Kargil and the Myth of Losing the Media War

I wish someone would do a comparative study of BJP`s versus Jamaat Islami brand of politics. I find way too many similarities, the most important being the use of voilence to further their political agendas. The major difference of course is that Pakistanis continue to reject Jamaat, and Indians have embraced BJP whole heartedly. Good Luck.

Ali

In response to Jay (Reply # 45):

Dear Jay: I wonder if I should thank you for your brief comment about me. You have every right to form any opinion about anyone, but it would be your personal opinion.

In this world, there are all kinds of people with all kinds of identitites, experiences, educational backgrounds, preferences, and outlooks. I have my own style and ideosyncracies which may or may not appeal to you.



Just to give a flavor of my current views and style, I want to submit the following letters, that I have recently published in a Pakistani newspaper, for your perusal.

Regard, Bilal Ahmad

Frontier Post; June 11, 1999

Protect minorities, ensure national unity



The Quid-e-Azam was very sensitive to the minority question. In pre-Partition India, particularly during the 1930s and the 1940s, the Muslim minority developed a sense of insecurity. It was this sense of economic, political, and cultural insecurity that eventually led to the creation of Pakistan.

Given the ethno-linguistic setup of Pakistan, the Baluchis, the Pukhtuns, and the Sindhis are some of the leading minority groups. Pakistan, however, is the home of numerous additional minority groups. Majority-minority relations exist in every province of Pakistan. Can we say with pride that the minorities in Pakistan are fully protected against the kind of alienation, oppression, and deprivation that the Indian Muslim minority felt some fifty-two odd years back?

The imagined community of the Indians was shattered in the late 1940s. Can we protect ours in this period of gradual and persistent decadence? If we, as a Pakistani nation, have some hope, then we must find ways to save ourselves from further disintegration. One major step would be to show real concern for our socially and geographically variable economic, political, and cultural insecurities.

Bilal Ahmad,

USA

Frontier Post; July 2, 1999

Another Call for Devolution



Many Pakistani citizens have recently stressed the need for a change in the structure of power through devolution. Devolution refers to the transfer of power from the center to a subnational jurisdiction. In Pakistan, a call for devolution is basically a call for some sort of provincial autonomy. Interestingly, Benazir Bhutto has also shown her belief in the devolution of decision-making since it would provide a more effective government to our people (Letter to the Editor, Washington Post, June 28).



In her letter, she further maintains that ``greater regional autonomy`` would ``help our people make the best use of available resources ... in tackling the problems of poverty, illiteracy and backwardness``. I wonder what she really means by ``our people,`` a select few or all Pakistani citizens irrespective of their class, gender, ethno-linguistic, religious, and other bases of individual and collective identities? Regardless of her real intent, the significance of devolution cannot be undermined since this measure may lead to greater citizen empowerment, a responsive government, and above all, national unity and security. If there is any merit in these expectations, then the issue of devolution must be placed on the forefront of our national agenda.

Bilal Ahmad

USA

Frontier Post; June 25, 1999

Peace, not war



The ruling elites in most so-called less-developed countries are obsessed with: (1) the lust for power; and (2) the expectation of sacrifices from the common people without protecting their basic citizenship and human rights. The Pakistani ruling elites are, in addition, obsessed with the desire to make a fool of Pakistani people by diverting their attention from the issues of their everyday livelihood and welfare. This process must stop.

We are on the verge of another bloody war. The Pakistani ruling elites need to truthfully and effectively inform the people around the world (which includes Pakistan) that Pakistan wants peace and not war. Peace in South Asia is necessary for the welfare of common Pakistani citizens and for earning global respect for our homeland and our people. Is Pakistan`s credibility at stake at the moment?

Bilal Ahmad

USA

Frontier Post; July 11, 1999

Behave like a living nation



In his recent book ``Jinnah, Pakistan and Islamic Identity``, Akbar S. Ahmed wrote: ``In Kashmir and in Karachi ordinary citizens suffer terrible privations; yet governments dismiss such ongoing atrocities as the work of enemy agents and attempt to use brute force to crush any expression of dissent or genuine demand.``



Blaming others for our weaknesses is deeply ingrained in the culture and politics of India and Pakistan. No enemy can harm us when our own house is in order. Recourse to atrocities, brutalities, and means of destruction proves that our house is not in order. It also shows our lack of capacity and/or unwillingness to resolve the conflicts peacefully and amicably. A living nation is one which learns from its past mistakes.



