New Forms of
Old Threats
By Dr Shireen M. Mazari
While some very
important developments in the context of Pakistan-India
relations merit major focus this week, two new developments,
one in Austria and one in the US, should jolt any
Muslim still sanguine about how the West views Muslims
and Islam into a reality mode. Post-9/11, it truly
is open season on Muslims and Islam even as the
West reasserts its sensitivity towards the Jews.
This was shown only too starkly in the three-year
prison sentence awarded to historian David Irving
by an Austrian court for his denial of the Holocaust.
There was no support for freedom of expression in
this case even though the issue in question was
a historical event and not blasphemy of the Prophet
of Islam, one of the leading religions of the world
today. Just as anti-Holocaust cartoons cannot be
printed in the Danish press, no one in Europe can
have a revisionist view of Nazism and the Holocaust.
Meanwhile, in the US there is an outcry because
control of six major US ports is being given to
a UAE -- that is Arab -- company, Dubai World Ports,
after it won the bidding. It appears that while
American and European companies can have free access
to the Muslim world and can operate in sensitive
areas, including energy and communications, Arab
companies cannot have a reciprocal freedom to operate
in the West. What we in the Muslim world need to
do is to see patterns because that allows a better
comprehension of the in-built biases against us
in the western world.
Meanwhile, Pakistanis have been consumed by the
violence that has increasingly accompanied the protests
against the blasphemous cartoons. In the process
some critical developments this month have gone
by without much attention or comment. First, there
was the bizarre statement from the Indian president,
in Singapore, that in about 50 years there was the
possibility of a Pakistan-India confederation. His
understanding of history is confused, because he
supported his argument by citing the case of the
two Germanies! Or perhaps age has caused a certain
level of amnesia in Mr. Kalam's mind because the
two Germanies were the result of post-war occupation
of Germany by the four Allied powers -- not a result
of post-colonial independence. Also, of course,
both Pakistan and India were created in 1947 out
of a colonial entity, British India, so both were
1947 constructs in their independent shape.
However, the Indian president's statement does reveal
a particular Indian mindset that still views Partition
as a temporary event. Never mind that 1971 led to
the creation of Bangladesh -- a reaffirmation of
the two-nation theory -- rather than the expansion
of the Indian state of West Bengal. The Indian trauma
over Partition persists.
That is why while Pakistan has been prepared to
go that extra mile in its peace moves, India continues
to be playing for time on the conflictual issues.
Despite myriad proactive suggestions from Pakistan,
India maintains an obduracy on conflicts like Kashmir.
In fact, a pattern of hostile intent is beginning
to emerge visibly from the Indian side, which should
be a warning to Pakistan. Apart from the questionable
diplomatic stance reflected in the Indian president's
statement in Singapore, more ominous has been the
growing concern that India is increasingly involved
in the terrorist acts in Balochistan.
Many of us have been suspecting that India would
get involved in low-intensity operations in Balochistan
once it opened six consulates in Afghanistan, especially
those close to the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.
After all, Pakistan had been protesting Indian activities
from its consulate in Zahedan earlier. Finally,
the Pakistan government has had to go public with
the Indian agency RAW's involvement in Balochistan,
and has formally handed over evidence to this effect
to the Afghan president. The Karzai government,
despite statements to the contrary, seems to have
an inbuilt hostility towards Pakistan. Given that
some of its cabinet members have had close links
to India, this is not surprising, although President
Karzai's periodic accusations against Pakistan are
a little disturbing.
However, the Afghan government's complicity, be
it indirect, with Indian designs is a serious issue
and one hopes the Karzai government will move effectively
on this count -- especially since we are constantly
being told to deal more effectively on the al-Qaeda-Taliban
issue.
What makes the new Indian threat from Afghanistan
extremely serious is the fact that India sent 300
commandos into the Kandahar area in the first week
of February -- as given out by official sources
to the Indian media. The rationalization was that
there are Indian workers in the area, but this logic
is a little absurd because if every country that
had workers in Afghanistan sent their forces to
'protect' these workers, there would be utter chaos.
After all, there are Chinese and Pakistani workers
also present and they have also been attacked. So,
should China and Pakistan also send in their commandos
to protect their workers in Afghanistan? And would
the Karzai government allow us such access?
One needs to question the Karzai government's intent
in allowing Indian commandos into a clearly volatile
and sensitive area. The 300 Indian commandos are
bound to add to the instability of that region --
as is their intent.
As for President Karzai stating that he had given
a list to Pakistan pointing out the Taliban figures
sheltering in Pakistan, it appears no one in Islamabad
knows who was given the list. So what is the Afghan
game all about, especially the constant accusations
against Pakistan? Clearly, there is a pattern here
because Indian actions are well thought out and
India's close links to the Karzai government have
allowed the Indians operational space against Pakistan
on its western borders.
Nor is this all. An Indian maritime aircraft also
violated Pakistani air space earlier this month
over Pakistan's Exclusive Economic Zone. Why are
all these things happening now when we thought the
dialogue process was inching forward, despite Indian
intransigence on Kashmir and other conflicts? Clearly,
one intent is to keep Pakistan preoccupied internally
as India moves ahead on controversial nuclear deals
with France and the US. As it is, the French president's
visit to India has gone almost unnoticed by Pakistan
as has the nuclear deal between France and India
which effectively accepts India's nuclear weapons
status. India is desperate to de-link its nuclear
status from that of Pakistan's. The Indo-US nuclear
deal already provides de facto recognition of India's
nuclear weapons status and the US has reiterated
that it will not have a similar agreement with Pakistan.
For Pakistan this de-linkage between its nuclear
status and that of India is going to be the most
threatening long-term development, impinging directly
on our overall security parameters as well as the
status of our nuclear program. That is why we need
to act pre-emptively on that count, but we cannot
do so effectively if we continue to remain preoccupied
and destabilized domestically.
(The writer is director general of the Institute
of Strategic Studies in Islamabad. Courtesy The
News)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
