By:
By Moorthy Muthuswamy PhD
moorthy@charter.net
April 18, 2004
A coalition will take over at the
helm in New Delhi after the elections. General Musharraf of Pakistan has
been putting pressure on the Indians to seriously talk about Kashmir. He
appears to strongly demand a composite dialogue that focuses on resolving
Kashmir conflict by July-August. At the moment there exists no analysis as
to what kind of a mandate exists for any regime in power now to undertake
a far-reaching “peace settlement” with Pakistan. This paper takes up this
issue in a greater detail.
The things I mention
here may not be palatable for some. Nevertheless, this should not be the
reason for ignoring this analysis. India has managed to box itself in a
precarious strategic situation by ignoring meaningful analysis such as
this.
First of all, if
anyone thinks that Kashmir issue is the root cause of the Indo-Pak
conflict, they couldn’t be more wrong. In my previous publication (When
are India and Pakistan ready for peace?)
I had discussed the
roots of the conflict and concluded that this has little to do with
Kashmir but everything to do with the existence of an “infidel” India.
Transition
leadership situation
The emerging India
has seen Indians competing successfully in several areas, including
software industries at the international level. This sector is creating
wealth as well as people with ability to solve problems. However,
governing the country continues to be poor due to the limited quality of
people embracing politics. This is also true with journalism and
media. India has largely been a dysfunctional democracy for these two
reasons -- when two key pillars that can make a democracy work are so
under-performing (more on this later).
The current
leadership in New Delhi has shown far more sensitivity and initiative in
dealing with Islamic fascists than their opposition predecessors.
Nevertheless, we must also discuss its shortcomings in evaluating whether
it can act to promote/safeguard India’s long-term interests.
None of the top
leaders at the national level, including the current regime in New Delhi,
have shown the ability to provide leadership in defeating Islamic fascism
that controls Kashmir and is now spreading to the rest of India. A good
measure of the leadership lies is pointing out the attributes of religious
fascism (The
woes of Jammu and Ladakh) in order to mobilize the nation and solve
this problem once for all, starting with the removal of Article 370. Quite
to the contrary, there is talk of enhanced autonomy to Kashmir without the
understanding that this fascism relishes on autonomy and isolation and
thus will continue its dance and get subsidies from the rest of India and
its Hindu majority. The religious fascism plays a prominent role even
under a democratic Pakistan. Fascism dominated Kashmir valley is no
different. Under these circumstances how can one have confidence in a
leadership’s ability to negotiate with Pakistan over the very Kashmir?
Conclusion: The older generation Indian politicians are unable to
“compete” with religious fascists who control
Pakistan and those who strongly influence
Kashmir.
It can be stated
that India is now undergoing a transition period and is in the process of
replacing its aging and “developing-world” category leadership with those
that represent its new emerging and “developed-world” side. A legitimate
question arises whether its current political class that represent
yesterday’s India has the “mandate” to take far reaching decisions on its
future by the way of “peace settlement” with Pakistan. All of this
implies that India should
first get a leadership that represents its emerging face – that can
compete -- and then deal with Pakistan.
This is the real secret to India overcoming Prithiviraj syndrome (Prithiviraj,
Again?).
Worse than
Prithiviraj’s blunder
Among the topics
India and Pakistan have already agreed to discuss as part of the composite
talks in August, there is no mention of non-Muslim ethnic cleansing
conducted by Pakistanis in South Asia since 1947, while the “rights” of
Muslims in India, including Kashmir, is given prominence.
This should tell readers that India is all set to make its greatest
civilizational blunder, far worse than that of the ones made by Prithviraj
Chauhan. Let me elaborate.
The aftermath of the
partition of India in the name of Islam in 1947 saw India having to
accommodate 85% of the population in 75% of the land, thanks to Pakistan
sponsored non-Muslim ethnic cleansing from all Muslim majority areas of
South Asia. This shows that Pakistan owes India land (New
Ideas for a New War). It is notable that Pakistani part of Kashmir is
virtually cleansed of non-Muslims, while Muslims constitute majority in
the Indian part! None of the recent governments have raised this issue of
non-Muslim ethnic cleansing by Pakistanis! What kind of settlement these
regimes could undertake with a Pakistan when Pakistan has been allowed to
paint itself as a victim and India the aggressor, -- when the reality is
exactly the opposite? How unfair and ridiculous can the situation get?
