Indian Aspirations and
Pakistan’s Illusions
by Prof. Khurshid Ahmad
Waves of change that surged world over since falling of the Wall of
Berlin and the disintegration of Russian Communist super power still appear to be
storming. The disturbing phenomenon of making and unmaking continues unabated. How long
shall it continue, nobody knows.
It is but natural that once a set up is disturbed, the situation
remains turbulent till a new order emerges. A decade is not a long period in the history
of nations, but the seeds of dissension sown by the new tug of war for supremacy all
through these ten years and the price the wronged humanity is paying for it, is
breath-taking. The long process of ravaging continues in every part of the world.
Especially the politics, the economy and the culture of the Pak-India sub-continent and
the Eastern and Central Asia have been the target of this clash and tumult. Rise and fall
of political powers, success and defeat in political and military encounters, ebb and flow
of economy, changes in leadership and turns of revolutions have been the symptoms of this
change. Simultaneously, for thoughtful people these are blazing signs as to the happenings
in future and provide great opportunities for deliberation and concentration. The holy
Qur’an reveals the truth that a process of grand objectives is always at work in the
background of this open game of changes and innovations. If it is availed in time, the
direction of history can be changed. But if such opportunities are wasted then nothing
falls to the fate of the nation except belated cries.
And did not Allah check one set of people by means of another, the
earth would indeed be full of mischief: But Allah is full of bounty to all the worlds.
(Al-Baqara:251)
Making mention of the mutual animosity, hatred and enmity between
nations, Allah sayeth:
Every time they kindle the fire of war, Allah doth extinguish it; But
they (ever) strive to do mischief on earth. And Allah loveth not those who do mischief.
(Al-Ma’idah :64)
In the light of these messages of Allah, it is necessary to cast a
discerning eye over the recent events in the sub-continent so that decisions and
subsequent practical steps could be taken according to the real aims and targets of the
Islamic Millat of Pakistan rather than personal inclinations, short lived
interests, external influences and suppositions based on narrow mindedness.
Hindu Cast of Mind
The extremist Hindu tendency in India that surfaced in the shape of a
dominating force in the country as a result of the recent elections, is not so much a new
reality. Its roots are deep in its history of five thousand years. This trend has been
manifest in all the important ideological, religious, cultural and political activities of
Hindus, particularly during the last two centuries. This was the trend that forced the
Muslim leaders of India from Sir Syed Ahmad Khan to Quaid-e-Azam, to give up the deceptive
target of "Hindu Muslim unity". Instead, faith, civilization and culture became
the focus of their endeavors. On that basis after independence, a new order was
established in the shape of two dominions. The last 50 years bear testimony that the
Muslim Ummah accepted this new arrangement with open heart but the Hindu majority of India
and its political leadership did never accept it in reality. Their inner resolve remained
dormant under the cover of diplomacy and duplicity, but for how long could it remain so?
After all this cover of duplicity was gradually removed. ‘Shahadat’ of
Babri mosque in 1992 and the countrywide elections of 1996 and 1998 so manifestly cleared
every thing that all the friends and foes now admit the domination of Hindu Hindutva.
Among these the only exceptions are the ones who are overcome by complacency and who
refuse to see what is so apparent.
Six-point Sabotage Plan
Every Muslim and every sane person desires and longs for peace and
security not only in this sub-continent but throughout the world. However, peace and
security cannot be achieved by simply longing for it. An understanding of the facts, an
effective strategy and full force of action are needed for achieving the desired goals and
for making them indispensable. Cowardice, weakness, diplomacy and sycophancy do not
achieve peace and security. These are fruits of tenacity of purpose, zeal for the target,
attaining effective stamina for structuring and creations and full-fledged preparations
and mobilization for protecting freedom and honor. That is why Qur’an has guided the
Muslim Ummah toward a right strategy in very clear terms:
Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power,
including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and
your enemies and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. Whatever
ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be
treated unjustly.
(Al-Anfa’l: 60)
The internal and external politics of a faithful Shari’ah-bearing
and respectable nation cannot be based on any foundations other than the ones stated
above. But our political leadership, claiming to be the heirs of Pakistan’s founder
party, donning also the plume of heavy popular mandate, appears to be restless and zealous
to woo the Hindu extremist leadership of India and is so complacent about it. It is
dreaming to build up castles of peace and security on the sands of American support and
the "moderation and befriending" of Atal Bihari Bajpai. All this is astonishing
– rather embarrassing.
