India Should Put Pakistan Peace Talks in Cold Storage

When you deal with an adversary, first you should learn his mindset and objectives and then his strengths and weaknesses. You do not think in terms of justice because what is just to you is not necessarily just to the other party. You negotiate giving higher priority to your own objectives than his. When you make a concession, make sure that the adversary pays an appropriate price. If you give away something for nothing, he will assume that it is worth nothing and will demand more. Make him earn it while staying within the framework of your own objectives. Indian polity forgot these lessons while dealing with Pakistan and India is paying a heavy price for nurturing Pakistani bad behavior. In every war with Pakistan the Indian military gained strategic ground only to be given away by the politicians in Delhi for nothing in return.

Pakistan is an Islamic state by design and not by accident. Islam is in the consciousness of every Pakistani, whether soldier, mullah, trader or a taxi driver. Over the last sixty years the Pakistani consensus has been to become more Islamic, whatever that may be, in social, political, economic and judicial spheres. As it is the case in other Muslim majority countries, Islam is simultaneously a religious and a political force in Pakistan. Like other Islamic populations, Pakistanis have found it difficult to establish or retain a modern state. Due to Pakistani intolerance to dissent the Ahmadiyyas are classified as second class citizens. They have indulged to fabricate a delusional history to deny anything good in Indian subcontinent until the arrival of Islam and passing it to successive generations.

Majority of Muslims in colonial India did not participate in the Independence Struggle. The fanatic ones argued that, if they could not rule over Hindus, then they had to be shielded from Hindu influence, not by becoming a separate but equal society, but a separate nation altogether. Even after the creation of Pakistan they have not reconciled to the idea of major chunk of territory that was under Mughal rule functioning under a secular political system.

Pakistan is a nation of several ethnic groups (Punjabis, Sindhis, Baluchis and Pashtuns) broken into several linguistic groups and religious sects, each with conflicting ideals and separatist tendencies. But they are ruled by an uncompromising central authority. The nation is constantly trying to solve the puzzle reconciling the differences in permutations of state, religion and a dysfunctional oligarchic political order. A solution that will lead the country to be a modern peaceful society is not likely to emerge in the near future. The educational system is so dismal that the masses of youth completing their studies in madrassas do not have the skills to be competitive in the modern global economy. The Military Staff colleges offer their students stereotyped theories of Indian motives and strategy. The cantonments are thick with reminders of past battles and fallen comrades and every year the units muster for regimental and unit memorial ceremonies, each officer being reminded that he may have to make the ultimate sacrifice against imagined aggression by India. Any civilian government that takes a bold step in new direction especially in foreign policy must have army’s consent, or it will be dismissed from the office. Therefore, it is unlikely that any civilian government that reaches a peace agreement with India will be able to gain its approval from its own society or military.

Anyone who believes that a resolution to Kashmir issue will bring peace between the two countries is only day-dreaming. Even if there is a settlement on Kashmir issue favorably disposed to Pakistani side, we cannot expect peace. In the Pakistani psyche the claim extends to the entire land where Aurangazeb ruled and Kashmir is only a placeholder to keep the issue alive. It is the superiority of the Indian military forces that has kept the Pakistani military adventurers outside India's borders. Now they have resorted to terrorism against civilian population. We should remember that Nehru signed the Indus water treaty in 1960 giving away the waters of all the rivers except Sutlej, but within a short period Pakistan sent its army into Rann of Kutch and Kashmir resulting in the war of '65.

Priority for the Indian political establishment is to protect its borders, state and citizens. Economically, diplomatically and militarily India is in a better position and there is no need to push for unproductive peace overtures that go nowhere. Further, the political machinery in Pakistan is highly unstable and durability of any agreement is doubtful. We need to keep our own national security as the top objective and put the peace negotiations in cold storage until the time when Pakistanis realize that they cannot reach a secure nationhood until they cast realism in their national objectives. If and when such realization materializes they will approach India in their own interest to normalize the relationship

Hate Monger Denied Entry Into Britain

British are waking up, at last. They revoked the visa to Zakir Naik and banned his entry into Britain. He was scheduled to give a series of lectures in London and Sheffield. Ms.Theresa May, British Home Secretary, said: "Numerous comments made by Dr. Naik are evidence to me of his unacceptable behavior".

Those of you who do not know Zakir Naik, he is a Mumbai based fanatic Islamic preacher, often on the road, giving fiery lectures bragging about the Islamic religion and berating all the other religions. Just go to you-tube and put his name in the search box, you will see a number of clips with his hate speech.

Here is the excerpt form one of his many you-tube clips: "...You heard the Muslims saying Osama Bin Laden is right or wrong. I reject them ... We don't know. But if you ask my view, if this is the truth, if he is fighting the enemies of Islam. I am for him. I don't know what he's doing. I'm not in touch with him. I don't know him personally. I read the newspaper. If he is terrorizing the terrorists, if he is terrorizing America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, I am with him ... The thing is, if he's terrorizing a terrorist, he's following Islam"⁽¹⁾. Other incendiary remarks include: "Muslims in India would prefer the Islamic criminal law to be implemented on all Indians since it is the most practical".

