Ever
since the vivisection of India the two neighbours, India and Pakistan, have met
each other in the battlefield more than twice. Unlike those 'quick triggering'
ones, but more like the major explosion of the Atom Bomb itself, a 4th war
brings about an explosion of fear of the holocaust - as never before. It is
amazing that when countries' arms are twisted, the mighty destructive power of
the Atom Bomb that has enticed global protests since Hiroshima, also brings
about an equally powerful feather of peace.
The
modus operandi is simple. When that feather is seen dithering, the whole world
cries out in unison- STOP. No wonder, when a Pakistani minister offered a
threat to use the dangerous bomb, it incited a global outcry. A 4th war between
the two congenital enemies, India and Pakistan, is, therefore, not wished by
anybody; and is unlikely. That is unless madness takes the supreme position.
Yes
when provoked, the then Indian PM Mr Bajpayi did order his massive troupes to
the nuclear powered Pakistan's border, like before. But, it was this fear,
reminding emperor Alexander's troupe's return from the edge of India that made
Indian troupes aimlessly return back from Pak border without a fight.
In
addition, tracing this and as if adding Gandhi's 'eye for an eye makes the
whole world blind' and telecom's 'it's good to talk' all ask both the countries
to talk and sort the Kashmir problem out. Both countries talk, yet terrorist
attacks do happen in India. And when one happens, almost as an obedient nation
India condemns the attack, does the needed investigations and prides itself in
finding the responsible country - Pakistan. And when Pakistan doesn't believe
its dossier of findings and its TV debaters, almost reminding North Korea, cry
out 'united we stand with the government', India just shuts up. As time goes
by, the same cycle of events continue. Unlike Gulliver's Travel's two hostile
kings who don't talk, these two take a clue from today's teenagers and do a
'break up n patch up'.
While
this alone makes Pakistan the luckiest among the nuclear nations despite facing
a much more formidable enemy that has defeated it several times, almost like a
child in its mother's lap, it also happens to get the comfort of the Chinese
lap. So much so that, denting even its own fight against terrorism and its
international dignity, the dragon land refuses to regard globally recognised
Masood Ajhar as a terrorist
It
is because of these factors that almost with impunity Pakistan, on its part,
educates its denizens against India, ferments trouble there, accuses India of
oppressing Kashmiri people, trains and supplies terrorists to attack Indian
civilians and then just casually says 'no proof is supplied'.
Why
is animosity so important for Pakistan?
It
may look pretty obvious but as aired below the actual answer is deep and far
from clear. It's because; yes 'brotherhood of Muslims' (ummah) can be argued as
enticing affinity towards the Muslim majority in Kashmir, but then, neither
East Pakistani (Now Bangladeshi) Muslims were treated properly by them earlier,
nor the rape and genocide facing Boloch Muslims are treated with any dignity
today.
Yes,
nostalgia of Muslim Moghal rule in India is cited as 'We Muslims ruled over the
Hindus'; and the consequent necessiity of an unfinished business of converting
Indians to Islam, as was done in Persia and Egypt, is aspired for. But then,
Hindu converts to Islam (most Pakistanis) didn't rule over Hindus. It was the
Moghals from Turkey, who did so. Instead, like the way Pakistanis are treated
in the Arab countries today, the converted Muslims were treated like second class
Muslims - almost like Hindus - by the Moghals. Almost akin to 'man is what he
thinks', it's strange that the people who called themselves Indians just 70
years ago now regard invaders like Ghauri as their heroes, are closer to the
Middle East and see India as the ultimate enemy!
But
then, there is more to its ways than just ingrained hostility.
Being
the most, or perhaps the only trusted institute in corruption ridden Pakistan,
without popular resentment, the army takes a lion's share of the nation's budget.
It's elite, not only controll various army regiments but the country's 50
commercial entities too. There is a network of people which includes both army
and civilian, that benefits from those franchises. With dependency thus glaring
like the sunrays on earthlings, even the army chief alone cannot go against the
mass interest. May be, Musharraf's abrupt departure from Delhi talks is one of
them.