Presently the foremost need for Pakistanis as a nation is to have
correct and accurate understanding of the facts and to discard the conjectures of
complacency and dependence on foreigners. No doubt we should stand firm on the ground and
should not stretch beyond our resources. It does not, however, mean that we should not
take notice of the affairs of the world and the maneuverings of our adversaries, nor
should we be oblivious of our aims and intentions or our steadfastness. To be victorious,
it is imperative that there should be accurate comprehension of the situation, judicious
use of the resources, awareness of the nation and for its full-scale participation in this
process of struggle and development. This is the way to our stability and progress. The
Western plan to sabotage regional power equation can be summed up as follows:
1. Perception of the reality at the international level that all the
American efforts aim at its political, economic, military and cultural supremacy and
domination over the whole world is absolutely necessary. It is not just a matter of
friendship and cooperation as these are everybody’s innate desires, but the fact
cannot be ignored that today’s only super power (U.S.) harbors plans for supremacy
and domination instead of mere friendship. It is expressed overtly and covertly in the
statements of former President George Bush and his team as also those of the President
Clinton and his advisers. The latest declaration is that of Clinton administration about
CTBT. It has been commented upon editorially by The daily Guardian, London in its
issue of April 7,1998:
But there is also widespread skepticism that the treaty merely
legitimizes the dominance of the nuclear five. The Clinton administration has said the
treaty will ‘prevent other nations from acquiring weapons and WILL DEMONSTRATE U.S.
GLOBAL LEADERSHIP’. As Robert Bell, Arms Control Director of the US National Security
Council has put it, ‘the point of the treaty is to ban the bang, not to ban the bomb.
(The Guardian "Ban the Bang: Who believes
it’s a new start?" April 7, 1998, p.15)
2. Leaving apart the soothers provided to others by U.S. on regional
basis, America’s vivid target is to encircle China to strangulate it and not to allow
any Asian country to emerge as world power. To build up India as an Asian power against
China, Japan and the Islamic polity, is an important part of the overall American plan.
But it would not be possible unless Pakistan accepts India’s supremacy in one way or
the other, may it be in the shape of regional cooperation or even friendship.
3. Another target on the regional level is to make Israel so strong in
the Middle East that it controls not only the Arab world but the entire Islamic world also
– militarily it should be superior to all and by dint of power it may raise the bogey
of peace and thus have a grip economically over the Arab as well as the Islamic World.
Then India and Israel – who already have abundant mutual cooperation at all levels,
military, political, economic, as well as in research and in espionage – may become
custodians of the whole area and thus fulfil their own and American designs.
4. Also on the regional basis it is deemed necessary that no real
alliance should emerge between Muslim countries and the Arab countries. They should fight
each other so that their resources are utilized by others to the maximum and should not be
let to be used for the prosperity of the people of this region, nor for a strong Muslim
Block to emerge.
5. In order to keep India in its fold, such situation must be
encouraged so that national level political powers may weaken and regional forces in India
are strengthened for utilizing them as leverage from different angles. The multinationals
should play an increasingly prominent role so that they could influence future policies of
India.
6. In Pakistan, the American policy is to encourage forces that may
open Pakistan’s markets for American and European investment and products, be
prepared to curtail defense expenditures and may agree to restrict its nuclear power
according to the dictates of the Western countries. Further, these forces should be
enamored of the Western culture and civilization and should line up not only for economic,
cultural and political friendship with India but even for alliances and annexation. For
liquidating the Kashmir question, some Oslo-type or Ireland model game be played. Pakistan
should be cut off from Arab world, Middle East and the Islamic World, which is its natural
place, and tied with India and Southern Asia wherefrom it had earlier carved out itself.
It should be distanced from Afghanistan and Iran. Southern Asian and SAARC chain should be
strengthened and Pakistan-China friendship split apart.
For this purpose, it is necessary that in the name of open mindedness
in Pakistan, secularism and culture, civilization and literation and a common economy with
India may be propagated. Feminist movement should be upped by popularizing the Western
cultural ways so that family bonds are torn to pieces, the new generation be driven to the
path of linguistic and class distinctions, violation, narcotics and licentious life and
there should be downsizing in defence forces in the name of developing education and human
resources. (Interestingly, the external debt and the interest paid thereon consume 50% of
our revenue receipts but there is no mention about it. Our financial wizards and former
finance ministers who have been responsible for burdening this poor nation with huge
loans, do not at all speak of this enormous burden and are making the defence expenditure
the major target which now constitutes half the amount of the debt service). An important
aim of this strategy appears to deprive Pakistan of its nuclear capability. After failing
to make Pakistan yield in the past, a new approach is now being worked out. We apprehend
that on the occasion of the ensuing visit of President Clinton, participation of Pakistan
in CTBT in one form or the other might be arranged.
