 |
| Saturday,
July 14, 2001, Chandigarh, India   
|
Imprisoned
peace Brutality
for Pervez’s sake |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
INDO-PAK SUMMIT
A Quran
from Pakistan
Why this
media frenzy about Musharraf?
A
dangerously Kashmir-centric approach
|
Imprisoned peace PAKISTAN'S
Kashmir fixation has forced it to the need for undertaking some other steps which can earn it goodwill here. The most emotionally sensitive issue is the fate of 54 Indian military personnel captured during the 1971 war and languishing in Pakistani jails ever since. To rub salt on the wounds of the family members, it has totally denied their existence. Several Indians who have managed to come out of the hellholes in Pakistan have given out even the names of the imprisoned army personnel. But the military establishment of Pakistan wants "evidence". How can any proof be given when many of them are lodged in torture cells, in places like Attok Fort, which are out of bound even for credible human rights organisations, leave alone international observers? What Pakistan has ignored is that its cussedness has kept alive the anger in the hearts of those whose family members and friends have thus suffered at its hands. This attitude is all the more reprehensible since the Indian Government has decided to release all Pakistani civilian prisoners currently in India, after completing the due process of law. While Pakistan has denied the existence of any Indian prisoners of war in its jails, it does admit that there are 135 Indians jailed in Pakistan on various criminal charges. Islamabad is up to its old tricks in this admission as well. It includes several names in the list that are not Indian at all. On the other hand, it is unwilling to repatriate several Indians who have committed no crime on its soil but were apprehended while aspiring to seek jobs in foreign countries and were pushed into Pakistan. Among them are at least 30 Punjabis. Equally vital is the issue of the uprooted Sikh and Hindu shrines in Pakistan. Most of them are in a state of neglect and disrepair. How serious Islamabad is about their upkeep is evident from the fact that the Pakistan Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee is headed by a former ISI chief, Javed Nasir. The SGPC has been demanding management and control of these historical gurdwaras. It also wants that the
PSGPC should consist of only Sikhs. Unfortunately, there is no response. When jathas from India travel to that country on pilgrimage, the occasion is used for propaganda purposes. It is high time such issues were treated with a tinge of humanism instead of being seen as some kind of bargaining chips. At stake are the sentiments of a nation of one billion people. Normalisation of relations is not something that only India requires. Peace is equally important for Pakistan too. Perhaps even more so. |
|
Brutality for Pervez’s sake THE officials in charge of the hospitality-cum-security arrangements for Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf should be sacked and tried for human right violations. It is evident that they do not know the difference between making the visiting dignitary feel welcome and letting loose a reign of terror against ordinary citizens. The high-handed manner in which the authorities concerned have handled the arrangements for General Musharraf's visit to place of his birth in old Delhi deserves to be condemned. Make him and the members of his entourage feel comfortable by all means. But not by using the tactics that have been used in the name of making foolproof security bandobast. The ordeal which 20 year-old Ripu Daman and her younger brother Zenny have had to endure deserves special mention. They lost their parents several years ago. Ripu and her brother live
in a small room in the Naharwali Haveli complex. Two days ago the authorities concerned threw out their belongs and razed the room they were living in. Why? Because the room was seen as a security hazard for the Pakistan President. Some public spirited individuals should challenge the entire approach of the municipal and security personnel in handling the arrangements of General Musharraf's visit to his ancestral home. The municipal corporation wanted to arrange a civic reception for the General. It was cancelled for security reasons. He wanted to visit the dargah of Khwaja Hazrat Nizamuddin. The proposal was shot down for the same reason. But his visit to the Naharwali Haveli was not cancelled. Instead Ripu and her brother were thrown out of their room and all the other residents of the massive complex have been instructed not to move out of their shelters when the General sets foot in the haveli in which he was born. Arranging security for even ordinary VIPs is not easy task in the congested localities of old Delhi. The General would have understood had he been told politely that he should not insist on visiting his ancestral home for security reasons. It must be understood that arranging security at the Red Fort, the usual venue for civic receptions in honour of visiting dignitaries, would have been relatively more easy than ensuring the safety of the General on the entire route leading to the haveli. In the past people were encouraged to turn up in large numbers for greeting visiting dignitaries. However, the shopkeepers and residents of old Delhi have been issued stern instructions not to open their establishments or venture out until the wholly avoidable visit, from the security point of view, by General Musharraf to the Naharwali Haveli was over. Was it necessary to harass and humiliate ordinary citizens for honouring the General? |