When will Indian government get the courage to shut down this hate monger?

References:

(1): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVtADPzyWTA

Lamb Among Wolves

India's political situation is pathetic in the international arena. It does not look any better domestically either but that is the subject for another day. India has one sixth of the world population but it has no representation in UN Security Council which operates with fifteen members. It has not held even the rotating membership in the last eighteen years. Pakistan, a terrorist state, has held a seat as recently as 2004. Even miserable Bangladesh had a seat at the council in 2001. India has been kept out far too long.

Pakistan, in spite of all the terrorism that it exports, is a "strategic partner" of the United States in fighting terrorism. Further, Pakistan gets handsomely paid for being the "strategic partner" and is provided with modern weapons with which it can threaten India. It tries to wield a veto power over India's aid projects in Afghanistan and routinely sends terrorists to attack Indian interests there and everywhere else. In spite of the numerous Pakistani terrorist attacks inflicted on Indian soil the world paid no attention until US and Europe began to suffer similar fate.

Casual world opinion is that India is occupying Kashmir illegally and would like a plebiscite but nobody except Indians seem to know that Pakistan is illegally occupying a large chunk of Kashmir from where they have ethnically cleansed out all Hindus and Sikhs. Though the UN resolution states that the plebiscite can take place only after both India and Pakistan withdraw their troops from Kashmir, the focus is only on India to withdraw its troops. There is the Gilgit area of north western Kashmir which Pakistan has occupied and conveniently renamed it as "Northern Areas" that even Indian government seems to have washed off its hands. In such a world, what kind of security does an Indian citizen have, how secure is India's sovereignty and how safe are India's borders? Indian newspapers routinely editorialize about the "violation of human rights by Indian army and police" when the borders are not secure and internal security tenuous. During the siege in Mumbai at the Taj Mahal hotel by Pakistani terrorists in November of 2008 the Time Magazine's South Asia correspondent, Aryn Baker^(a) had the arrogance to advocate for the bigots in Pakistan longing for "the golden era of the Mughal period in the 1700s and has a fervent desire to see India, Pakistan and Bangladesh reunited under Islamic rule". As if Hindus do not deserve human rights.

Three countries stayed out of Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, namely India, Pakistan and Israel, and all three have nuclear weapons. Nobody in the West would even dare to suggest that Israel gives up its nuclear weapons. Columnists in the West routinely write about India and Pakistan holding nuclear weapons and the need to strip them of those weapons. Of the two, everyone knows which one exports terrorism and nuclear weapon technology. But even US does not have access to the top Pakistani proliferator, A.Q.Khan, in spite of all the billions that they are giving as bribe and blood money. But President Obama wanted to scuttle the Indo-US Commercial nuclear treaty that President Bush and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh worked out. Now, China is proposing to sell nuclear reactors to Pakistan in clear violation of commercial nuclear materials and equipment treaty while Obama and his state department are looking the other way. They very well remember that China owns a over two trillion dollars of US Treasury bonds and currency and it can sink the US dollar and economy overnight. It is not just Obama, there is a big business by a crowd of do-gooders who warned against Indo-US nuclear treaty, including New York Times and Gary Milholin of Wisconsin Project, but one does not hear these people uttering a word about the China-Pakistan deal. When it comes to their own economy, every country, including the mighty United States, becomes flexible with their principles and ideologies.

Is there justice in the world? Only fools and liberal Indian commentators would raise such a silly question. Of course, there is justice, but only on the terms of the mighty and strong. For the weak to survive in this world they need wisdom which Indian polity sadly lacks. We Indians are Gandhi's children, we always look out for the other guy and our dharma is to let our enemy hold our neck in a noose so that he feels safe and secure. Our intellectuals talk about a "just solution to Kashmir problem with Pakistan" as if Pakistan ever cared for a just solution. Pakistan's wish is to bring back the Moghul empire and claim ownership to every piece of real estate where Aurangazeb ruled. Some talk about mediation through a "disinterested third party" as if such an entity exists. There is no disinterested third party, every country in this world has an agenda with underlying self interest. We proudly talk about our non-violence, secularism and equality as if the rest of the world cares about all these. We live in a dog eat dog world, and when it comes to implementing a foreign policy, wise leaders put self interest ahead of ideology. Gandhi and his Congress followers including Nehru never realized this fact, and basically this ignorance is the root cause all the security problems that India is facing in its borders as well as in its international relations. Until India's polity realizes that its self interest ought to consistently command higher priority over the so called justice and ideology the forces to balkanize India will ever more be active and might even succeed. Just remember, Amnesty International is not going to stop Pakistani terrorists or guarantee our borders, our own security establishment has to do that.

I plan to be writing about India's internal and external politics, diplomacy and security interests on a regular basis. I welcome readers to give me feed back.

Reference:

(a) - Aryn Baker, "India's Muslims in Crisis", Time Magazine, November 27, 2008

(www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1862650-2,00.html)