This is a six-point plan that is being acted upon by the Western
countries. Now we have to see what is the place of the recent changes in India in the plan
and in what direction the Government of Pakistan wishes to lead this country.
Hindu Fascism
Bharatia Janata Party was formally established in 1980 and within 18
years it overshadowed the political horizon. But in fact, Hindu extremist movement has
been gaining ground since the beginning of the 19th century. Its first movement
came into existence in 1820. Thus alongside the Congress, Hindu Sabha (1907) and then
Hindu Mahasabha (1918) had been playing this role. Rashtria Sevak Sangh was established in
September 1925 and earlier in 1923 Hindu extremist leader V.D. Sawarkar presented his
extremist policy in his book Hindutva which is treated as the Bible of this
movement and its achievement is BJP’s real target. This booklet of Savarkar is based
on Rig Veda, according to which Hindus are those who are kept together through
sacred relations of birth and earth. Under this system Hindu and Hindustan – sacred
mother country – Pitrubhu and Punyabhu – are connected like body and
soul. This holy land has been encircled by three sacred rivers Sindh, Ganges and
Barahamputra. Savarkar himself played a central role in Mahasabha. He and Mr. K.B. Hedg
War who had full faith in Savarkar’s Hindutva and had become its preacher –
established Rashtria Sevak Sangh. In September 1925, on the occasion of the Hindu festival
Dosehra, which is the mark of Krishna’s victory over Rawan, the first
Sevak was set up at Nagpur and then this semi-military movement grew stronger. Twice it
was banned but it could not deter it and gradually Rashtria Sevak Sangh (RSS) became the
spinal cord of Hindu extremism. RSS had claimed in 1989 that it has in its fold 18 lakh
trained Sevaks who are working in its 25,000 branches at 18800 places (See Robert
Eric Frikin Berg’s article Hindu Fundamentalism and Structural Stability of India,
vol. III of the Fundamentalism project ‘Fundamentalism and the State,’ University
of Chicago Press, 1993, pp. 242-243).
After partition of the sub-continent, the RSS movement gave birth to
Bhartia Jan Sangh under the leadership of Dr. Shiama Parshad Mukerji. He was a federal
minister in the Nehru cabinet. He had refused to recognize the partition of the country
and had resigned from the cabinet in protest against Liaquat-Nehru Pact of 1951. The whole
leadership of RSS played the central role in its formation. This is the Jan Sangh, that
became under the leadership of Atal Bihari Bajpai a part of Janata Dal established by
Murarji Desai and Mr. Bajpai joined Desai’s cabinet along with Sangh’s another
leader K.L. Advani. (Only three Ministers were from Jan Sangh. In the Assembly the number
of Sangh members was stated to be 91). Janata Dal government held the reins twice. Due to
its failure, Bhartia Jan Sangh was disbanded and in April 1980 it was formed anew in the
shape of Bhartia Janata Party. It secured two seats in 1984 and 178 seats in 1998 in the
Central Assembly. Its various provincial governments are already in position including the
one in U.P. in whose leadership Babri Mosque was desecrated. Now this party is leading the
Central government. Thus it is a series that has been continuing since 1925.
Concept of Hindutva
Now let us glance over the base of its ideological and political stand.
Philosophically it is based on the Hindu concept of the universe and believes in organic
unity. Politically it has four basic principles and targets that must be understood:
First thing that is the most fundamental is its concept of nationalism
and collectivism that has been presented by M.S. Golwalkar, a thinker of this movement, in
his book "We, Or Our Nationhood Defined" as a gist of Savarkar’s
thoughts. It is even today the spirit of BJP’s manifesto and its strategy. Its main
theme is one country, one nation and one culture. Gowalkar writes:
The non-Hindu peoples in Hindustan must adopt the Hindu culture and
language, must learn to respect and hold in reverence Hindu religion, must entertain no
idea but glorification of the Hindu race and culture i.e. they must not only give up their
attitude of intolerance and ungratefulness towards this land and its age-old traditions,
but must also cultivate a positive attitude of love and devotion instead... in a word:
they must cease to be foreigners, or must stay in this country wholly subordinated to the
Hindu nation, claiming nothing, deserving no privilege, far less any preferential
treatment, not even citizen rights.
(Mahadev Sudashiv Golwalkar,
"We, or Our Nationhood Defined", Nagpur,
India Prakashan, 1939, 1947, pp. 55-56)
Golwalkar and the whole leadership of this school of thought declares
Muslims (and similarly the Christians) as foreigners and the only way for them to survive
is to fall in line with Hindutva and get themselves absorbed therein.
