Confrontation or Co-Existence?
The Crossroads of Destiny
 |
|
For many Pakistanis the joys of winning the cricket test at Chennai on Indian soil had a profound moment of poignancy within minutes of victory. Notwithstanding the insecurity unleashed by Bal Thackeray's venom, the entire audience in the stadium, though acutely disappointed at India's defeat, rose to applaud when the Pakistani team took their victory lap. Mian Nawaz Sharif must be commended for a long and relentless crusade to establish mutual relations on a sound footing without losing sight of the core Kashmir issue, it is BJP's Vajpayee who as Indian PM crossesd the Wagah border on Feb 20, 1999 in a bus rather than a tank (despite the entreaties of loose cannon Thackeray). Taking history by the scruff of its neck, the bus ride brought the leaders as well as the peoples of Pakistan and India face to face with a harsh economic reality in the new millenium, we will either sink or survive together.
How can one question the natural demarcation imposed by geographical boundaries enclosing the peoples of South Asia in a high, mountainous embrace of the Himalayas, Karakoram and other ranges in the North, bounded in the South by the vast expanse of the Indian Ocean? Distinct peoples and religions are enclosed within this sub-continent, despite many diverse languages one can still understand each other. Invasions bring its own dynamics (and with it many excesses), for the most part the peoples of South Asia have lived in racial and religious harmony for over a millennium till the British established their bedrock authority on a policy of divide and rule. Even the much-vilified (by the Hindus) Emperor Aurangzeb, last of the Great Moghuls, had a Hindu General as his Commander against Shivaji! Two centuries of festering hatred, assiduously nurtured by the British, resulted in a new reality in 1947, that has continued now for over 50 years, the British leaving a bone of contention in Kashmir. At worst Vajpayee's trip ended on a note of symbolic significance, at best it presents us with a unique opportunity to study the consequences of confrontation in the past and replace it with co-existence in the future.
Reality begins with identity. Hindus and Muslims are as different as chalk is to cheese in ideology, in culture there are distinct areas of conformity. While respecting each other's beliefs we must ensure that militants among the minority on either side should not ride roughshod over the overwhelming desire of the vast silent majority to live in peace. Any military analyst will confirm that wars between Pakistan and India are unwinnable Ñ if either India or Pakistan were to gain any territory would they be able to hold ground in the face of guerilla warfare that would almost certainly ensue? On the other hand what about the danger that either India or Pakistan, facing possible defeat in the battlefield, not turn to the weapon of last resort as a desperate measure? The nuclear potential has made victory for either side infructuous. Meaningful detente was born during the cold war out of the negative vibes to any such query. Ground realities demand that we work our way from confrontation to co-existence.
Reality must begin with the core issue of Kashmir. Pakistan cannot abandon the long-suffering people of the Valley for narrow, crass economic considerations; on the other hand India has adopted a hard-line stance to the whole issue, shunning third party mediation to solve the dispute. Why not a radical departure from stated options? For 50 years now the Ceasefire Line (CFL) has seen fire and bloodshed being exchanged all along the line. Why not exchange that for free movement of people and trade across a defunct CFL but with the restriction of no permanent residency for the time being, so as not to upset the population count? The status quo in the Northern Areas and Azad Kashmir (AK) must be regularised as Pakistani territory and Ladakh and Jammu should go to India. Let us look for a solution for the Valley within the parameters of South Asia, bringing in SAARC troops (light infantry) from Sri Lanka (4 Brigades), Bangladesh (4 Brigades) and Nepal (one Brigade) to enforce the peace, allowing India (with a meaningful participation from Pakistan) to keep on administering the Valley for the next 10 years till 2010, with the laws of either India or Pakistan applicable to the individual as per his or her choice. India would retain a maximum of one Infantry Division concentrated at two or three locations in the Valley. SAARC troops would be stationed across the broad expanse of the vale, having right of hot pursuit to maintain law and order. In their own areas (Northern Areas and AK for Pakistan, Jammu and Ladakh for India) there should be a limitation on number of troops and offensive weapons, particularly artillery. Siachen must be immediately demilitarised and all troops withdrawn, in fact India is spending five times what we are for this senseless war at the coldest height of nonsense, money that could well be used for giving good air mobility and reconnaissance potential to the SAARC troops policing the Valley. The complications inherent in enforcing such a plan are a far better option than continuing with the loss of precious young lives on a daily basis with no possible end result. At the end of the 10-year period, let there be a referendum to determine the real wishes of the Kashmiri people.
When we come to terms with Kashmir only then we can consider the economic benefits of co-existence for the peoples of South Asia, possible only if there is free trade without any tariffs between the participating nations, with a start made to eventually have a South Asian currency on the pattern of the 'Euro' called the 'Rupiah', to coincide with the final settlement of Kashmir. Some in Pakistan feel the competitive price and quality of Indian goods will overwhelm us, that makes for commercial nonsense. If Indians can produce quality goods, so can we. In any case most of our goods and services, even though suffering in price comparison due to the vast economy of scale in India, are still quite competitive. In turn we get benefit of the 'freight' advantage. The Indians get a market for 130 million people, in contrast a market of 900 million people of India and 250 million peoples of the rest of South Asia (over a billion) opens up to us, a vast economic opportunity that is enhanced by the transit nature of the trade that flows through us. Our cotton is a main cash-earner, with downstream textile mills and cotton derivatives surpassing the Indians in quality. Instead of being overwhelmed by our fears, let us be prepared to accept the challenges that economic opportunity present us with. The gateway to Central Asia is Pakistan, crossroads for an unimaginable trade opportunity that will never become a reality without an amicable understanding over Kashmir.
China as well as the regions of East and South East Asia have had tremendous economic progress mainly because free trade has flourished in a sea of peace and stability. They have many problems between them, not perhaps on the scale of Kashmir, yet they have chosen co-existence instead of confrontation even though they are far more diverse than the peoples of South Asia. Together, we can surpass their potential, if only we do let us not fritter away our respective economic strength in escalation of conflict down the military route.
There will always be hawks and peace-niks, the hawks will always raise alarm bells about 'Balkanisation' and hold forth about a 'sell-out', the peace-niks would favour immediate disarmament, both are wrong. Have the nations of Europe reduced any of their troop levels even as they turn to political integration to match economic initiatives of the Common Market? Detente requires the capability of 'mutually assured destruction', mad as it may seem we have to keep our powder dry and our troop levels intact for the time being because in both nations there will be elements instigating and creating reasons for suspicion and conflict. Nobody can afford a Trojan Horse but one may be sure there will be elements on both sides intent on planning it. On the other hand to instil a modicum of cohesion, we could take a giant step forward by making the para-military Border Forces (Rangers and BSF) work under a Joint Military Commission while keeping their identities distinct, a direct experiment in meaningful co-existence.
Barring the unfortunate people of Africa, who nonetheless still have vast raw resources to fall back upon, is there anyone in the world further below the threshold of poverty than the peoples of South Asia? If we do not cooperate economically the world will pass us by; hi-tech will accelerate the gap in the 21st century, faster than anyone can imagine and far bigger than our people can bear. To lift the economic threshold of our downtrodden aspirant people we have to come to terms with the harsh political realities that makes co-existence necessary and confrontation a disastrous option. A vast gulf of emotions has to be overcome, it is time to take radical political steps for the economic emancipation of our people. We are at the crossroads of destiny on the verge of the new millennium, either we can have the courage to take bold, imaginative steps to brighten our future together or because of myopic vision consign more than one billion people into the dustbin of history.
