Muzaffar Ahmed
The Indian rejection of the US offer of mediation for Pakistan-India peace talks
is a clear indication of New Delhi’s intransigence as well as hegemonic designs.
This is actually what has contributed in the last many decades in both
countries’ wavering relations – from bad to worse and moderate to bad.
Although the eras of unipolar world and bipolar or multipolar world have
significantly influenced the Pakistan-India conflicts, yet what has remained
constant is the stalemate. This all has not been by default but mostly by
design. Pakistan’s raising of voice for atrocities in Kashmir, Indian proxies in
Balochistan, water issues and ceasefire violations, etc – either in the United
Nations or at other world forums – mostly remains an echo. Contrarily, the
Indian calls and concocted narratives seem to have comparatively gained
attention.
The Indian propaganda revolves around following ‘forged realities’: (a) Pakistan
is supporting non-state actors like Jaish-e-Muhammad, Lashkar-e-Taiba and
Harkatul Mujahideen to create instability in Kashmir. (b) Pakistan’s war against
terror is an eyewash (despite the fact that the country has lost over 70,000
lives and properties worth billions of dollars). (c) Pakistan is playing double
game in Afghanistan; on one hand it promotes peace and at the same time
destabilizes the incumbent setup of the government by instigating the Taliban.
(d) Establishment is the hurdle in Pakistan-India relations. Its policies have
forced India to revisit the ‘No First Use’ and the Cold Start doctrine. (e) CPEC
is not acceptable to India as the corridor line passes through contentious
areas.
The above notions, no matter how forged or concocted, outweigh Islamabad’s just
claims in the eyes of international community due to India’s economic market,
expat lobbyists and socially acceptable clouts. The $67.7 billion US-India trade
volume that makes them the ninth largest trade partners, against the $6 billion
US trade volume with Pakistan that ranks it 62nd is the testimony of the fact
that Pakistan is far behind both economically and at diplomatic levels.
Consequently, big powers like the United States, credible international
organizations and jurists become silent and leave Pakistan-India issues to the
logic of their vested interests. Should a nation that has rendered sacrifices of
over 70,000 lives and billions of dollar losses in the ongoing GWOT merit such a
discriminatory treatment?
The irony however doesn’t stop here. We, the victims, probably remain short of
formulating a suitable foreign policy that we couldn’t stay either proactive or
assertive; rather we have been toeing a defensive or reactive approach.
Questions remain as if we are firm and prudent in effectively countering the
Indian propagandists so as to uphold our national stature, credibility and
sovereignty? Have we strategized our course of action, once the world has shown
reluctance towards our condemnations of the Indian atrocities in Held Kashmir,
or regarding the other bilateral disputes between the two nuclear neighbours?
Why have we been resting on just the Kulbhushan-like cases, despite presenting
what we call ‘credible’ evidence (dossiers) at the Sharm el-Sheikh moot, or
other international forums, didn’t work?
The reaction by the Trump administration has yet to come over the rejection of
America’s mediatory role in the Pakistan-India peace talks, however, given the
Indian defensiveness over Kulbhushan and world condemnation over use of brutal
forces against innocent Kashmiris, the time is appropriate to further expose
India before the eyes of international community, through effectively using
diplomatic and media channels. We must expose the ongoing Indian army’s
brutalities in the held Kashmir and the atrocities being meted out to minorities
(Sikhs, Muslims and Dalits) in a number of Indian states.
The recent 6 percent by-poll turnout, and the Jammu & Kashmir Chief Minister
Farooq Abdullah’s warning to New Delhi that “India may lose Kashmir Valley” and
that “dialogue is the only solution” to resolve the Kashmir problem is
considered to be another setback to the Indian claims.
Cow vigilante groups and Hindu hard line activists have made miserable the lives
of Muslims as they are carrying out their planned murders and targeted
massacres. A day after Pakistan handed down death penalty to the apprehended
Indian spy, India’s Foreign Minister Sushma Sawraj threatened that New Delhi
would go “out of the way” to save the life of Kulbhushan Yadev. Obviously New
Delhi stands exposed and goes on defensive.
Disrespecting other countries’ sovereignty is not new for India; supporting and
fomenting acts of terror while ing and legitimizing it through ‘forged
realities’ has become a fashion. India can cross all limits of ethical lines
using military means or political pressures, subversive or terrorist activities,
diplomacy and media, or forging an equal case of espionage (a retired Pakistan
army officer has already been trapped in Nepal).
The election of hardliner Adiyanath Jogi withers away the Indian claims of a
secular stature, which the world must notice. Moreover, the Indian refusal to US
offer is no less than a sabotaging bid to world community’s peace efforts.
Exposing real face of Indians may not fetch us much unless we convince the world
community of our gains and losses, sacrifices and ongoing efforts in the war
against terrorism. Thinking it as such, we don’t have a choice to follow the
paths of disengagement or neglect from US or other international community.
Trumps’ recent military ventures in Yemen, Mosul and Syria are an eye opener
regarding the policy towards the Middle East. Similarly, the US plan for sending
8,000 more troops to Afghanistan has rung alarm bells.
While the US is heavily engaged with India in economic and defence fields, all
eyes are on the Trump administration as to what course it takes as regards to
Pakistan and India. Our ongoing engagements with Russia and China, in the face
of forthcoming US moves will likely put our diplomatic champions in test. There
is a need of calculated response keeping in view national interest, Indian
ambitions and the Afghan imbroglio.
We keep sending messages of peace and dialogue to India, but this we can’t
afford from position of weakness. At the same time, besides blaming for own
faults on international arena, we need to stress more on putting our house in
order by following multi-pronged approach. Better raise our own compatible
economic market, remove internal differences, promote own expat lobbyists for
projecting our positive image, improve literacy standards, foster ethnic
harmonies and radiate real essence of ideology to wash away the blots of
radicalism, fundamentalism and terrorism. If we enshrine such facets, then it
may turn a ray of hope that the so called “forged realities” of the enemies will
not outweigh our just efforts and claims.
(The author is a freelance columnist from Bhera, Sargodha)