Peter Popham, the correspondent of the daily Independent of
London, has explained the mentality of BJP and RSS displayed on the occasion of the recent
success of Bharatia Janata Party:
The BJP is not a party like other parties. It is the political wing of
a paramilitary organization founded 73 years ago called the Rashtriya Swayamsevak
Sangh...the RSS take itself very seriously. Its growth during the last decades of British
rule was an attempt to do for the Hindus what Mussolini and Hitler were doing for Italy
and Germany: evoke a vanished golden age of national strength and purity; create
solidarity by identifying and stigmatizing national enemies; and lay the basis for a take
over of the state by creating a corps of dedicated, paramilitary zealots.
"There was a time when our country was free and prosperous and had
attained commanding heights in every walk of life," the RSS’s website declares.
"And yet it found itself defeated and disgraced at the hands of a handful of foreign
invaders...." The abiding obsession has been ‘the Muslim Problem’. What to
do about the 11 percent of India’s population who owed allegiance not to Lord Rama
but to Mecca. Golwalkar, the RSS leader still known simply as "guru", took
Hitler’s attitude to his own ‘Semitic’ problem as his inspiration. "To
keep up the purity of the nation and its culture, Germany shocked the world by the purging
of its Semitic race, the Jews," he wrote in We, or our Nationhood Defined.
"National pride at its highest has been manifested there. Germany has also shown how
well-nigh impossible it is for races and cultures having differences going to the root to
be assimilated...." "The core beliefs of the RSS, however, have been consistent
down the years. Muslims and other minorities are still the obsession." (The
Independent, London. March 22,1998 "India’s new rulers enter with a whiff of
fascism")
The representative of American Magazine Time writes in his book The
Indian Unrest:
The whole tendency of the Hindu revival ... during the last twenty
years had been constantly anti-Mohamedan..."
The second point of the basic creed of RSS, Bharatia Jan Sangh and
Bharatia Janata Party itself is to establish the unity of India and the program to undo
the (1947) Partition of the country. This program is the first point of Jan Sangh’s
manifesto viz. "United India is our life blood". Indiai Janata Party has,
however, stated it somewhat tactfully. Prof. D.D. Pattanaik in his book "Hindu
Nationalism in India" (vol. 3) comes to the conclusion after studying the
literature of both Jan Sangh and BJP, that both of them have a common target, viz. to undo
the partition of the country and to establish India’s oneness. This target is not
limited to Pakistan and Bangladesh but all the neighboring countries that formed part of
India in the past are now the target for a Greater India. In regard to BJP he adds the
following:
Political unification may not be viable but culturally it may be
possible. Stating this, Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi, the former BJP President, held that
voluntary merger of neighboring countries which were part of India in the past, viz.
Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Burma and Sri Lanka, is possible.
(The Statesman, 19 January, 1992)
Bharatia Janata Party had organized the ‘Aikta March’
in 1990 from Somnath to Kashmir with the sole purpose of defining its target. After the
formation of Bharatia Janata Party government, its secretary general not only declared
that they would recover their territories from Pakistan and China but he had proposed a
confederation of Southern Asian countries. The Chief of Tehrik-e-Takmeel-e-Pakistan
Mr. Mahmood Ali and Sardar Abdul Qayyum, have expressed their fears that the installation
of Akhand India in some way or the other is becoming the important goal of the
politics of the Continent. It is being supported by the United States also and a lobby is
active for this purpose in this country (Pakistan) as well (See Nawa-e-Waqt,
statement of Sardar Abdul Qayyum, the Editorial – Disclosure of Akhand India Plan
– 1st March 1998 and Jang Rawalpindi, March 7, 1998).
Bharatia Janata Party’s concept of India, its nationalist
ideology, and to merge once again Pakistan and other countries of this entire region in
the shape of Akhand India and to clamp India’s supremacy over this part of the
world, are the primary and basic objectives for which they have been working since the
last 75 years. Their target has remained the same, no matter what the name and
organization of the party. For achieving these goals, work is being done in literary,
political and cultural fields, besides mustering a military force and equipping it with
such traditional and non-traditional weapons by dint of which India could become the
policeman of the whole region and thus it becomes not only a regional but global power of
some degree.
Further, two more principles are stated to have a fundamental bearing.
One, the setting up of a capitalist economy based on free market that may be a model of
Brahmanic money-lending concept of economy; and second, putting into practice the
indigenous concept of becoming self-sufficient and as a result of which the influence of
multi-national corporations may abate and Indian trade companies and their own
multinationalism should prosper.
