On 22 April, the attack on tourists in Pahalgam was carried out by the terrorist organisation The Resistance Front. In the early hours of 7 May, Indian security forces launched strikes on nine sites believed to be camps of Lashkar-e-Taiba, Hizbul Mujahideen, and Jaish-e-Mohammad. Defence Minister Rajnath Singh claimed that at least 100 terrorists were killed. These strikes have been followed by counter-offensives and attempted or foiled attacks from both sides. The number of civilians being killed is now adding to the 26 who lost their lives on 22 April. It remains to be seen when this chain reaction will end. By then, many more civilian lives will likely be lost on both sides.
India initially aimed to precisely target only terrorist camps. However, the Pakistani strike on a Gurudwara and a Masjid in Poonch has expanded the scope of the attacks. A fight against terrorism has now turned into a conflict between two countries. The terrorists have achieved their objective.
Hopefully, the war will stop before it reaches a point where one side gets desperate and considers using nuclear weapons.
The goal of eliminating terrorism will remain a distant dream. It is more likely that additional 'jihadists' will be provoked to take up arms in retaliation for the killing of their brethren. The destruction of the Babri Masjid, which resulted in the first major terrorist attack in India—the serial bomb blasts in Mumbai in early 1993—has already shown that acts of destruction lead to reaction.
Dr. Manmohan Singh resisted the temptation to attack Pakistan after the much larger Mumbai attack in 2008. His government pursued the legal route against the accused, leading to some being punished while others await their verdicts. After a hiatus of more than a year, Kuldeep Nayar led the first delegation of Indian civil society to Pakistan, and the peace process adopted by the government subsequently delivered dividends. This process at least ensured that no repeat incident occurred during the remaining six years of Manmohan Singh’s tenure. India-Pakistan relations had shown visible signs of improvement when he stepped down as Prime Minister.
The wisdom of using peace as a tool to resolve the entangled relationship between the two countries has not been lost. However, the incumbent government of India, instead of insisting on a joint inquiry—with the involvement of third parties if necessary—to identify and prosecute the culprits, has chosen a populist, politically expedient approach of unilaterally attacking Pakistan. Without just means, the stated objective is unlikely to be achieved.
At the end of this war, we’ll be left with more bitterness. Communal hatred on both sides has already reached the level of madness. The narrative driven by a frenzied media will destroy whatever possibilities for rapprochement existed. Trust has been completely eroded. And lastly, there will be no guarantee that another terrorist attack won’t take place several years down the line.
A possible solution lies in friendly relations with Pakistan. At some point, someone has to take the first step. A dialogue between the two countries, followed by confidence-building measures, should ultimately lead to both governments working together to eliminate the threat of terrorism. We must remember that Pakistan has paid a heavier price in terrorist incidents. As recently as March, a train from Quetta to Peshawar with 380 passengers was hijacked by the Balochistan Liberation Army, resulting in many casualties during the subsequent shootout. We must begin with the premise that not everyone in Pakistan supports terrorism. Hence, India’s priority should be to strengthen the saner voices in Pakistan, enabling a democratically elected government to take charge, without military or ISI interference. The support extended to Imran Khan’s party during the last elections proves that people desire democratic rule.
Imran Khan will always be remembered for opening the Kartarpur Sahib corridor for Indian pilgrims—an act that was even praised by Narendra Modi at its inauguration. As a confidence-building measure, India could have reciprocated by opening a corridor to the Ajmer Sharif Dargah for Pakistani pilgrims. This single act could have generated immense goodwill for India within Pakistan. Strong people-to-people ties are the only way to diminish whatever support terrorist organisations may still have in Pakistan.
How long will we continue viewing Pakistan as an enemy? It was part of India until 1947. Many Indians have migrated and settled there. Many families remain connected across borders. How can a husband and wife, married across the border, be expected to pledge loyalty to only one country? Shared history, customs, culture, family, and language—India and Pakistan have been artificially divided. India is living proof that Hindus and Muslims can coexist, even after more than a decade of sustained attempts to divide them through various governmental and non-governmental actions. This political division has been imposed on a social unity that persists at the grassroots. Hindus and Muslims cannot be divided the way the Meiteis and Kukis have been in Manipur. If Hindus and Muslims can coexist, why can’t India and Pakistan?
Going forward, there are only two options: either we live as good neighbours, or we perish together by dropping nuclear bombs on each other.
If the former chiefs of RAW and ISI, A.S. Dulat and Asad Durrani, can write a book together, and if Narendra Modi can make a surprise visit to Lahore to attend Nawaz Sharif’s family function and present a shawl to his mother, why shouldn’t common Indians and Pakistanis be allowed to live in an atmosphere of trust, peace, and friendship?
We hope wisdom prevails among the civilian population, good sense guides political ideologies on both sides, and visionary leadership takes steps in the right direction to solve the problem of terrorism once and for all.
---
Arundhati Dhuru is with the National Alliance of People’s Movements in India, Saeeda Diep is with the Centre for Peace and Secular Studies in Lahore, Pakistan, and Sandeep Pandey is General Secretary of the Socialist Party (India). They, along with their children—Maryam, Ayesha, Bakht, Chaitanya, and Anandi—refuse to consider citizens of the other country as their enemies
Comments