|
Indo-Pak
relationship is quite complex and a multifaceted
one. Ever since its inception, Pakistan has adopted
an adverse attitude towards India. Because of
inbuilt hatred against India and its obsession
for parity, the Pakistani leadership adopted a
confrontationist policy towards India and tried
to undermine its role in world affairs. In order
to gain an upper hand over India, it went to the
extent of joining various military treaties and
combinations, which formed part of the US Global
Strategy during the cold war period.
Pakistan
was created with an aim to provide a separate
territory where the Muslim minority of the subcontinent
could feel secure. Under the extended policy of
'Divide and Rule', the British imperial rulers
created two separate states and supported 'Two-Nation'
theory. Unfortunately, the Muslim homeland created
in the name of Pakistan could not prove that Muslims
are separate nation. The existence of Bangladesh
proved it beyond doubt.
The
area that constitutes Pakistan today was dominated
before partition by liberal and nationalist leadership.
The communal elements, which were represented
by the Muslim League under the leadership of Qaid-e-Azam
Md. Ali Jinnah, had little hold in this area.
The Pakistan Movement was strong in U.P., Bihar
and metropolitan cities like Bombay and Calcutta.
In Jammu and Kashmir, the freedom movement led
by Sheikh Abdullah and in the North-West Frontier
Province, the Congress was powerful under the
inspiring leadership of Frontier Gandhi, Khan
Abdul Gaffar Khan. In Punjab, Sir Sikandar Hyatt
Khan was a dominant Muslim personality and in
Sindh, Khan Bahadur Allah Bux was the tallest
leader of the Muslim community. None of them were
enamoured with either the concept of Pakistan
or the leadership of Md. Ali Jinnah.
The
partition of the country, left in its trail, a
horrid atmosphere of massacre, other forms of
human brutalities and untold miseries to the millions
of displaced people who were forced out from their
dwellings. However, 50 years are long enough to
test the efficacy of a solution, which was the
supposed justification for the partition of India
and the creation of Pakistan. The most relevant
question, which arises in this context, is whether
this has resolved the so-called 'Muslim problem'
of this subcontinent. The answer is in the negative.
In fact, partition was a bitter experience for
all concerned except the British. As has been
pointed out by Prof. S. G. Kashikar in his brilliant
treatise, has amply analysed that the partition
of India, instead of solving the Hindu-Muslim
problems, raised them from the domestic to the
International level and thereby made them more
complex and intractable. Pakistan in its animosity
towards India not only aligned itself with the
US dominated military alliances but also started
looking towards West Asian history, tradition
and culture in order to retrace its heritage anew.
Thus, cutting itself from the great heritage of
the Indian culture and traditions. After partition,
the dominant cultural trend in Pakistan has been
one of cutting itself off from all that was sublime
and glorious in the vastly enriched cultural traditions
of this subcontinent. But sadly enough bereft
of their cultural roots, they are neither here
nor there. Pakistani elite has to realise that
they are neither Arab, nor Persians: neither Turks
nor Afghans. They must appreciate the fact that
culturally they are an inalienable part of the
Indian cultural ethos and there is every reason
to be proud of it.
Nature
has made the Indian sub-continent into a single
unit. From the high mountains of Himalayas to
the Indian Ocean, and from Baluchistan to Bangladesh,
it is a one geographical unit. Economic development
of this entire region is possible only in co-operating
with each other and not otherwise. Hostilities
from across the border has pre-empted both the
countries to spend billions on unproductive channels,
which could have been easily utilised in alleviating
poverty from among the people of this area. But
while nature has bestowed this continent with
rich sources of water, land and minerals, man
in its greed has created artificial political
boundaries dividing people on narrow sectarian
considerations of caste, creed and community.
This has affected the whole thought process of
the post-partition generations. This mindset has
to change if the sub-continent aspires to attain
its desired goals.
In
spite of the partition of the subcontinent, India
has been trying to live with Pakistan in peace
and friendly atmosphere right from the very beginning.
