| |
August 2010
Indo-Pak Dialogue
Jihad is back on the agenda — it's official
As India and Pakistan battle out their differences regarding the future of Kashmir and Afghanistan, and jihad poses an ever-closer menace, those most affected by the impasse call for a peaceful and secular path to independence.
By Shabir Choudhry
|
 |
In denial: Qureshi refutes claims that infiltration is Pakistan's policy |
|
|
As expected, recent talks between India and Pakistan have failed, because both delegations had different priorities. India's priorities were an end to infiltration and terrorism, and action against the culprits of the Mumbai carnage; Pakistan's priorities were human rights abuses in the Valley and issues related to water.
As far as India's priorities were concerned, the Pakistani government put their cards on the table by facilitating a big rally in Muzaffarbad in which the call for jihad was reiterated.It was declared that jihad was an imperative and India must be brought 'down to its knees'.
India has always been reluctant to show any flexibility on issues related to the Kashmir dispute, whether that is water, human rights or the future of the State. However, in the view of many experts, the Muzaffarabad event, coupled with other activities coordinated by the Pakistani establishment, sealed the fate of the dialogue before it even started.
|
|
|
| |
Some experts believe India is not too keen to negotiate any deal with leaders who have no power to deliver, as Pakistan has more than one centres of power. It is difficult to tell who actually holds authority: is it the President, the Prime Minister, Parliament or the army? Despite Pakistan's civilian outlook, many believe it is the army that calls the shots in foreign affairs, especially those related to India, Kashmir and Afghanistan.
Ayesha Siddiqa, an expert on defence-related issues, commented: 'Shah Mehmood Qureshi was not keen to be viewed by the military establishment at home as being soft on India… The military's top management neither took ownership of Musharraf's peace initiative nor did it agree with his proposals on the Kashmir dispute.' Shah Mehmood Qureshi enjoys 'cordial relations' with the army top brass, and he had to show that, unlike President Zardari, he was tough when it comes to dealing with India
Pakistan's tussle with India is no longer only related to water, the Siachin Glacier, Sir Creek, terrorism, infiltration and the future of the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The two countries are also actively confronting each other in Afghanistan. Both India and Pakistan know that America and other occupation forces will have to leave one day, and hence both are competing to fill in the vacuum.
The future stability of Afghanistan, and the type of government that will lead it, are of great interest to both countries. India does not want extremism or a Taliban-like government in Afghanistan, but if the Taliban are defeated and there is 'stability' in Afghanistan with a pro-Pakistan government, then many experts think hordes of tribesmen will rush to Kashmir for jihad, as they did in the past. Also, this will have tremendous impact on Indian plans for the region, especially Central Asia.
According to Indian claims, infiltration has increased by 40 per cent. Local people in Pakistani Administered Kashmir also confirm increased activities by jihadi outfits, though the exact percentage of infiltration cannot be ascertained. Pakistan, of course, denies this charge, and Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi has asserted: 'Infiltration is not the policy of Pakistan or any intelligence agency of Pakistan.… But if there are individuals who have crossed over, deal with them firmly.'
Some Indian commentators read this statement in the following sense: 'Pakistan will keep on sending terrorists across the LOC, and it is for India to decide how to deal with them.' It is believed that Pakistan is either unable or unwilling to comply with the demands of India with regard to terrorism and the Mumbai carnage; and despite a policy of non-interference, Pakistan will not stop infiltration of militants and jihad will continue in Kashmir.
This policy will not only throw a spanner into any peace talks, but it will also have a disastrous impact on the people of Jammu and Kashmir on both sides of the LOC. My request to those who have some say in policy-making and its execution is: please stop this 'blood trade' in the name of jihad. We people of Jammu and Kashmir have already suffered too much. Like everyone else, we want peace, stability and economic prosperity. We also want to live with dignity and honour and enjoy the fruits of independence.
The kind of jihad you people have imposed on us will only make our lives worse. It provides an excuse to people in uniform to commit human rights abuses. In any case, the Kashmir dispute is not a religious dispute. Don't divide us in the name of religion. This strategy will never win us independence; and we don't want to be part of any country. Our struggle is for a united and independent Jammu and Kashmir, which can never be achieved in the name of religion.top | |