Bilal Ahmad

USA

Re: Alil#43

I agree with you that India has been indulging in propaganda but the same holds true for Pakistan. It is common to see, article after after article in Pakistani media protraying Indians as animals carrying out carnage in Kashmir. The truth is always somewhere in the middle. Both the militants and the army have been committing atrocities in Kashmir. One person`s hero is the other person`s villain. Propaganda is a common tool that is inevitable in a war or war-like situation. After all, how else do we motivate people to go and kill others ?

My main point is that Pakistan has not laid out a proper vision for Kashmir except to appeal to emotions. The same mistake happened during partition, when Pakistan was demanded but there was no blueprint for the future. As a result, after the creation of Pakistan, the rulers did not know what to do with it or how to coexist with India. Since Jinnah died too soon, Pakistan has been in the hands of the feudal elite who have basically treated it as their personal jagir. They have reflexively adopted an anti-India mindset and have programmed themselves into believing that it is the only viable policy for Pakistan. Pakistanis still view everything in anti-India terms, as if life has not moved on since 1947. The communal riots in 1947 affected both sides but Pakistan simply finds it impossible to get over the past. It is common to see Pakistanis wrestling with existential issues, while most people in India wish that Pakistanis simply lead their lives in peace and leave India alone.

This lack of vision was demonstrated most aptly with the Kargil affair. On one hand, you invite Vajpayee and roll out the red carpet for him. Then a few months later, you send army and mujahedin into Kargil. What is the logic behind this ? It simply shows that Pakistan has not figured out a way to coexist with India. Pakistan knows very well that if it normalizes relations with India, it will be overwhelmed by the positive response from India. The Kashmir problem will be solved in a short while as India will not see any value in hanging on to the Kashmir valley. We started seeing that after Lahore. The process frightened the right wing elements in Pakistan. What would happen to their dreams of Jihad ? The right wing elements in Pakistan do not trust the ordinary Pakistani because they know that ordinary Pakistanis are itching for better relations. Once the floodgates are opened, there will be no going back. Hence we saw Kargil happen.

Dear Tariq,

I admire your integrity. You are the second pakistani I met on the chowk who is bold enough to criticise some aspects of the pakistani social system, like the eighth amendment and link it as an obstacle to the veolution of pakistan and any resolution of kashmir. I wish people like you talked louder, with out mincing words, like Bilal Ahmed.

Regards

Jay.

Re: Tariq #29

I understand your feelings about Kashmir. However, one major problem is that Pakistan talks a lot about liberating Kashmir, but it never presents a plan about what will happen after the liberation. What will that liberated Kashmir look like ? Would it allow the pundits to come back ? Would it allow Indians to come in for tourism ? Would it allow hindus to perform pilgrimage at various religious site such as Amarnath ? What shape would Indo-Pak relations take ? Would we have truly friendly relations between the countries?

Since Pakistan keeps quiet on these matters, Indians interpret it that any political change in Kashmir would basically result in an extension of 1947. We would lose all access to another part of the subcontinent. If Pakistan gets Kashmir, it will become even more belligerent and triumphant. There would be calls for a march on to New Delhi, mount the ultimate Jihad etc. The religious parties in Pakistan would go nuts in their joy. This is the reason why India does not let go of Kashmir.

The Lahore process had opened a window of opportunity. People had started to see that perhaps Indo-Pak reconciliation is possible. As a result, people were talking about opening the LOC, withdrawal from Siachen etc. The importance of clinging on to Kashmir was reducing and it was being offset by the prospects of a true friendship with Pakistan. However, Kargil has changed all that. Pakistan`s actions showed that it has no interest in a peaceful, negotiated solution. It is only interested in Jihad.

If Pakistan wants to solve Kashmir, it must withdraw all Mujahedin from there and allow peace. If it wants to jumpstart the negotiations, it should ask the APHC to fight the assembly elections in Kashmir and prove that they truly represent Kashmiris. Then we can restart the Lahore process and bring in the APHC representatives elected by the Kashmiris. People in India have started beleiving that Pakistan will never be happy short of establishing muslim rule over the entire subcontinent and converting everyone to Sunni Islam. So nobody is willing to think about parting with Kashmir. It is upto Pakistan to change that perception.

Re-Jay

Playing the Communal Card

You assume that I would be a supporter of the Eighth Amendment, and also of the Kosovo Liberation Army. This is not so. The extremists in

the KLA, as well as the Mujahideen in Kashmir who

commit atrocities are bums who deserve to be condemned and punished. The men of the Indian security forces who commit atrocities deserve to be condemned and punished too. The example of Kosovo, which you cite, does have relevance here.

