GEO-POLITICAL REALITIES

Who said that we forgot Mahatma Gandhi and his ideals and remember him ceremoniously only on Oct 2? It is not the whole truth. We can’t be untruthful to the apostle of Ahimsa and Satya. Yes, our government and politicians remember him whenever we go in for talks with Pakistan. What did Gandhiji preach us? He said if someone slaps you on one cheek, show him the other. That’s what we are doing very religiously whenever we get insulted by Pakistan. Go again across the border or invite them to our land and submit ourselves to have egg on our face again and again. There are some cheer leaders on our side who call themselves “incurable optimists” who want this to happen. For them, Pakistan is always right.

No, it is not just our External Affairs Minister SM Krishna’s smug performance and the “forbearance” he had to swallow whatever his counterpart Shah Mohd Qureshi hurled at him without any diplomatic decency that shows India in bad light. But Krishna did not show the same gesture to his own colleagues back in India. He started attacking Home Secretary GK Pillai for his “untimely” remark on Headley’s disclosures thus making him the scapegoat for the failure of talks. His tirade against Pillai also exposed the rift between MEA and Home Ministry. If at all there was any outcome on Indo-Pak talks, it was this. Exposing our own weaknesses rather than fixing Pakistan for its nefarious role in exporting terror. As a cartoonist put it, we need peace talks between our own MEA and Home Ministry before we think of peace talks or composite dialogue or whatever phrase we invent, with Pakistan. We not only showed the other cheek, but praised the one who slapped us when Krishna and Qureshi were on the same page on Pillai.

When Pak Foreign secretary came to India, he was no different from his minister. He termed the dossiers presented to him as “piece of literature”.

In fact, the first slap was when our Prime Minister had a summit meeting with his counterpart from Pakistan at Sharm-el-Sheikh. Our Prime Minister walked into Pak trap when he condescended to include Balochistan in the joint statement. At that time the scapegoat was, like Pillai this time, the one who drafted the joint statement and who now presides over our national security affairs.

It is no secret that it was our Prime Minister who was pushing for talks with Pakistan when he met Pakistani Prime Minister at Thimpu, undoubtedly under the pressure of the US whose strategic interests demand it. When Qureshi said that “India was not prepared”, he was only making a complaint to the US against India. Did you notice that even before Krishna could return to his country, the US started welcoming the talks? Now that the talks were botched up, why is Dr Man Mohan Singh adopting the message of Gandhiji’s three monkeys? Don’t speak evil, hear evil, and see evil. He should atleast sort out the turf war under his nose.

As if our discomfiture is not enough while dealing with Pakistan, especially over Headley’s disclosures, the US too is not happy over the use of Headley inputs on ISI’s active role on 26/11 tragedy. There was initial reluctance on the part of US to give access to Headley for Indian investigators. When the NIA succeeded in getting vital info on ISI, the US does not want to be the instrument for India to embarrass Pakistan and that is the reason the US wants India to act “responsibly”, whatever it means.

When we talk about Headley, we can’t ignore our own double standards. Krishna says Headley’s revelations can’t be ignored and Pakistan can’t be “selective” on fighting terror. Fair enough. What is our track record? When the same Headley says that Ishrat Jahan is an LeT operative, we say “we can’t take note of the statement of a person who is behind the bars in the US”. Why this “selective” approach when it comes to Gujrat or Modi? And how can you expect Pakistan to take Headley seriously?

When we analyse the Indo-Pak talks and the US pressure, we must realise one thing. It is not a sense of altruism to have peace in the sub-continent that the US wants India and Pakistan to bury the hatchet. It is guided by its own selfish interests. In a year’s time, the US will start its first phase of pull out from beleaguered Afghanistan where it finds itself in deep trouble. When it pulls out of Afghanistan completely, it does not want the country to be taken over by Taliban and al Queda and pose a threat to its interests once again. That is why the US wants Pakistan, its frontline partner in fighting terror, to engage Taliban who have entrenched themselves on the Pak-Afghan border. If Pakistan has to do that its eastern border with India should be free of tension.

But that is where Pakistan is playing a clever game. It wants US intervention to sort out all issues with India (read Kashmir issue) At the same time it wants to strike a deal with Taliban for dominance over Afghanistan. After all, ISI and Taliban have symbiotic relationship. At any rate, Pakistan wants to keep India out of Afghanistan so that it can have a proxy rule in Kabul. The recent donors meet in Kabul has confirmed this.

Afghan President Karzai too is a man in jitters. Once the US and Nato forces pull out, he will be made a mincemeat by Taliban and al Queda. That is the reason he is trying to have peace with Taliban categorising them into good Taliban and bad Taliban. “Inclusive government” in Afghanistan that India talks about is all hot air. Pakistan is going to recover its lost ground in Afghanistan and as an analyst put it, it will be a great reward for Pak army and ISI for their support to Islamic extremism and global terrorism. Since the entire tribal population of northern Afghanistan is not with Taliban, there is also a distinct possibility of civil war rearing its head once again in the country of rugged terrain.