Such stupidity is a commonplace in our parts among public, state and media. It is of a piece with the unthinking and closed-minded view that is unique to us in India and Pakistan.
India went through this first 30 years ago when its troubles in Punjab were blamed on Pakistan. Those angered, those agitating, those killed in encounters, were all agents of the enemy state. The vocabulary of the state evolved and common people began using phrases like “asamajik tatva (anti-social element)” which came from propaganda.
When Muslims in Kashmir began a ferocious protest under the Jamaat-e-Islami and the umbrella organisation of Hurriyat, the villain was Pakistan. Even today, when the trouble is behind us, it will be difficult to find an Indian analyst who can say what is obvious to the world. That a large number of Kashmiri-speaking Muslims reject the Indian Constitution.
The primary cause of Kashmir’s trouble was unrest in the population. The militancy, whether local or imported, was secondary. Guerilla war, which is what was waged against India, cannot be prosecuted without a base in the population. But this violence became the narrative and there the solution was focused.
President Pervez Musharraf switched off the jihad in Kashmir (something India hasn’t thanked him for) and the violence wilted after 2002. It is almost gone today. But can we think of Kashmir as any other Indian state? I don’t think so, and the reason is that many if not most people in the valley are still sullen and attracted to the Jamaat-e-Islami and its calls for bandh.
I am visiting there in a few weeks and will have an update for you on this.
Meanwhile, Pakistan is going through the same problem today. India is to blame for the trouble in Balochistan. As a long-term observer of the Urdu press, this was not surprising to me. But I was taken aback by reading that even people like Najam Sethi were talking of Indian mischief in Balochistan. Analysts should get out more, because gathering information from mostly state sources will leave too much for them to filter out. Then there is talk of Indian intervention in Fata and elsewhere through the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan.
The damage done by Talibs to the Pakistan Navy is debited to India. Why? Because the aircraft they killed were India-specific. No more logic is advanced than this. But if Talibs consider the Pakistani state their enemy, and they do, it is only to be expected that they will pinch it where it hurts. It shows how paranoid thinking has become among analysts that this has not crossed their minds. If it has, I have yet to hear it.
I wonder who these people think in the Indian government authorises such mischief. Manmohan Singh? Sonia Gandhi? Then they don’t know much about India.
The sad fact is that our problems are mostly of our own making. Our Constitution, whether Indian or Pakistani, is not universally loved internally. We should try selling it more to those who don’t accept it.
To accept our neighbours have more sovereignty than we do over our areas, which is what we do when we blame the foreign hand, is ridiculous.
Published in The Express Tribune, November 18th, 2012.
COMMENTS (20)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
"Because history of past 65 years of Indo-Pak conflict shows that while India does not initiate aggression..."
This is laughable!
Brilliant. Denial rules in the subcontinent.
@stenson: WOW, And of course you can provide us references for those "international sources" (conspiracy bloggers not accepted) that you say proves "that India is using Afghanistan as a base to send criminals and terrorists to destabilize Pakistan"!!! Otherwise we will have to conclude that you are just making these things up!
@stenson: "This has been proven time and time again by international sources. "
Please provide a single international source that has proven this.
No one can dispute that India is using Afghanistan as a base to send criminals and terrorists to destablise Pakistan. This has been proven time and time again by international sources. The people of occupied Kashmir have wanted to rejoin Pakistan after they were cheated by the British and their Indian friends.
It is only us who r always sold like.....never heard in other countries so many sold souls.
I never miss your articles. Yours and Khaled Ahmed's write-ups always make me think.
President Pervez Musharraf switched off the jihad in Kashmir (something India hasn’t thanked him for) and the violence wilted after 2002. It is almost gone today. Now, please clarify me this - 1. Is Pervez Musharraf a Pakistani or not. Because the answer is obvious, he is a foreigner. 2. If Mr. Musharraf could switch of the jihad in Kashmir, it means the button of the 'switch' was in his hand which makes it 'The Foreign hand'... 3. Were foreign/Pakistani boots not involved in Kargil?? 4. Would you thank the thief for being caught by the police for the theft he did in your house? I just read the author talking of something being 'ridiculous'!!
lol.... now I forward my theory bear with it....Kargil attack was conducted by RSS swayamsevaks, Kandhar hijack by Shiv-sainiks,Kasab was Amar Singh and his accomplice Heera Lal,both were Sikh militants(concept borrowed from Sir Zaid), Naxals are providing Arms to Kashmirs militants.and all Lashkars and Jehadis bent on causing destruction in India are Bollywood character artistes..26/11 was a gang war between BJP and Shiv sena...cleverly twisted by India to her own benefit...food for thought...