INDO-PAK SUMMIT UNEXPECTEDLY and that too on the very eve of the Agra Summit some doubts and uncertainties have surfaced. Not caused by the hosts but by the commanding rhetoric of the one who had been for nearly two years seeking a meeting “anywhere, anytime”. I am not sure if in doing this the General is testing our patience or nerve or perhaps both. Blatantly, he instructed his suave High Commissioner in Delhi to invite the Hurriyat members to shake his hand in the glaring presence of the Indian media and the city’s elite. Perhaps in the hope that it may provide some sort of relevance to the Hurriyat. Never in our history and possibly elsewhere has a guest chosen to affront the host this way. I am gratified that the Indian leaders took this and the Pakistani statement accusing India of inhuman acts in Kashmir in stride and refused to get provoked. All the same one doubts the purpose of the General’s visit, though we have put the agonies of Kargil behind us to explore the possibility of building a friendly relationship with the neighbour. My proclivity for good neighbourly relations is known. All the same I cannot help wondering if President Musharraf’s perceptions of Indo-Pak relations are widely different than of his predecessor in office. In each of the seven summits between Mr Nawaz Sharif and me at the first, and later between him and Prime Minister Vajpayee, we looked at the Kashmir issue as a part of the several issues that needed attention. But General Musharraf is not tired of telling his people that he has “bravely” reversed the priorities. Of course he has, but to what purpose? Along with Mr Nawaz Sharif we believed that the core issue was the Indo-Pak relations and much needed to be done to reshape them. Obviously, the Army Chief refuses to appreciate that the complex relationship between India and Pakistan is so knotted by history that it cannot be unravelled by rabble-rousing slogans. Only the inter-se trust can help. I am aware that the coup in Pakistan has changed the internal power parities wherein the centre of power has shifted from the now despised legislatures to the doctrinaire madrasas where the Talibani outlook inspires the trainees to project the philosophy of a permanent war with India. Some responsible persons in Pakistan have unabashedly told Indian visitors that animosity with India will not end even when the Kashmir issue is settled. Unfortunately, General Sahib has not yet cultivated the liberal civil society of his country, which hopes that one day — as per the order of the Supreme Court democracy will be restored. At least in form, if not in spirit. The main reason for even partial success of the seven summits emanated from the fact that it was for the first time the two democracies were negotiating with each other. The elected leaders were sensitive to the aspirations of their respective people. They were also conscious of the world history wherein no two democracies have ever gone to war. Even the contentious issues are resolved by negotiations. At this point of time it may be difficult to comprehend if the dismal economic situation afflicting Pakistan will make the military rulers choose the path of amity. They have placed faith in the lowintensity war with cheap cannon fodder made available by Afghanistan. It may cost much lesser in money terms but its internal fallouts are visibly devastating. The Kalashnikov culture; the Shia-Sunni killings; weakening of the inner cohesion can be traced to this so called Jehad that is not a war but a culture that ultimately is eating into the nation’s vitals. India continues to believe that a “failed” state in its neighbourhood is not in its interest. We wish Pakistan to flourish as a sovereign, prosperous country. We will be happy if it is democratic, but this must be determined by the people of Pakistan and no one else. Whatever be the fate of the Agra summit, it is important for us to realise that even in the recent past we have missed opportunities to reduce, if not end, the alienation of our compatriots in J&K. Amazingly, the ceasefire did not coincide it with the needed initiative for internal dialogue with diverse people of the state. Six valuable months were lost till Mr K.C. Pant was deputed to undertake this mission. The vacuum was utilised by the Hurriyatis and their collaborators to damage the well perceived ceasefire. Rightly, we spare no effort in telling the world that