#PulwamaRevenge – ‘War Isn't An Option’

I am away from home in a faraway country. There are times I get homesick and I long to be home.  This itch to be home really reaches a pinnacle, during incidents like the Pulwama attack. The moment the news came up on my Facebook feed, I felt a sudden wave of anger and shock, but when it subsided after a few minutes, I began to join the dots together as an aware youngster, who has a mind of his own. And I began to wonder how a slip-up of this level could take place from our intelligence agencies. The security system in Delhi (even in Delhi Metro or the markets is so tight), how could things have gone unnoticed in Kashmir, where metaphorically speaking, perhaps even a bird can’t flap its wings without permission?

Questions are being raised about this massive intelligence failure and the government is answerable to all the people, who are asking these questions. I did a follow-up of all the Pulwama-related news. I was glued to the news websites and stayed away from news channels.  

The next thing I knew, India had conducted a ‘surgical strike’ at Balakot in Pakistan. Though, it might have come across as a decisive step, I have also begun to notice some chinks in BJP’s armour. I feel that they often advertise more than what they actually do at the ground-level, and that might be the undoing of the party. But the janta watches everything. Even though some are not so vocal about their opinion as others, you cannot fool everyone all the ever time.

Over the years, I have understood that war is not the solution. We need mass sensitization of people at ground level. We need genuine engagement with all parties involved in the Kashmir issue, otherwise it might be the end of us all. It is time to end power-games from both sides (India and Pakistan) and genuinely think about solving the issue. We, who were born in the 90s, have no memory of the Kargil War. But we do have memories of the 2008 Mumbai attacks and I believe we really need to put all our energies in finding a solution.

Yes, I do feel important issues have been side-lined in the wake of what happened after Pulwama. People are so busy with the idea of war that they forget the repercussions of a war. But before all the war mongering and calling war a ‘decisive action’ — just picture the bloodied face of Wg Cdr Abhinandan Varthaman or think about the people who have lost their lives. A war between two nuclear powers spells doom for all.

The government needs to address other important issues. It seriously needs to work on job creation, or the youth will become directionless, which is not a good thing for any country. I have come to Canada in the hope of a better future, but I want to go back to India and contribute to the strengthening of its infrastructure (I am pursuing an MBA in Construction Management). We need to strengthen our home so much that no one can dare touch it. And for that, all of us need to individually contribute with our skills.

I haven’t been able to vote so far and sadly this time also it looks improbable because I have just come to Canada and can’t go back home to vote. But if I could, I would still choose to go with Modi, just because I see no other alternative. Here, I interact with people from Pakistan regularly and I must say the world is a better place with love and understanding in it. Hope the Opposition in our country can channelise the power of love and stand up strong and give us alternatives to vote for.

]]>

Indo-Pak Spat Will Sadly Be Milked For Political Gains

In the recent past, particularly the couple of days when tension was at its height between India and Pakistan, if you read only the media publications of those two countries you could have been a victim of schizophrenia, or of extreme bipolar disorder.

The claims and counter-claims about the airborne dogfights, the targets that were allegedly bombed, and the counter-attacks that followed, were so diametrically opposite each other that, if you were an unbiased observer, they would have left you perplexed.

India claimed that its air force had killed hundreds of terrorists believed to be behind mid-February’s suicide bombing in Kashmir in which scores of Indian security personnel died. Pakistan countered by saying its fighter planes had chased away the Indian aircraft and the only damage done was to woods and trees in a deserted area where there were no terrorist camps.

Then when Pakistan shot down an Indian aircraft and captured the pilot and tension began to escalate, the posturing of both sides changed. Pakistan took the high moral ground with its Prime Minister, Mr Imran Khan, offering to have a dialogue with India and releasing the pilot unconditionally. India, on its part, saw this as a huge victory and a cowering down by Pakistan. Meanwhile, a sort of proxy war seemed to be on in both, the social media as well as mainstream media publications, between the two countries. Nationalistic fervour was (and, perhaps, still is) at a peak, and shrill, hawkish screams abounded.

