The latest twist in Indo-Pak relations, with Gen. Musharraf slated to receive a ceremonial welcome at the Rashtrapati Bhavan forecourt next month, has so shocked the nation that most commentators have condemned it as an ill-conceived volte face by the Vajpayee government. They have cited the Government’s consistent refusal to deal with the General since the October 1999 coup as he was the principal culprit behind the Kargil outrage, an unrepentant sponsor of cross-border terrorism, and chief patron of the hateful Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Some have suggested that Mr. Vajpayee’s so-called independent initiative is actually the result of American pressure.
While I share the concern about India’s security and sovereignty caused by the open-ended invitation to Gen. Musharraf, I view the overture to the Pakistani dictator as the culmination of a strategy that is already being implemented over the past few months. The only change is that the Government has modified its rhetoric to match the ground situation. It is baffling why opposition parties have let the Government get away with this sabotage of national interests, with only a token protest when they were all party to the 1994 Parliament Resolution which declared the whole of Jammu & Kashmir an inalienable non-negotiable part of India, with the return of Occupied Kashmir the only issue requiring discussion with Pakistan.
To my mind, the subversion of Indian interests in Kashmir has been a carefully calibrated act, beginning last November with the Prime Minister’s offer of a Ramzan ceasefire. Though this was instantly ridiculed by militant groups, the Government reined in the armed forces for seven long months despite the sustained attacks on security forces, the ethnic cleansing of Sikhs, the unhappiness of the Chief Minister, and the daily toll of innocent lives.
Most commentators viewed the ceasefire as a wasted goodwill gesture, and the monthly extensions without any plans to restore peace as tokenism to placate world opinion. Regular readers of this column, however, would be aware that I had warned of a countdown to the possible annexation of Kashmir. The RSS, ideological fountainhead of the BJP, around this time mooted a controversial proposal to trifurcate the state, which smacked of a move to delink the Valley from the rest of the country. In December, press reports (read plants) hinted at talks with Pak-sponsored militants, and perhaps even the Pakistani generals at a later stage, without spelling out the nature or contour of the proposed dialogue.
The purpose of these seemingly random moves was obvious – the Kashmiri Pandits (indeed, even the Indian people) were cut out of the Kashmir dialogue and Kashmir surreptitiously converted into an issue of the Muslims, for the Muslims, and by the Muslims (of whatever nationality). Those who consider this harsh may recall that in December the man who hijacked an Indian Airlines plane to Lahore in 1971 mysteriously arrived in Delhi, and Saudi Arabia suddenly emerged as a key player in resolving the Kashmir imbroglio, as did a shady Pakistani-American, Mr. Mansoor Ijaz (who penned two peculiar articles for a secular daily and disappeared). Thus, India’s traditional stand that there would be no third party mediation in Kashmir was reversed last winter itself.
New Delhi’s current decision to deal only with non-Indian Muslims on Kashmir (Hurriyat too, is effectively out) is obviously part of a preconceived plan, to which we, the people of India, are not privy. Last week’s decision to give safe passage to hard-core militants holed up in a mosque after two army men lost their lives in the encounter, is consistent with this approach. So is the invitation to Gen. Musharraf, which has enabled Pakistan to open a new chapter in the old civilization conflict with India. The General has seized the opportunity to state plainly that Kashmir is the core issue between the two countries. This has sufficiently rattled his would-be hosts to proclaim that the state is integral to India’s nationhood. The result of this brinkmanship can only be more ethnic cleansing and more blood and mayhem.
Even apart from the fact that it has wantonly violated a decades-old consensus on Kashmir, the timing of Mr. Vajpayee’s overture to Pakistan is grievously flawed. The apocalyptic tragedy in Nepal, where almost the entire royal family has been wiped out in suspicious circumstances, will impact on regional stability. Fingers are already pointing to a possible ISI role in the affair, with speculation mounting that one man alone could not have caused such extensive casualties, and that the Prince may have been used to penetrate the palace guard. As yet there is little real information to go by, but if it is established that the injured Crown Prince (now King) was shot in the back, it will give the case a new dimension. The attitude of the new monarchy and government towards ISI activities there, the mushrooming of madrasas on the Indo-Nepal border, and the disturbing changes in the demography of the Hindu kingdom, will all bear careful watching.
The sudden developments in Nepal could not have been foreseen, but surely the Government understands that the savage butchery of BSF jawans has introduced a new element in Indo-Bangladesh relations? Conditions on the vast porous border were already unstable given the extent of the daily infiltrations, but the ISI has added a new twist by infiltrating the ranks of the would-be infiltrators and helping them across. It has also fanned anti-India sentiments in the armed forces and citizenry, as a result of which the situation on that front can be volatile at any time, even if New Delhi maintains equable relations with the regime in Dacca.
Then, there is the monstrous behaviour of the Taliban, which seems to have escaped the notice of South Block mandarins completely. Not content with dynamiting the majestic Bamiyan Buddhas, Islamabad’s puppet regime has asked the miniscule Hindu community to wear distinctive yellow markings (reminiscent of Nazi identification of Jews), and directed Hindu women to wear burqas in public. If the Prime Minister had used Pakistan’s good offices to get the offensive edict reversed, it might have served as a promising backdrop for sincere dialogue.
Unfortunately, Mr. Vajpayee is unable to appreciate that if a Pak-supported regime publicly reduces Hindus to the status of Dhimmis (subordinate citizens tolerated under certain trying conditions), then Islamic Pakistan itself cannot have a very different attitude towards Hindus, and this Hindu-dominated nation. He therefore owes us an honest explanation about the apparently irresistible pressures that have forced him to dialogue with Pakistan despite its commitment to jehad against (infidel) India. He should know that we cannot walk the high road to peace (sic) through minefields, cannon fire, slit throats and mutilated bodies.
The timing of the dialogue is even more baffling given that Pakistan is a failed state whose Mohajir, Sindhi, Pakhtoon and Baluch populations are straining to break free of the stranglehold of its Punjabi-military elite. What is more, Gen. Musharraf is under strict notice from the Supreme Court to vacate office next year. He is also under constant threat from jehadi generals and mullahs and cannot meaningfully negotiate issues that Pakistan means to settle by the sword. Hence, before the General comes, Mr. Vajpayee must tell us if he has secretly committed (to a third party like the Americans or Saudis) to part with a portion of Kashmir (or to facilitate its delinking from India), and on what terms.
The Pioneer, 5 June 2001