the state is governed by a democratically elected government that in turn derives its mandate from the elected legislature and yet when it came to it, Delhi disdainly rejected its resolution recommending autonomy for the state within the orbit of our Constitution. It is no one’s case that the clock of history can be or need be turned back to 1953 but it would be unwise to assume that the status quo is sustainable. The assembly resolution had provided a platform and opportunity to engage all segments of state in a debate and discussions that, in the end, would help in evolving a consensus regarding the governance of the state. Of course, in all circumstances this must remain democratic and secular. Here I would like to say a word of caution. It would be dangerous to reorganise the state in any manner that may smack of a communal divide. Preservation of its unity-in-diversity is as important as it is in the rest of the country. On the summit’s eve the Prime Minister has announced some measures that would go a long way to further facilitate the people-to-people relations in the two countries. This is consistent with the paradigms that were spelt out in the Gujral Doctrine. Successive governments in Delhi have never hesitated to unilaterally offer such concessions and facilities as would help the cause of good neighbourliness and the people-to-people bonhomie. Of course, the cause of an amiable future will be well served if neighbours would not interfere in the internal affairs of each other nor let their lands be used for any inimical action against the other. This is common sense but it is equally valid in diplomatic relations if we seek peace and coexistence, particularly in the nuclear era. I had once told Parliament something that may be useful for the ears of our visitors too: “Improvement in Indo-Pak relations would be a slow process and never an event” since these carry a heavy burden of history. In the meantime, let me repeat what I had said at Male:
'Guftgu band na ho, baat se baat chaley, subha tak sham-i-mulaqaat chaley'. (The conversation must never stop. One point will lead to another). Mr Nawaz Sharif had agreed with it. I do hope that the Agra Summit will endorse it. The writer is a former Prime Minister of India. |
A Quran from Pakistan A
dangerous hate campaign is doing the rounds, fired by religious zealots. At the root is the alleged burning of a Quran, “pictures” of which came via internet. That’s a dubious route, handy for those who like to work shadily. My story is straight, and shows how Indians are secular to the root. It is about a Quran that came to India from Pakistan and a mosque we encountered in captured territory. I was a young Second-Lieutenant and, as my company commander never tired of reminding me, the ink on my commissioning papers had not dried yet. Our thrust towards Shakargarh floundered in the final lap, and we firmed in on its outskirts. Badwal was the village immediately to our right flank, now totally deserted because of our advance that had been swift. Moving ahead without rations and even maps, we found ourselves facing Pakistani tracer bullets which they fired from the other side of the Bein river that prevented our further advance. Without anything to eat for over a day and with the battle fatigue catching on, a patrol was despatched to the adjoining village to get something to eat. It was me to whom this task got assigned. In the village huts we saw burnt chappatis on the chullah (earthen stove), an indication of the suddenness with which the villagers might have evacuated their homes and fled the previous night. My men managed to gather some rice and wheat from the village bania’s shop, enough to fortify the company till the administrative echelon caught up. This consignment we extricated with a couple of bloodthirsty Sabre jets spitting fire on us, which we evaded by taking cover in the narrow village lanes. Our quartermaster soon caught up to restore the ration supply. But with no further headway, ceasefire saw us in the same position next to this abandoned village. Nestled inside Badwal village was a mosque. As the troops started shaking off the war stress, it was made clear to them that the mosque should be kept in good repair. Ours was a Mahar battalion with mixed troops and a good sprinkling of Sikh soldiers. Recovering a Quran from the village, Sepoy Lal Singh brought it to me. A fleeing villager might have dropped it in a moment of panic just before we arrived. This Quran I later sent it to my mother in Chandigarh. She placed it in her prayer room lined up with pictures of Guru Nanak and Christ. Soon, she offered the Quran to the Sindhgis, our kindly neighbours who were overwhelmed on hearing of how it came to India. Meanwhile, our men rolled up the bottom of their trousers above the ankles and deployed bucketfuls of water to wash the mosque’s floor. In its upkeep they took great pride. Why, one day these enterprising chaps even managed to whitewash the exterior of the mosque. We saw the mosque in its new coat