How
did this come about?
The answer isn't difficult though. Being a
country that was surreptitiously created on the behest of the West to restrain
USSR from reaching the southern seas and to keep India restrained through a
split, but then overtly doing so under the stewardship of Jinnah - who just
wanted to be the first executive of a country -Pakistan had to bring areas with
different ethnicities, cultures and languages to form an artificial nation.
That too hurriedly before Jinnah's TB induced early death! Disunity was real
and Pakistan had the need for unity right at the start.
Despite
Jinnah not knowing written Urdu, Pak had to enforce the elite alone understood
artificial language Urdu. This at least created an uneasy common language,
right at the start. And conversion of Sanskrit worded Hindu written national
anthem to a Muslim written Persian worded one, did help. But then, like the
taking out of local languages (Punjabi, Sindhi etc.) from its schools,
subsequent annexation of an independent Baluchistan that added land, added
disunity too. Pakistan cried out for unity and an external enemy, as has always
been done for political needs, would solve its internal problems. While a Hindu
India gave a default enemy that it made sure interred into its school texts to
create a 'man is what he thinks' character, it needed to put that into action
to get more. Incidentally a conglomerate of a week Nehru, a slow maharaja and a
quick Pak army brought about half of Kashmir and the needed convincing cause
for hostility. But then, with India's reaction being inert at best, it needed
more. While the vocal minority in Kashmir infused life into the needed
hostility, almost producing a golden egg laying goose ,'We morally support
Kashmiri people's struggle', brought about the needed perennial animosity.
With
the threat thus confirmed, unlike for Nepal, Bhutan or Sri Lanka, Pakistan
needed a defence force; and that too continually. With the external enemy thus
guaranteed, its army's prestige and need was guaranteed internally too. With
guys graduating from school with an anti India anti Hindu thought, creating
fighters wasn't that hard.
That
wasn't enough though. Having created the defence need and a trusted
institution, cash needs of the army was understood and people didn't mind a
lion's share of the budget reserved by the army. Being congenitally involved in
its creation, and with the purpose of making Pak strong militarily, West's aid
wasn't far. As if duty bound, latter supplied the hardware. The profiting Pak's
elite were just lucky. And when the soviets descended on Afghanistan, their
luck ascended. Almost like cheap Chinese goods, Taliban flooded the land of the
Bamiyan Buddha.
But
then, after finishing off the Godless ones (communist Russia) the Taliban
turned their guns towards the God's message distorting ones (Christian USA).The
great Satan needed Pak's help again. The elite's luck seemed to increase by the
day. As brilliantly as less religious leaders use religious zealots for their
mundane gain, its elite created religious Jihadists to use as pawns. In fact,
when a pork and alcohol consuming, prayer disliking, Mullah disliked, fully
westernised Gujarati Ishmaili Jinnah could amazingly use Muslims to muster
Pakistan albeit with the blessing of the British, its elite could surely use
religious jealoutes to die for them too. In fact, yes, Ambani's Indian stock
share valued at more than Pakistan's total stock market may not be surprising,
its machinery creating Jihadists as a product, using them in the eastern and
the western fronts pleasing both the West and its people, and then killing them
with impunity - is certainly so.
Despite
being corrupt, the British had mustered huge respect from the locals. Similarly
being seen as less corrupt in the land where corruption is a culture, and
having seen to have done so much for the country the army is revered in
Pakistan. So much so that, an army takeover may be frowned upon outside but not
inside its borders. When the US cleaned its showing teeth and passed a law to
automatically stop aid if the Pak army took over, it showed its own showing
teeth. As ingeniously as hiding Bin laden in front of its own barrack, it
simply elected a subordinate prime minister. Airing that, although, 'whom to
talk to in Pak' is cited for the talk lethargy in India, there is more to the
futility of talks than meets the eyes.