These four points form the axis, round which the policies and
activities of RSS and Bharatia Janata Party have been revolving and shall do so. After the
recent electoral success the leadership of RSS and BJP has openly declared that due to
lack of overwhelming majority they would work on a common agenda but Party’s real
target shall be as per their manifesto and it shall follow a twenty five years plan when
it gains full power and achieves its real targets.
BJP’s Future Outlook
For the sake of common program, their claims in their manifesto viz.
absolute merger of Kashmir by eliminating Clause 370 of the (Indian) Constitution and
having a common Civil Code by abrogating the personal and family laws of Muslims, have
been apparently deferred and similarly the program for constructing Ram Mandir in place of
Babri Mosque is also not mentioned in the program, but when the statements of Indian
leaders are analyzed and their very common agenda is studied, one finds that these things
have been inserted between the lines in some form or the other, e.g. setting up of a
Constitutional Commission that shall prepare suggestions in the light of the experience of
the last fifty years. Clause 370 and the Personal Law are covered in it. As for the
question of Babri Mosque, the Prime Minister Bajpai and his compatriots have clearly said,
"they will not resort to court and legal proceedings. Instead some solutions shall be
found through negotiations and consensus". The same course of action has been
announced in the case of other mosques, which are the targets of the extremist leadership.
These include the mosques of Mathura and Kanshi in addition to the 2000 more, which are on
their bloody agenda.
Nuclear Option and "liberating" Azad Kashmir from Pakistan
are openly included in the program of the new government. Similarly pressurizing China and
itself becoming a world power are also the items of this agenda.
There should not be any misunderstanding or complacency in regard to
the thinking and the aims of the new leadership of India. The Pakistani leadership may
negotiate with anybody but it should stay fully conscious whom it is dealing with, vividly
comprehending their resolve and program and its own objectives and targets. Better stay
cautious in relying on others and in harboring hopes. Experiences of the past should not
be forgotten by the Pakistan Prime Minister – some of them relate to the recent
events about which he complained: "Mr. Gujral was a very good guy but failed to honor
his words". The Foreign Secretary of India said one thing in Islamabad and within
hours on reaching Delhi he changed his words – and it did not happen once or twice
– it has been happening since the last fifty years. We are bitten repeatedly from a
known hole and are still prepared for more bites.
The Present Indian
Leadership
Having understood the historical role of Bharatia Janata Party and
Hindu extremism and their common objectives in their dealings in different postures, it
appears necessary that accurate assessments are made about the 72-year old Prime Minister,
Atal Bihari Bajpai and should not indulge in vain fancies on mere hearsay. No doubt, he
enjoys the reputation of being ‘a good man in a bad party’, or that he is a
moderate fellow. Also that the then Pakistan’s leadership was impressed by his
pleasant disposition when he was the foreign minister of India. All these things might be
true but we do not intend to analyze his personal life, yet Indian newspapers, the books
published there and particularly the memoirs of his fellows in the cabinet and in the
parliament are replete with this sort of information which should be useful for the
negotiators to possess as also to understand the different facets of his personality.
First of all we should keep in mind that we are not doing our
ambassadorship in an era of kingship where the ruler enjoyed absolute powers and much
depends upon his personal likes and dislikes. Today’s political system is working on
absolutely different basis. There is a weak coalition government in India and its survival
depends on not one or two but 18 political parties, their mercurial leadership and their
ever-changing interests. If only seven members of parliament change sides, the government
shall be flattened. Pinning hopes on such a government that it shall be able to take any
major decision or it can take the courage of initiating any new action about basic
problems like Kashmir, is a complacency that merits little appreciation.
Bajpai being ‘principled’ and ‘moderate minded’ can
be understood from the fact that he has been a member – a resolute member – of
Jan Singh from his childhood and even today he considers it his body and soul. His
Interior Minister – K.L. Advani, is an extremist of the first order, and the Minister
for Human Resources Shri Murli Manohar Joshi even surpasses Advani in his severity. Thus
the ministries of Interior and Human Resources are in the hands of the two most prejudiced
and authoritative persons who have been Party’s presidents. Of the 13 ministers of
BJP, 9 have been nominated by RSS and Bajpai could do nothing. He wanted very much to give
Finance Ministry to Jaswant Singh but he was helpless against the opposition of RSS.
According to daily The Asian Age (London and Delhi) Prime Minister Bajpai was left
alone in regard to the selection of Finance Minister and his nominee (Jaswant Singh) could
not get the support of a single person (21-22 March, 1998). Of what use can be his
"moderate demeanor" in the presence of such a strong hold of RSS?
This electroplating of moderation need not be given much weight because
all significant observers are of the view that Bajpai is merely a showpiece. He does not
possess the real authority; that lies with RSS and it shall rule the roost.