when the sunrays swathed it the next morning. Why hadn’t the working party reported about it the previous evening? That stout Gurdial Singh, with a brave heart and forever cutting jokes — even while those menacing Sabres circled overhead for another swoop — had been the working party commander to the mosque the previous day. Duly summoned, he appeared with his men, somewhat apprehensive. When told that it was a fine job done, his face lit up and he received with utmost modesty a pat on his back. Other men lined up behind responded with similar sentiments: pride in the uniform and in having done a good deed that upholds the other man’s religion, even if he’s the enemy. Is there a message about the universality of human kindness and respect for the other’s God? Chattisinghpora, the massacre of Sikhs in Srinagar, and now the alleged “burning of a Quran” transport me back to Shakargarh in 1971 where our brave company of Sikhs and Hindus demonstrated an unparalleled largeness of heart by upholding that one and only God, and the goodness of man. |
Why this media frenzy about Musharraf? WHAT an overdose of Pakistan we have had in the past few weeks. While the government has behaved with restraint and dignity, the media appears to have gone completely mad in its attempts to give us every last detail about the life and habits of General Musharraf and his family. So much so that he has gone from being Enemy No 1 — the villain of Kargil — to Hero No 1. The absurdity of our adulation of this new found hero reached its height when one of our leading newspapers, a couple of Sundays ago, carried as its lead story on page one details of the culinary tastes of Mrs Musharraf. She likes Kashmiri food, we were told in tones of wild jubilation, clearly without the newspaper realising the innuendo or irony behind this piece of otherwise irrelevant information. Most newspapers and TV channels have been so desperate to give the Indian people wall-to-wall coverage that some reports have bordered on the ludicrous and others have been almost dangerously misinformed. So we have heard that the General has acquired legitimacy because of the Prime Minister’s invitation to a summit. How? He is recognised as Pakistan’s ruler — albeit as a military dictator — by the world and his “legitimacy” really depends on the Pakistani people. The difference has been only in the position of our government which has gone from refusing to do business with him to conceding that peace on the subcontinent was so important that it needed to get over its squeamishness about doing business with a military dictator. The problem with this media feeding frenzy is that less discerning Indians could be fooled into believing that the Taj-view summit is going to bring instant peace between India and Pakistan. It is not. Anyone who has made even the smallest attempt to find out what our government hopes to achieve in Agra would have discovered that all our Ministry of External Affairs is hoping for the restoration of the process that began with the Lahore bus ride. No miracles are expected and certainly no instant solution in Kashmir. But, when it comes to Kashmir the Indian Press is usually so removed from the realities of the situation on the ground that it gets things wrong more often than right. So, this time we have had this extraordinary fuss over whether the All Party Hurriyat Conference should be invited to tea with the General without anyone pointing out that in a fair election the Hurriyat is unlikely to win more than a handful of seats in the Kashmir valley. If the Pakistanis think that Hurriyat represents the Kashmiri people then the General should be encouraged to have his little tea party. It is unlikely to make any difference at all and by preventing it all we achieve is making ourselves look silly. And, more importantly, we give Hurriyat a respectability that it does not deserve. The militants, wreaking death and destruction in Kashmir, are not under the control of the Hurriyat leaders so it is not as if getting them on board will make much difference. They have, quite rightly, not been invited to the summit because this would have meant that we recognise that they represent the Kashmiri people and that Kashmir is a separate entity so if they want to have tea with the General, let them. Who cares? There are more important things to think about like where India and Pakistan go from here? Are we going to succeed in starting a peace process? Are we going to begin to at least start speaking the same language? Are we going to move towards stopping the violence in Kashmir? If none of these then what is the point of the summit? The short answer to that question is: not a lot. But even if we can just begin a dialogue, we will achieve a great deal. Without a dialogue the Indian subcontinent continues to be — as Bill Clinton once put it — the most dangerous place in the world. The need for peace is more urgent now than ever before the simple reason that nuclear bombs on both sides of the border make a difference. We might have full faith in our government being responsible and restrained even if pushed to the wall by
