Modi and Nawaz must rein in hate speech to talk peace
Throughout the 2014 General Election campaign trail, Modi repeatedly raked outstanding issues with Pakistan and promised to deal harshly with India’s arch rival. During the 67th Independence Day celebrations held on August, 15, 2013, Modi said, “I am speaking from the land of Kutch from where my voice will be first heard by Pakistan due to its proximity to Kutch and then later by the people in Delhi as they are farther from where I am speaking.”
After assuming the office as prime minister of the world’s largest democracy, Modi appears to have matured in his thinking. He has abandoned Pakistan bashing (to some extent, but that doesn’t neutralise the anti-Pakistan venom, which he has spewed in the past) and is desperately on the lookout for improving relations with a country which can be described as India’s lost twin. Efforts in this direction began from the very moment when Modi, as prime minister-elect invited heads of other SAARC nations to his swearing-in ceremony.
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif responded positively by accepting the invite and flying to New Delhi to not only attend the oath taking of the government, but to also hold bilateral talks with the new premier.
However, talks soon got derailed as is the norm when it comes to India-Pakistan ties. But a dialogue between the two nuclear-armed nations has dramatically been resumed over the past three weeks. In the first few days of December, NSA-level talks were secretly held between Ajit Doval and Nasser Khan in Bangkok. Thereafter, external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj went to Pakistan to attend the Heart of Asia conference and finally Modi surprised the world on Christmas Day by arriving in Lahore to wish Nawaz Sharif on his birthday.
But if India and Pakistan wish to milk the yield of the dialogue process, the leadership on both ends will have to rein in the loose cannons that are a major thaw in the ties. In a recent interview to BBC Urdu, Pervez Musharraf said, “Considering the atrocities and treatment meted out to the Muslim majority in IHK (Indian held Kashmir), several groups such as Lashkar-i-Taiba and Jaish-i-Muhammad emerged. They were ready to lay down their lives for their Kashmiri brethren, we call them freedom fighters, not Taliban or terrorist.”
As the former head of the Pakistani army and government, Musharraf’s statement cannot be ignored. The terror groups who are responsible for wrecking havoc in Indian territory are being openly praised as freedom fighters by Pakistan’s army general. Nawaz Sharif has to walk the talk and ensure that political leaders in Pakistan do not try and distinguish between good and bad terrorists. Similarly, Hafiz Saeed must be arrested for calling for terror strikes against India from Lahore’s Gaddafi stadium. Bilateral engagement is bound to suffer if Pakistan leaders and others like Hafiz Saeed (who is alleged to be a terrorist and the mastermind behind the 26/11 Mumbai attacks) openly advocate a policy of promoting terrorism against India.
Just like India cannot tolerate anti-India statements coming from Pakistan, Pakistan too cannot be expected to appreciate anti-Pakistan statements, which are frequently made in India. India’s national security advisor and former spy Ajit Doval is on record saying, “You (Pakistan) can do one Mumbai, you may lose Balochistan.” Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar said earlier this year that only “terrorists can neutralise terrorists” and spoke of “kaante se kaanta nikalna (removing a thorn with a thorn).”
Such rhetoric doesn’t help the cause of India-Pakistan ties. Terrorism cannot be used an instrument of foreign policy. No matter what activities are allegedly being undertaken against India from Pakistani soil, India must not return the favour by either actively supporting or talking about supporting terror groups in Pakistan. India must also not distinguish between good and bad terrorists. If India doesn’t want Pakistan to ferment trouble in Kashmir then it needs to keep its hands off Balochistan.One can’t have different set of rules for the two countries wherein both of them lend support to certain extremist outfits in the name of freedom or liberating a particular portion of territory be that Kashmir or Balochistan. Secondly, just like Modi has to prevent officials like Doval from indulging in anti-Pakistan rhetoric, Modi also has to stop his party men from calling for the annihilation of Pakistan.
In September 2015, BJP’s Subramanian Swamy said that India was going to split Pakistan into four parts. Ram Madhav recently told Al Jazeera about the notion of Akhand Bharat, which as per the RSS would mean the coming together of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. It’s natural on the part of Pakistan to suspect India’s imperialistic tendencies if such remarks come from members of the ruling party.
This writer once attended the annual function of a college in which Indian Major General Dr GD Bakshi (Retd) was the chief guest. Bakshi, who frequently appears on television as a security expert, delivered a highly jingoistic speech in which he said that the biggest achievement of his generation was that they split Pakistan into two parts and if the younger generation supported them today then India would further split Pakistan into four parts. If Indians can object to the language employed by Pakistani army generals like Musharraf, then Pakistanis too can object to the language of the likes of GD Bakshi.
Responsible Indians and Pakistanis should shun jingoistic behaviour while simultaneously ensuring that they don’t turn a blind eye to each other’s excesses. Nawaz Sharif and Narendra Modi should certainly ensure that individuals who make reckless statements to derail the peace process are dealt with sternly and booted out from the administration if necessary. Media reports have suggested that Sharif has already made a move in this direction by asking his Cabinet to refrain from making anti-India statements.
Modi should follow suit by warning his government and party members. However, fair criticism towards the behaviour of the two states must not be curbed, but hate and jingoism they harbour for each other should.