As for Mr. Bajpai, there is no exaggeration in the claim that he is an
adept in changing colors and adapting himself suiting the occasion. Kuldeep Nayyar’s
articles about him "Two Faces of Bajpai" (Dawn, March 28,1998) and
"How Long Before the Mask is Off, Mr. Bajpai?" (The Asian Age, Delhi and
London, 21 March 1998) are worth reading. Kuldeep Nayyar makes particular mention of the
article written by Mr. Bajpai under the caption "The Sangh (RSS) is my Soul".
Mr. Bajpai writes:
Their religion will not be changed. They can follow their own religion.
Mecca can continue to be holy for the Muslims but India should be holier than the holy for
them. You can go to a mosque and offer namaz, you can keep the roza. We have
no problem. But if you have to choose between Mecca or Islam and India you must choose
India. All the Muslims should have this feeling: we will live and die only for this
country."
(The Nation, January 24, 1998)
About the program of Rashtria Sevak Sangh (RSS), Mr. Bajpai writes that
it has two sides – First, to organize Hindus and second, to build up such a strong
Hindu society that should be ideologically united and above petty differences so that it
could execute its program.
Mr. Kuldeep Nayyar writes about Bajpai: "He is a product of RSS
and there is no doubt that RSS is using his liberal image to gain power" (Dawn,
March 28, 1998). Kuldeep Nayyar makes mentions of the three-day consultative moot of RSS
wherein it was said that they would achieve their real targets within 25 years. He has
quoted the Joint Secretary RSS, Mr. Mohan Das, who had declared in very clear terms that
neither the plan to construct Ram Mandir shall be shelved nor the claim of Mathura and
Kanshi would be withdrawn. Therefore, it is simply the matter of postponing the program
for the time being and Mr. Bajpai himself is an adherent of this strategy. He, however,
takes one stand while preparing Party’s manifesto and skips over to another while
implementing the common program. He thus has two faces, not one.
The conduct of Mr. Bajpai as Foreign Minister is often discussed so
much so that in his congratulatory letter Mr. Nawaz Sharif made mention of it. But it has
been ignored that he was at that time a member of the cabinet of Prime Minister Murarji
Desai who was rightly awarded Pakistan’s highest civil award. Mr. Murarji Desai was
among those Indian leaders who had heartily accepted the partition of the country and
always honored it practically. Mr. Bajpai was a member of that cabinet where majority
disagreed with his real thinking but now he is Prime Minister of the government
established by BJP whose strings are held by the RSS.
In this context, Kuldeep Nayyar’s comment that sheds light over
Mr. Bajpai’s double personality is worth studying. He writes:
What left Islamabad speechless was when he reportedly remarked that
they should forget what he said in the past because he was then Jan Sangh member and was
now part of Janata Party. The visit was highly successful. Did the real Bajpai emerge, or
did he act to suit the ambiance? Riding two horses at the same time can be an aerobatic
feat. But it cannot be a proper way of governance.
Similarly, the aspect of Mr. Bajpai’s conduct that he displayed in
bringing together Jan Sangh and Janata Dal may be kept in view. This alliance came into
being on the pledge that the relations between the RSS and Jan Sangh will be severed
completely. The well-known Indian leader Jay Parkash Narain also had played a key role in
this deal. Primary negotiations were held and agreements drawn between Jay Parkash and
Atal Bihari Bajpai but what was the conduct of Mr. Bajpai at that crucial time of test,
are stated by Mr. Kuldeep Nayyar:
It was the Gandhite Jayparkash Narayan who having full faith in the Jan
Sangh brought it into the Janata fold. He was disappointed when it did not break its ties
with the RSS. He even said that he felt cheated. Ultimately, the Jan Sangh members walked
out of Janata on that very question. Bajpai was one of them.
Indian newspapers have published the self-compiled autobiography of
Subramaniam Swami – a leader of the Janata Party. Some excerpts have appeared in the
monthly "Afkar-e-Milli" published from Delhi (April 1998). They depict
his (Bajpai’s) double rather triple sided personality. Further, they bring out as to
when and what role he has been playing in regional conspiracies. Inspite of his opposing
Indra Gandhi’s emergency, he played tacts right from rendering apologies for release
up to the tug of war with Murarji Desai, Charan Singh and Jagjeevan Ram. All these things
help in understanding his politics and modus operandi. A matter of very basic importance
that Pakistan must know is the particular tilt of Mr. Bajpai towards Russia (and this is
also said about Indian Defense Minister George Fernandis). Both have serious reservations
about China and this is the thing that makes them not only acceptable to America rather
points towards a special role in the regional politics of the future, whereas China has
been our most dependable friend.