Pakistan, but it is hard to meet an Indian who thinks the Pakistanis will behave with similar restraint. To us Pakistan is a country ruled by a dangerous combination of military men and Mullahs and even if the military men understand the destruction that a nuclear bomb brings, there is no indication that the Mullahs do. How can we be sure that they will not see it as Allah’s ultimate weapon in the jehad? General Musharraf is Pakistan’s first ruler, in a very long time, who has shown the courage to take the Mullahs on. At a religious meeting he addressed, some weeks ago, he actually berated the clergy for making loose statements about India without understanding the consequences. Not Benazir Bhutto nor Nawaz Sahrif and certainly not Zia-ul-Haq dared do anything similar. But we need to know whether the General can actually control the Islamic fundamentalists in his country and the only way we can know this is if we start a dialogue. We also need to know if he can control the militants Pakistan exports to the Kashmir valley and again that is a good enough reason for dialogue. Pakistan continues to deny that its government arms and funds the militant groups but, according to Indian government sources, nearly ninety per cent of the militants currently involved in the ‘Kashmir jehad’ are foreigners. They also happen to be foreigners who come into our country from across the Pakistan border so expecting us to believe that the government has nothing to do with them is like expecting us to believe that the Indian army was not fighting Pakistani troops in Kargil. The road to a solution in Kashmir is a long, hard one now, thanks mainly to the mistakes made by our own leaders. It is important not to forget that there was no Kashmir problem to speak of in the seventies and early eighties. It had died until Indira Gandhi decided to start messing around with the democratic processes in the Kashmir valley by toppling Farooq Abdullah’s government in 1983. Rajiv could still have retrieved the situation in 1986 by simply ordering another election but he foolishly decided to force Farooq’s National Conference into an alliance with the Congress which nearly destroyed both parties. Pakistan began its interference only once the movement for azaadi had already begun indigenously in Kashmir. We need to admit this, just as Pakistan needs to understand that it cannot go on demanding a plebiscite or continue to dream of Kashmir being handed over on a silver platter as part of the “unfinished business” of Partition. The solution has to come without any further partitioning of India, any further redrawing of borders in the subcontinent. If we can even begin a process of working towards it, we will achieve as much as we can from the Agra summit. Meanwhile, may the General and his wife enjoy the romance of the Taj Mahal, they seem to have a room with a magnificent view. |
||
A dangerously Kashmir-centric approach MOST of the write-ups carried in Pakistani newspapers these days on Indo-Pak relations are sharply focused on Kashmir. Though it is believed that Kashmir is a complex problem and cannot be solved easily and quickly, there are people who think that some major development may occur during the Vajpayee-Musharraf Agra dialogue. Different models and formulas are being discussed, but in an atmosphere dominated by unreasonableness. Former ISI chief Lieut-Gen Hamid Gul has warned the ruling General that he should not do anything to hurt the sentiments of the Kashmiris. In his opinion, the USA wants to drive a wedge between the Kashmiris and the Pakistanis so that "given the choice, they (the Kashmiris) say that they do not want to live with Pakistan either". Perhaps he still believes that a plebiscite is possible in the valley! Obviously, this reflects his ignorance of the reality. He should be aware of UN chief Kofi Annan's recent rebuff to Pakistan that any talk of plebiscite is ridiculous in the changed circumstances. The General goes to add that if militants (he calls them "mujahideen") question a decision on "Pakistan trading with India then it must not be done". This is nothing but perverted thinking. He also talks of a suzerainty formula. "It means they (the Kashmiris) have to live within the Indian Union dominion. The Chinese will leave this issue to Pakistan to decide. They will be disturbed only if independent Kashmir (third option) was to be exercised, and a part or the whole of Kashmir is to become independent." General Gul has dug out perhaps from his country's archives the "Chenab formula" based on the "Owen Dixon Plan". He says, "The Owen Dixon Plan means you have to give away Ladakh and draw a Chenab line which goes all the way to the Himalayas and to the Chinese border...The fault with the Owen Dixon Plan is that it actually divides the Kashmiri nation (?) and violates the UN resolutions." Mushahid Hussain, a well-known commentator, says in an article in The Nation: "In