Yes,
with it offering a trouble free existence of a newly formed nation, lucrative
hardware from the West, an elating prestige from the locals, control of
political and economic institutions of the country without a revolt, an
un-opposing dependent network of beneficiaries and the fulfilment of
religio-ideological emotions, and its absence giving a fear of being irrelevant
;Pakistan simply cannot afford to prefer peace. Thus, while its hostility as an
engraved national policy is perfectly natural, if natural emotion is let loose it will want to see
Kashmir, if not the whole of India burning. It is such that even if whole of
Kashmir (including independence seekers) is offered to Pak for peace, it will
reject it- lest it be another Baluchistan anyway. It will rather take 95% of
the state and continue its struggle for the remaining 5%.
But
Why Does The US Support Pakistan?
With
India being the cause of hostility and America the supplier of its defence,
almost fooling both and treating jihadies like a factory product, it recycles
(forms, uses and kills) the latter with impunity. In doing so, it's elite
benefit all the way. But then, USA is neither innocent nor unaware of this
double role.
America
befriends Pakistan to do the dirty work of flushing out Islamic fundamentalists
from that area. But then, a country that knows all the eastern terrorist
training camps and was able to sniff out Bin Laden from under its army's nose,
rather offers Pakistan military hardware like F-16. Surely, F-16s are for wars
and not for flushing out terrorists. What makes America do so? Why do Americans
like ordinary Pakistanis, become the victims of the Pakistani propaganda?
The
answer is simple. If not the American taxpayers and the Pakistani poor, elite
from the two countries certainly win. The modus operandi isn't hard either.
While the US siphons part of its tax payer's money to its buddy Pakistan as an
aid for fighting the jihadists, as if completing the loop Pakistan returns it
back by buying its military hardware. Both countries seem to win. However, with
the payment returning to the American elite who have multiple states in the
arms industry and not the public; the elite benefit, unaware voting public
lose.
Pakistani
public don't get much either. But in a land that cherished Sr Bhutto's 'we will
eat grass but get the Atom Bomb', the imported hardware certinaly enhances the
pride of all Pakistanis in relation to India with a, 'we will beat India'
feeling. But, unlike the poor, its elite enjoy major kickbacks too. Therefore,
almost saying 'Elite of the two countries unite' both beneficiaries would not
say no to its continuation. While this union explains the chronicity in dealing
with a bunch of terrorists in its territory despite the advanced technology,
aid to enhance the unhindered animosity towards India needs more words. Yes
Pakistan at times gets the back fire (terrorist attacks) but the elite remain
unscathed. They instead get an opportunity to broadcasts 'we are the victims of
terrorism'.
t's
not that the West's fear of USSR's expansion into the southern seas alone that
made it split India by eulogising Jinnah and sacrificing Edwina/Mountbatten
duo; parallel to the Hindu phobia in the Western academia brought about by
India's past glory, it feared an unwanted global competition from a united
Hindu India too. Almost as a double whammy, while the partition weakened that
India as a future power, the raising of sentiments of hostility even brought
about two military hardware buyers! For Pakistan clearly yes but even for the
US, Pakistan has to remain intact and strong, remain hostile to India and has
to keep on buying arms. It knows all, but lets things happen.
In
this context, Hilary's 'You can't have two types of snakes in your back yard'
and Obama's 'seek urgent action against the Mumbai attackers' are the showing
teeth. In fact, despite the deaths of its own citizens in the Mumbai attack it
says 'We will not let down the integrity of Pakistan' - as biting teeth. And of
course for the 'oldest democracy' in the world, Pak's integrity is much more
important in the bite than the rapes and deaths of many in Baluchistan.
Of
course the US voters want peace, but with the elected rulers merging with the
elite in the elite/public split capitalist country, it's the elite who decide;
and Hillary or Trump's victory matters less. So, for Trump, Pak could easily be
what Guantanamo was for Obama. Therefore, unlike its inclusion in Kuwait's
banned list, the exclusion of Pakistanis in the banned list of the
fundamentalist disliking Trump comes with an arrow airing just that.
-------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment