Same old bluff and bluster

We of the media, print or electronic, are wordsmiths. Words are the tools of our trade, and so, perhaps, we occasionally grant them an importance which they do not deserve. Thus it was with the British and American media’s reporting of General Musharraf’s much-vaunted speech of this past Saturday.

If we were to believe some commentators, it would appear the Kali Yuga ended that evening! The general, it seemed to some, had reversed half-a-century of Pakistani policy, vowed friendship with India, and promised to curb the terrorists operating from Pakistani soil. But what did General Musharraf actually say, and does it merit even the restrained welcome it received from India?

In a speech lasting over an hour, General Musharraf’s references to India were remarkably cursory. Here they are:

“Kashmir runs in our blood. No Pakistani can afford to sever links with Kashmir.” “We will continue to extend our moral, political and diplomatic support to Kashmiris.” “We condemn the terrorist acts of September 11, October 1 and December 13.” This is mind-boggling stuff! While the Pakistani dictator finally forced himself to accept that the attack on Parliament was a “terrorist” act, he promises to continue the policies which made it respectable, even a vote-winner, in Pakistan.

But the contradictions continued. “Solving the Kashmir issue is the joint responsibility of our two countries. Let me repeat some of the observations made by you, Mr. Vajpayee, some time back, and I quote: Mind-sets will have to be altered and historical baggage will have to be jettisoned. I take you on this offer. Let us start talking in this very spirit.” So far, so good. Alas, it was too good to last...

“Now as Commander of the Armed Forces of Pakistan, I wish to convey another message... Let there be no attempt of crossing the border in any sector as it will be met with full force.” And, then, “Kashmiris also expect that you ask India to bring an end to state terrorism and human rights violations.”

And how did he end? “...we have been sent a list of 20 people by India. I want to clear our position on this. There is no question of handing over any Pakistani... As far as non-Pakistanis are concerned, we have not given asylum to any one. Any one falling under this category will be proceeded against whenever one is found.”

Can I sum it up? The same stale lies about state terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir. The same bluster and bravado about Pakistan’s right to retaliate. An absolute refusal to hand over the men wanted by India. And if you take the strict interpretation of the word ‘asylum’ in international law, then yes, General Musharraf is right — Pakistan has not given “asylum” to anyone. All it has done is to house them, feed them, and protect them — anything and everything but grant them “asylum”!

The same sense of being too clever by half is apparent when you hear Pakistan saying that there are no longer any Indian criminals in that country. This again is probably the literal truth; by many accounts the Dawood Ibrahims and the Tiger Memons were told to move out of the country a day before the general’s speech.

The schizophrenia which permeated General Musharraf’s speech is understandable. As with every other leader of Pakistan, civilian or soldier, his policy stands on two legs. First, do not defy the United States — because it is the source of money and arms. Second, be as aggressive as is possible to India — because that hostility is the rationale for Pakistan’s existence. General Musharraf’s problem is that these two policies are, currently, contradicting each other.

The bottomline is this: can India afford to trust General Musharraf, believing that his fear of the United States shall override his hatred for us? The history of the past three years offers little comfort.

Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif went out of his way to pick Musharraf as Chief of Staff of the Pakistan Army. His reward was a coup followed by exile. I recall General Musharraf appearing on the BBC to laud the Taliban, an organisation which the Pakistan Army had solicitously nursed. It took just 24 hours for the general to stab his child in the back. If that is how this man treats his friends, why should India hope for any better treatment?

As he set out from Washington, Colin Powell betrayed the traditional bias of the US State Department when he announced his hope that both India and Pakistan would pull back their forces from the border. Frankly, I cannot think of anything more suicidal, perhaps literally so. One may as well lay out a red carpet for militants, or even a re-enaction of Kargil. (In any case, the United States — which has blocked sale of the Falcon aircraft to India even as China restocks Pakistan’s armoury — is ill-placed to play the arbitrator.)

It is only under the threat of war that Pervez Musharraf has been forced to negotiate. And war, however undesirable in itself, must remain a credible option if we want him to continue on the straight and narrow. Ease off the pressure, and General Musharraf will slide back into his old habits, promising much and doing nothing.

As to the gratuitous advice coming from Washington, I can do no better than quote the first American to win the Nobel Peace Prize: “A milk-and-water righteousness unbacked by force is to the full as wicked as, and even more mischievous than, force divorced from righteousness.”

General Musharraf would do well to mull over some more words of wisdom from Theodore Roosevelt: “...it was out of question to suppose that any other nation would attempt to do for them what they were utterly unable to do for themselves.” Remember that, General, when next you lure a third party to help you grab Jammu and Kashmir.

The newspapers in the United States quoted External Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh’s response to the general’s speech: “He has only talked the talk. He must now walk the talk!” The minister was being generous — General Musharraf hasn’t even begun to talk leave alone walk!

Earlier Columns