc of unimaginative proportion on each other. The redeeming feature of this development was it restored balance of power and peace in the region on the sustainable basis. Nuclearisation of Pakistan had served the purpose of enduring peace in South-Asia that would have been a pipe dream if Pakistan had not attained the nuclear power status which was conceived and matured by Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. The defence of the country became invincible with the induction of state of the art missile technology by Shaheed Benazir Bhutto.

It may be pertinent to mention here that both countries are nuclear power with second strike capabilities sufficient to annihilate each other in absolute terms. No one may be left behind to mourn and burry/cremate millions who may perish in the first nuclear strike. There is absolutely no possibility of emerging the victor or victors out of the mushroom clouds. Those who may survive the war will beg for death to extricate them from the unbearable agony of life in the aftermath of nuclear holocaust.

Total destruction may, God forbid, cut across the sub-continent in case of nuclear conflict turning it into a heap of radioactive waste bringing slow and ultimate denouement for all the living species with no hope of their recantation. But, that doomsday was most unlikely because the leadership of the two countries, the people including the international community is cognizant of the scale of devastation of the nuclear kamikaze. Therefore, the possibility of nuclear conflict between the two countries is almost improbability. The international community may play an effective pre-emptive role to pin down the potential aggressor’s evil intentions if manifested through overt or covert actions. It may not allow the countries to go too far. It is terrifying even to mention nuclear conflict. Let us hope and pray that better sense will continue to prevail between the two countries at the altar of self-preservation.

Here comes the role of the two leaderships to seriously and honestly strive for addressing the bone of contention -- curse of state of uncertainty and mistrust including Kashmir issue -- those had shadowed the relations between the two countries, and sadly going from bad to worse. They may ponder sincerely to devote their whole attention to seize the opportunity out of the prevailing adverse circumstances and provide the kind of statesmanship that is desperately required. Forward looking leadership saves the people from the predicaments they are embroiled in and also those are likely to unfold in future. The incumbent leadership in both countries terribly exemplifies the opposite category because it has the two countries into the position of grandstanding and dangerous brinkmanship. It needs to revisit its thinking thoroughly and comprehensively.

The frequent violations on the LoC and Working Boundary, India’s declared policy to isolate Pakistan diplomatically, Pakistan’s inability to take action against the proscribed organisations, lack of transparency in its policy against terrorism, reported presence of Haqqani network on its soil, are the manifestation of grave challenges the leadership is confronted with. The meaningful diplomatic initiatives to address these challenges are urgently required if peace and security are to sway across this region as the ultimate desire of the people.

Let us hope against all odds. The leadership of two countries finally may seriously engage in exploring the possibilities to formulate well thought out strategy with firm resolve to bring qualitative improvement in their relations to frustrate those lobbies that are determined to see the two countries in state of duel unto to their total paralysis. Their unequivocal commitment to resolve all the issues through political means may set the ball rolling in the desired directions. For that, the leadership has to launch aggressive PR campaign to convince their people of the dividends of détente and normalisation while forcefully articulating that confrontation has been a self-defeating madness both tactically and strategically. The history of relations of the two countries regretfully bears witness to this irrefutable truth.

Make no mistake, the extremist and retrogressive forces in both countries will oppose and resist the rapprochement but the leadership has to demonstrate its commitment and resolve by not acquiescing to their nefarious tactics. Spoilers -- state and non-state actors -- are quite capable of queering the pitch like they did in the past. They are quite capable of executing their evil tactics again but the leadership must frustrate them by translating their vision of normalisation of relations into reality. The task is daunting but worth pursuing because the future of one fifth of humanity is at stake.

muhammadshaheedi@yahoo.com