Pakistan’s Stance
After analyzing the political scenario in India, it is necessary to
cast a glance over Pakistan’s stand and the advances made by it in this regard.
The first thing that has caused anxiety to the thoughtful persons is
the infinite desire for friendship with India that our Prime Minister has been displaying
every now and then since February 1997 when he assumed the office. Despite the repeated
flogging from India, his eagerness and manifestation has been on the increase. Naturally
one can ask as to what is in the background!
The Prime Minister, the Defense Minister and other leaders of India
have all along been saying that there shall be no negotiations on Kashmir. If it is held,
it shall be on retrieval of Azad Kashmir from Pakistan, but here in Pakistan negotiations
are talked about every now and then. India may have any type of government but our
eagerness to beseech them goes unabated. The more they show their aversion and avoidance
the more is our eagerness, longing and interest to woo them. It is also worth mentioning
that in his letter which our Prime Minister wrote to Mr. Gujral on his assuming
premiership, the Kashmir problem was mentioned as a core issue, but in the letter written
to Mr. Bajpai, a reference about Kashmir has been made but not as a key issue. Further, in
his interview with Kuldeep Nayyar, our Prime Minister appears to be giving a message that
there be only an expression of intention for negotiations on Kashmir, even if there are
any negotiations, or no matter how long negotiations may go on, with or without any
outcome, all this will be acceptable. Kuldeep Nayyar writes:
Nawaz Government shall be satisfied if only negotiations do start. He
has no time frame in his mind. Three months earlier he had told in an interview that once
negotiations start on Kashmir, he would not mind how much time it takes. His position is
still the same but he wants to keep the ball rolling even after the installation of a new
government in New Delhi. When questioned if the army shall be satisfied with this
approach, he said that there was no question of army intervening. There was no pressure on
him from that quarter.
(daily Khabrain, March 1, 1998)
This very view was expressed by the Foreign Minister Mr. Gohar Ayub
Khan, in an interview to a representative of an Indian newspaper in Colombo, saying:
"The Kashmir question would ‘eventually’ become the
subject of discussion, to be held ‘repeatedly’ among the two countries...(The
accent on ‘eventual’ talk could be construed as a willingness to wait
indefinitely) If India simply refuses to discuss Kashmir, then it will be difficult for
Pakistan to continue the talks. (The Hindu, February 3, 1998).
In this interview, some ‘new thoughts’ of Gujral have been
mentioned and in that context Gohar Ayub Khan told something to the representative of The
Hindu, making a reference to Mr. Nawaz Sharif, which was a fatal blow to
Pakistan’s principled stand:
Mr. Ayub Khan quoted Mr. Sharif as having told Mr. Gujral further as
follows: ‘If we (India and Pakistan) have to get lawyers to interpret the very basis
of certain agreements to sort the negotiations, where are we going to go? We (Pakistanis)
are not going to go there. It has to be a will to start the dialogue’. (The Hindu,
February 7, 1998).
On the one hand, the compromise on the central and the foremost stand
on the question of Kashmir, yet our anxiousness for enhancing trade relations with India
(despite the existing deficit of Rs. 10 billion), then the Prime Minister’s agreement
on the occasion of SAARC Conference, for setting up of a free trade zone within two to
three years, the more than frequent visits of cultural and business delegations, tour to
India by Prime Minister’s son, bringing in vogue the Hindu festival like ‘Basant’
in Pakistan and reception of India’s cultural troupe and then claiming repeatedly
that Prime Minister enjoys a mandate for all these things — openly clash with the
aims and interests of Pakistan and the Muslim Ummah. That is why Nawa-i-Waqt
itself, which had supported this government more than any one else, is now crying hoarse
and admonishes that this dangerous game should be stopped. See eight editorials during one
month, i.e., 1st, 3rd, 5th, 6th, 20th, 27th, 30th, and 31st of March, 1998.
It is now sufficiently clear that the attitude of the Government of
Pakistan has been indicative of a departure from the principled stand and represents
confused thinking and compromises. The nation has neither ever given any mandate to any
ruler for such deviations – rather disloyalty, nor would tolerate it at any cost.
This rot must stop immediately, otherwise it shall be difficult to save the country from
severe internal and external strife.
The government has committed yet another Himalayan blunder by signing
the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) without necessary reservations. In fact this
agreement is a part of the plan to give superiority to the Western nations over the whole
world. Like the nuclear weapons, the chemical weapons also serve as a deterrent. There was
no reason in accepting it merely because India also had agreed to it. The first thing is
that those possessing chemical weapons, like other nuclear weapons, should be asked to
destroy their stock in the first instance instead of tying up others’ hands.