It was the hostile psyche of Pakistan, which did
not allow India to live in peace with its neighbour,
with the result the two countries had to fight
three wars against each other. In spite of India's
victory in all the three wars, Pakistan did not
take lesson from it and went to the extent of
launching proxy war against India. On the initiative
of India, there had been agreements at the highest
levels of the two countries in 1965, 1972 and
1999. In 1999, the Indian Prime Minister was so
keen to establish friendly relations that he himself
went to Lahore by bus. The Indian Prime Minister's
sincerity was reciprocated by Kargil war from
Pakistan's side. Undeterred by Pakistan's hostile
behaviour, the Indian Prime Minister, Mr. Atal
Bihari Vajpayee invited the Pakistani President
General Pervez Musharraf to hold talks at Agra.
The Pakistani President, though visited Agra in
the year 2001 but could not make any headway and
went back.
Efforts
are again being made at various levels to normalise
relations between the two key players of the sub-continent-India
and Pakistan. Apparently, it seems that Pakistani
people and the government are also in the mood
to hold useful talks. But any fruitful talk seems
to be possible, only when the Pakistani psyche
comes out of the hang over of the Two-Nation Theory,
meaning thereby, deep hatred for India and the
Indian people. Let us hope for the best. In view
of the previous behaviour of Pakistani leadership
and its military rulers, the Indian side is perhaps
required to be more cautious as Pakistan had been
backtracking on its promises from the very beginning.
The
forthcoming SAARC summit at Islamabad should be
an occasion to promote the idea of amity between
the member states. The key to the success of SAARC
efforts for the regional development will be the
cordiality of relationship between India and Pakistan.
Dialogue with Pakistan by Prof. S. G. Kashikar
is a thought provoking contribution to the ongoing
debate on the vexed question of anti-India mind-set
of Pakistan and its tragic consequences.
Hari Kishore Singh
Former Minister of State (External Affairs)
Government of India
|
|
Ever
since Prime Minister A.B.Vajpeyee extended his
hand of friendship and expressed willingness to
enter into fresh DIALOGUE WITH PAKISTAN,
I developed an irresistible urge from within to
write on the subject.
After
preliminary planning and preparation, I started
writing on 26-6-2003 and completed it today.
As
a student of Political Science, I have been closely
following the vicissitudes of the developments
of Indo-Pak relations since partition. I wrote
a number of articles and spoke at a number of
gatherings on various aspects of the subject.
For
over past fifty years, I have been collecting
material - books, statements, notes and newspaper
cuttings - having bearing on Indo-Pak relations
and pondering over them.
The
present book is the result of all that labour.
Some
readers might say that the book presents a Hindu
point of view. To them I would say that it gives
an objective point of view. If they still say
that it is a Hindu point of view, I would say
to them that it is a Hindu point of view based
on objective Muslim point of view.
India
and Pakistan are so close to each other in every
respect, that they cannot take the posture of
indifference towards each other. They can either
be best friends or worst enemies. It is ultimately
for the governments and the people of the two
countries to choose between the two paths.
Hatred,
and not Kashmir, is at the root of the Indo-Pak
conflict; and if the two countries choose the
path of friendship and amity, whether as friendly
neighbours or reunited brothers, then they must
root out the causes of hatred. Ad hoc and piecemeal
solutions would not do. They may produce temporary
relief but will not provide permanent solution.
For that comprehensive and long-range planning
and determined efforts would be necessary. The
following pages make a humble effort to show,
what I sincerely feel is the only right way. It
is, however, for the readers to make the final
judgement. Whatever references, in addition to
those I had collected, I needed, my son, Dr. Mohan
Kashikar, Reader in Political Science in Nagpur
University, obtained for me from various sources.
He, thus, has a share in the preparation of this
book.
Whatever
references, in addition to those I had collected,
I needed, my son, Dr. Mohan Kashikar, Reader in
Political Science in Nagpur University, obtained
for me from various sources. He, thus, has a share
in the preparation of this book.
I
am thankful to Shri Dina Nath ji Mishra and the
India First Foundation, of which he is founder
President, for so kindly undertaking the publication
of this book.
S.G.Kashikar
Nagpur, 2-12-2003
|