Big picture lost?
Indian politicians
across the board have mentioned the need for peace with Pakistan. The
issue for India in reality
is not peace but how to roll back and defeat Islamic forces that are
continuing to assault it from within and without.
As India needs to act decisively against these forces entrenched within,
how could at the same time peace with Pakistan be maintained - as Pakistan
would oppose any such moves on religious grounds? On the contrary, Islamic
forces will only increase their assault within India as they know that
India couldn’t act against them decisively if it wants to maintain “peace”
with Pakistan. This idea of Indo-Pak peace is a no winner for India (Soft
Borders with Pakistan: A Certain Suicide).
The regimes in
New Delhi have failed miserably to send the right message: India is the
last land for non-Muslims to live in security and dignity in South Asia.
There is nothing communal about this statement, but makes most Indians
understand in simple terms the big picture security threats they face and
makes it possible for India to fight back effectively – given the 1947
partitioning of India in the name of Islam and the subsequent non-Muslim
ethnic cleansing from the Muslim majority areas into India. This gives
India the moral and civilizational right to send to Pakistan the fascists
who do Pakistan’s bidding in the name of Islam and sponsor terror within
India.
Understanding
democracy in the Indian context
Private companies
and individuals without the government or political interference initiated
the recent upsurge in the emerging India. This should be seen as an
attribute of the traditions of Hindu majority’s willingness to learn and
compete, rather than an attribute of the democratic mode of governing.
India is in many ways a classic case of dysfunctional democracy, a country
that is poorly governed. The inability to elect able leaders, to institute
economic reforms, bring stability by crushing insurgency, improve
infrastructure, or uphold the rule of law are manifestations of this
dysfunctionality. In reality, these attributes of the Indian democracy
remain among the biggest obstacles for moving forward as a nation.
India is no exception, wealth creation and not democracy, has uplifted all
of those nations that have moved from the developing world to the
developed world category. These ideas are further discussed in my
earlier publication (A
New Paradigm: Civilization through Wealth Creation).
Recently, the Indian defense minister George
Fernandez remarked that if NDA comes back to power after the elections, it
would impose the Presidential system in Bihar due to the anarchy brought
by the elected Rabri government. A parallel question arises who is to save
India if some ill-advised concessions, by an elected central government,
are being made to Pakistan that can portend India being destroyed
civilizationally?
It has become clear
that based upon what we just discussed such a possibility does exist.
Hence this calls for the only institution that is fighting the religious
fascism, Indian military, to be involved in decision-making. More than the
Indian politicians, who feel compelled to appease minority religious
fascism -- due to majority disunity, the Indian military knows its enemy.
Conclusions
q
Based on the agreed upon
topics and format of the upcoming talks between India and Pakistan, it
appears that India is about to make another Prithiviraj-type blunder.
q
India would be ill-served
by the politicians belonging to yesteryears in any upcoming talks with
Pakistan.
q
Limitations of democracy in
the Indian context call for military’s involvement in security-related
decision making.
q
Hoping for the Indian
politicians to the take right decisions is to repeat yesteryears’
failures. Indians must do their homework to control their destiny,
especially in settling issues with Pakistan.
By Moorthy Muthuswamy
PhD
(The views
expressed here are author’s own. The writer is a nuclear physicist based
in America. He is also a director of Indian American Intellectuals Forum,
a New York-based non-profit organization. His contact address:
moorthy@charter.net)
Do you wish to reach IndiaCause readers?
Write @ IndiaCause
Copyright and Disclaimer:
The author is solely responsible for the contents of the
opinion/column/letter. IndiaCause does not represent or endorse the
accuracy, completeness or reliability of any opinion, statement, appeal,
advice or any other information in the article. Our readers are free to
forward this page URL to anyone. This column may NOT be transmitted or
distributed by others in any manner whatsoever (other than forwarding or
weblisting page URL) without the prior permission from
IndiaCause and the author.