But can we think of Kashmir as any other Indian state? - No, because all Hindus and Sikhs from the valley have been driven away!
@Sinclair, @BlackJack, thanks for your thoughtful comments. As far as thanking Musharraf goes - let us consider - Is this the man that led Kargill and derailed the Musharraf/Vajpayee dialog? - Is this the man tha came to Agra in July 2001 and derailed a potential agreement by giving a pompous speech about continuing to give ongoing support to Kashmiri jihadis - that completely took Vajpayee by surprise? - Do you think that US push to collaborate with war on terror combined with India flexing its muscles post December 2001 PArliament attack might have led to some rewiring of Musharraf's mindset and openness to out of box thinking? - Tha Pakistani army is finding it difficult to control its Western borders. Under the circumstances, it does not want to do things which would open the Eastern border up. Because history of past 65 years of Indo-Pak conflict shows that while India does not initiate aggression, it has successfully responded to every aggression attempted by Pakistan. SO again they are watching out for themselves (as they should) instead of for India. SO no thanks are due. This is a simple demonstration of pragmatism.
After trolling India and Pakistan in turns, I should congratulate the writer for successfully trolling both sides in one go this time around. With the context of partition and the subsequent territorial disputes between the two countries in mind, it isn't exactly inconceivable that the two could have made attempts to fish in troubled waters in the others' territories. Also, it would help if you consider the fact that the two were semi-proxies of the two opposing superpowers during the cold-war where covert interventionism was a major tool employed across both sides of the divide. South-East Asia, the Middle East, the Balkans etc come to mind when you think of it. So either the author's just being sensational here or he is being overly simplistic.
pakis have a natural habit of blaming everything on RAW/CIA/MOSSAD..............they dont understand the fact that the extremism which is imprinted in their minds has fuelled up the already existing insurgencies............shame on their ignorance...............
Punjab terrorism in the 1980s was partly indigenous but partly had external support. The society did not support it in general but there were pockets of some support for extremists. However, In Kashmir Pakistan was not fishing in troubled waters, it was causing turbulence. You yourself have said that general Musharraf had switched it off. Nations do take advantage of the situation as India did in east Pakistan. That is water under the bridge. Let us move on. A major change in the mind sets of both nations is the way forward.
The problem itself may not be created by a foreign hand, but never rule out someone "fishing in troubled waters" out of mischief, or even malice (Refer CIA). I do not consider any country so "innocent and pure" as to never indulge in such dirty games - not even my own country. But I know how India works in such adventurous scenarios - slow and with extreme caution. As for RAW going out on its own in Balochistan, it has no credibility whatsoever because it is India and its bureaucrats - it would be a miracle if they focused on the right things for once, forget about quick reaction times.
Somewhere between ridiculously naive to unnecessarily provocative. The CIA has a long and fairly well-documented history of covert operations that it has run in Central and South America as well as in the states beyond the iron curtain; I assume that Aakar Patel thinks that this is all hogwash. India does not blame Pakistan as the origin of its troubles - these are generally attributed to the fixed elections in 1989 (in Kashmir) and Indira Gandhi's own brand of interventionist politics (in Punjab). However, the writer apparently believes that in a troubled province or location, aggravating (and prolonging) an issue through mischief or malevolence is not possible - although the involvement of the Pak army in Kashmir and in supporting militant groups like the Babbar Khalsa are acknowledged even by Pakistani media; India has also played its part in Sri Lanka in a similar context - definitely not our finest hour. But last, this line is truly worthy of contempt. President Pervez Musharraf switched off the jihad in Kashmir (something India hasn’t thanked him for) - Musharraf switched off the jihad because of his domestic compulsions and the WoT and not the goodness of his heart; these compulsions are still in existence, which is why the jihad still remains controlled despite Musharraf's exit.
Why should India thank Pakistan for stopping jihad in Kashmir? Is state sponsored terrorism conduct becoming of a responsible nation? In addition, why do Indians suffer from Stockholm syndrome where they need to thank their tormentors?