Furthermore, India has as usual, played foul. First, they said that they possessed no
chemical weapons, but just at the time of ratification, they admitted the presence of
chemical material and thus endeavored to save it.
In regard to CWC, America is on the front line, yet it has managed to
secure protection on two points viz. American President’s authority to refuse
allowing inspection of certain places and the right to accept or reject any inspecting
authority. Our Government has made no effort for securing such rights. What is the reason
and why other countries be deprived of the safeguards that America is seeking for itself?
Who can deny the fact that during the last few years the right of inspection has been used
many a time for undue interventions and embarrassment? Today it is happening in Iraq.
Other countries may also become target some day. India and Israel can play this game. In
Articles IV and VI and in the Verification Annex. to the Agreement, all those powers are
included which can be used seditiously by other countries. Protection against such acts,
at least in the shape of national legislation, was necessary then and for all times to
come.
The experiment of Ghauri Missile is a timely and commendable step, and
should be appreciated. This can complete and strengthen our nuclear deterrent system. It
is the most important need of the hour but we must be fully aware of the danger, lest we
may have to pay for the initial lenient reaction of America concerning Ghauri Missile, in
the shape of signing CTBT. Every conspiracy in this regard must be checked in time.
This is the background in which America is endeavoring for India’s
conditional acceptance of CTBT consoling it that: You are practically a nuclear power,
already in a position to prepare 80 to 100 bombs, and in addition you possess raw material
for preparing 1000 bombs as claimed by the Indian scientists recently. In this way the
U.S. shall recognize India as a nuclear power unofficially and shall be prepared to extend
all possible privileges if only India signs CTBT. India agreeing, the entire pressure
shall be exerted on Pakistan for signing CTBT as already committed. It shall be followed
by a demand that Pakistan opens its installations for inspection. There is urgent need to
forestall it. The only way to do is to push research and development on Missiles and to
practically induct them into our defence system on the one hand, and attain so much of
nuclear capacity on the other hand that at least for the next 20 to 25 years we possess a
deterrent to at least encounter India.
Pakistan’s real need today is not to negotiate or trade with India
but reforming and stabilizing the country and the nation ideologically, morally,
economically, socially and militarily. We need to do away with the ideological confusion
and dichotomy and create harmony with respect to national objectives. We need to improve
the law and order situation and to protect the country’s frontiers not only with
reference to the military activities but in regard to smuggling and subversion also.
Instead of downsizing the defence forces, what is needed is their optimal rationalization
and keeping them in readiness. The relative shortfalls already existing in the Air Force
and the Navy must be rectified. For re-scheduling foreign debts some package must urgently
be prepared so that resources for defence and human and economic development could be made
available.
India should be apprised in clear terms that in regard to the future of
Kashmir, the foremost and real issue for us is a decision in the light of UN Resolutions.
If India is prepared to negotiate on modalities for ascertaining the wishes of Kashmiri
people according to the UN Resolutions, we shall be quite happy, otherwise there is no
question of any negotiations on trade and cultural relations with India. Rather, a trade
boycott of India should be initiated from our country and the whole world be invited to
join it as contained in the OIC Resolutions of Karachi and Casablanka. Cultural relations,
participation in games and similar other so-called trust building steps, are mere
deceptions. We should openly tell them that in the event of tortures in Kashmir and denial
of the right of plebiscite, it is not possible for any self-respecting nation to
participate in the ventures. Comprehensive and all comprising steps should be taken about
national security and strengthening of defence. The foremost priority should be awarded to
self-reliance in military, economic and cultural fields. It shall boost our negotiating
ability and strength and the country shall advance towards self-reliance and prosperity.
As a result of the dominance of Hindu extremism, the challenge created
for India and its Muslim population, and the issues and dangers it has posed to Pakistan
and other neighboring countries, merit serious thinking, meaningful planning to counter
it, warrant to create awareness regionally and internationally and necessitates to
initiate serious counter-actions. It is also absolutely necessary to take the nation into
confidence and to prepare it for every confrontation. Dreaming for India’s friendship
or expecting support from the so-called Western friends in these circumstances is just an
illusion. It amounts to acting like an ostrich hiding its head under the sand instead of
facing the danger. Bravery demands preparation for accepting the challenge with the
consciousness as to whom we have to deal with. A tiger does not alter its originality and
a wolf does not turn into a sheep by putting up its skin. To distinguish between friend
and foe, to muster up strength, to face the challenge and to stand up to the occasion
– the living nations have always opted for.
Translation and adaptation of the
editorial of Tarjuman Ul Quran May,1998.