fact, India probably envisages a peaceful settlement on Kashmir that may have shades of the "Sahrawi Model" . As recommended by former US Secretary of State James Baker, the model has it that there should be no referendum in the Western Sahara region of Morocco. Western Sahara should opt instead "for a settlement seeking autonomy for an interim period within Morocco, which occupied it in 1975, and after four years giving the Sahrawi people the right to vote on their future status." Former Chief Justice of Pakistan Nasim Hasan Shah has also written a long article in favour of the 1950 Dixon formula, which he says "could be the starting point". Pakistan Muslim League leader and former Interior Minister Chaudhary Shujaat Hussain's proposal is that the "independent Kashmir idea is limited only to the valley, with Jammu and Ladakh remaining with India". He has been telling people that this way Pakistan- occupied Kashmir will remain where it is. Another ridiculous idea, deserving to be ignored with contempt. General Mirza Afzal Beg, a former army chief who regularly contributes to newspapers, is surprised at the confidence of the ruling General. "The question is: what do the two leaders have up their sleeve to deliver? What is patently striking is the optimism being expressed by both leaders, particularly in sharp contrast to over half a century of rigidity and deadlock on the Kashmir issue, culminating in three wars, and recurring battles on the Line of Control." Dr Hasan-Askari Rizvi says in an analysis carried in The Nation that "several factors indicate a strong possibility of the Musharraf-Vajpayee meeting producing some positive results." His list of factors: One, the traditional hardliners, the army in Pakistan and the BJP in India, control the levers of power today. Two, major powers like the USA and China, besides international financial institutions, are taking "active interest in the summit". Three, "there is a realisation at the societal level in both countries that they must explore the peace initiative." Fourth, it is perhaps for the first time "the two governments are endeavouring to build popular support for the dialogue in their respective countries". However, Dr Askari, too, like most other thinkers, comes to the same question at the end: "The major obstacle to an improvement in India-Pakistan relations is the multidimentional Kashmir dispute...This problem can no longer be pushed to the periphery of the dialogue." One comes to the conclusion that few people on the other side of the Line of Control realise the necessity of giving less significance to Kashmir and launching a joint battle against poverty, the biggest common enemy of the two countries. The Kashmir obsession has brought Pakistan to the edge of an economic precipice. What else does it want? |
Congress Working Committee’s protest
Calcutta: The following further resolution was passed by the Working Committee of the all-India Congress Committee records once again its strong protest against the action of the South African Union Government in proceeding with the Colour Bar Bill inspite of the unanimous protest of this country and the representation of the government of India, and assures the Indian community in South Africa that the whole country is
behind them in their struggle to resist the insidious and dangerous implications of the bill. |
You may have controlled the elements like fire. Solid steel may have been pierced directly through your power. You may have acquired immense wealth through magical powers. Yet if you have not realised your own Self, what it will all avail you? Oh, what indeed will it all avail. You may have stupefied all with magical formulae. You may have hit the target with your arrows. You may have mastered the mystery of time. Yet, if you have not realised your own Self, what will it all avail you? Oh, what indeed will it all avail? — Shri Adi Shankaracharya, Anatmashri
Vigrhanama, Verses 4, 10-11, 13 * * * Pilgrimages, penances, compassion and alms-giving Bring a little merit, the size of sesama seed. But he who hears and believes and loves the Name Shall bathe and be made clean In a place of pilgrimage within him. — Guru Nanak Dev,
Japuji Sahib, 21 * * * O man, practise asceticism after the following manner: Think no more of thy house in the city Than as if it were a forest abode; And remain always a hermit in thine heart! Instead of matted hair, cultivate continence; Wash thy self daily in unity of will with God; Let thy daily religious duties be thy long growing nails! Let divine wisdom be thy Guru and enlighten your soul As with ashes, smear thy body with the love of God.... — Guru Gobind Singh, Sabad Hazare |
 |
| Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir | Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs | Nation | Editorial | | Business | Sport | World | Mailbag | In Spotlight | Chandigarh Tribune | Ludhiana Tribune 50 years of Independence | Tercentenary Celebrations | | 121 Years of Trust | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