A war between two nuclear-weapon nations is least desirable, and the de-escalation of tensions after the release of the Indian pilot is welcome. Also, it is unlikely that India has, as it claims, decimated a huge terrorist camp in Pakistan. Yet, the problem remains: Kashmir continues, as it has been since Independence in 1947, to be a matter of serious dispute between the two neighbours; and Pakistan clearly is a haven for terror groups, including the dreaded Jaish-e-Mohammed, which repeatedly and regularly attacks and fans violence in the Kashmir Valley where Indian security forces have long maintained a near-military rule. If the recent face-off leads to a saner discussion between the two countries, particularly on the Kashmir issue, it could be a good beginning.

But does India want such a dialogue right now? As Prime Minister Narendra Modi, his party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and its allies, head towards national elections, keeping the tension simmering between the two neighbours could actually help them. On 28 February while addressing a gathering of scientists in Delhi, Mr Modi remarked that that a “pilot project”, which was a “practice” just got over, and that the “real project” was yet to happen. It is easy to label Mr Modi’s comments as opportunistic in the context of the coming elections. History across the world shows that incumbent governments often benefit electorally when they demonstrate decisiveness or strength when tensions with an “enemy” state surface.

Yet, it would serve Indians well to remember the genesis of the current face-off: it began when terrorists from across the border launched a suicide attack that killed at least 40 Indian security personnel. That is the crux of the problem. The war against terrorists, who are ostensibly camped in, and perhaps encouraged by, Pakistan has to be a continuous effort that India cannot afford to relent on. But the electoral advantages that Mr Modi and his party might be able to reap from the current skirmish are real. We can expect his election campaign to keep referring to these: the threat of terrorism from Pakistani territory; the pilot (Wing Commander Abhinandan) who is now a hero in India; and a resolve to launch the not-so-cryptic “real project” that Mr Modi mentioned.

There is another disturbing aspect in the current scenario. India’s as well as Pakistan’s media, particularly the mainstream newspapers and TV news channels, have commonly fallen prey to jingoism whenever a conflict with Pakistan arises. You may want to call it healthy nationalism, perhaps. But in today’s scenario where social media plays a huge role in shaping people’s perceptions in both, India and Pakistan, this could have serious consequences. Fake news, doctored videos, and inflammatory comments, are being traded in a free-for-all manner. Many believe that these could heighten the tensions between the two nuclear weapon nations despite the de-escalation that followed the Indian pilot’s release.

The cynical viewpoint is that the ruling regime’s spin doctors could be leveraging all of this to help them in the coming elections. Signs of that, viz. Mr Modi’s and his colleagues’ recent statements, are already visible. Mr Modi came to power with an overwhelming electoral victory in 2014 but on the back of promises that now seem tall. He promised development, progress, and better days for Indians who placed their faith in him, but five years later, at the end of his term, much of those promises remain unfulfilled and the initial euphoria after he came to power turned out to be ephemeral. And, despite their bluster, the BJP and its allies have little to tom-tom about their achievements. In that context, the skirmish with Pakistan could be like a shot in the arm, providing campaigning fodder that could touch the hearts of many Indians.

On the other side too, Prime Minister Khan has been quick to grasp an opportunity to position himself as a mature statesman. His publicly stated willingness for a dialogue with India and the prompt release of the Indian pilot is likely to boost his popularity among his fellow countrymen. Last summer, his party, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) came to power when it won the largest number of seats in the national assembly but it didn’t manage to get a majority on its own. There were also widespread allegations about rigging by the PTI. Besides, in Pakistan, a hawkish military exerts overwhelming pressure and influence over political regimes and is commonly believed to encourage separatists and terror groups that operate in Kashmir. Yet, Mr Khan too has to resolve to fight the terrorism that breeds in his nation’s territory. A statesman-like image, which he has tried to create for himself recently, wouldn’t hurt.

Hyper-ventilating TV news anchors, and internet and social media trolls in both nations notwithstanding, the crucial need of the hour is not to fan tensions between Pakistan and India but to try and fix ways in which the long-standing dispute over Kashmir and the violent terrorism it has bred can be resolved. For that to happen the leaders of the two nations have to set aside their immediate political interests and agree to move towards non-violent and non-aggressive solutions. Will that happen? Or is it merely wishful thinking?

]]>