Kosovo`s political culture was not militarist. Even after Milosovich suppressed the legimitate Government of the Province in 1989, most Kosovar`s continued to support the political party led by Gandhian passive resistance supporter

Ibrahim Rugova. They turned towards the KLA when

they saw no end to Yugoslav state repression. The

nationalist movement in Kashmir remained peaceful for a long time, and turned militarist as a response to the brutal repression first begun by

Governor Jagmohan in 1989.

I would refer you to an excellent study by Humanrights Watch Asia, entitled, Playing the Communal Card, which has chapters on India, as well as Yoguslavia. It is a comparative syudy of siuations in which the state plays the leading role in mobilising the most bigoted religous and ethnic forces in society in the name of national security. Unfortunately, this has been happening in Pakistan too. You are right about the Eighth

Amendment. This has wiped out the secular content of the Constitution of 1973, and has legitimised the persecution of religous minorities and women in particular. It has also established the system of separate electorates which violates the principle that all citizens should be equal before the law, regardless of their religion. As you probably know, many people are struggling against the consequences of the Eighth Amendment in Pakistan. Like the struggle of the Kashmiris,

this struggle is likely to be a long one too.

Re-Jay

Playing the Communal Card

You assume that I would be a supporter of the Eighth Amendment, and also of the Kosovo Liberation Army. This is not so. The extremists in

the KLA, as well as the Mujahideen in Kashmir who

commit atrocities are bums who deserve to be condemned and punished. The men of the Indian security forces who commit atrocities deserve to be condemned and punished too. The example of Kosovo, which you cite, does have relevance here.

Kosovo`s political culture was not militarist. Even after Milosovich suppressed the legimitate Government of the Province in 1989, most Kosovar`s continued to support the political party led by Gandhian passive resistance supporter

Ibrahim Rugova. They turned towards the KLA when

they saw no end to Yugoslav state repression. The

nationalist movement in Kashmir remained peaceful for a long time, and turned militarist as a response to the brutal repression first begun by

Governor Jagmohan in 1989.

I would refer you to an excellent study by Humanrights Watch Asia, entitled, Playing the Communal Card, which has chapters on India, as well as Yoguslavia. It is a comparative syudy of siuations in which the state plays the leading role in mobilising the most bigoted religous and ethnic forces in society in the name of national security. Unfortunately, this has been happening in Pakistan too. You are right about the Eighth

Amendment. This has wiped out the secular content of the Constitution of 1973, and has legitimised the persecution of religous minorities and women in particular. It has also established the system of separate electorates which violates the principle that all citizens should be equal before the law, regardless of their religion. As you probably know, many people are struggling against the consequences of the Eighth Amendment in Pakistan. Like the struggle of the Kashmiris,

this struggle is likely to be a long one too.

reply to #36

Not `every` Indian uses the word `SALA` when referring a Pakistani...not at all...similar should be the case in pakistan too...see this is the biggest problem...we always tend to think in line with the bad minority....but aren`t we, the educated ones supposed to be a little more mature in our thoughts.

There are fundamentalist, narrow minded people everywhere....we should fight them instead of fighting each other....(is any one listening??)

I can give you a classic case of religious fundamentalism taking its roots in my state, Kerala in South India. Just go to the following web site and read the harrowing experiences of some people

www.rediff.com/news/1999/apr/27keral.htm

ciao

skumar

SKUMAR #35,Hi,ASAK

Your ref. to # 30 would have been o.K in anyother situation.When every Indian learns to add SALA to word Pakistani,& i admit same is true in Pak.we have (thanks to politics) have reduced ourselves to animal level .Not that i endorse this sentiment by any means but i know,no Pakistani would feel at ease,safe& comfortable in India not because of 12% muslims but for 85 % hindus.On an lighter note i saw a documentary on Lepers in India in Bombay area the producer in order to illustrate ignorence of common people of this dreadful disease asked a english speaking lady where leprosy is found???She immediately replied such heideous thing could only be found in ``PAKISTAN``

Lets not quabble about Human ideals.I commit & devote all my life to humanism BUT that is not reality,I hate to hear what`` should be``in the name of humanity from Poets,Writers Artists when they dont acknowledge how deep the wound runs how those things that we are not aware of could be more powerful than our submissive silence, tears, shock & horror.

Reply to Iqbal Kasim (#30)



He writes ``..12% of the people we kill are our fellow Muslims....We will have murdered our fellow coreligionists....``



Isn`t this stupid....the fact that 12% of the people who gets killed are MUSLIMS gives you more sadness....does that mean that you care less about the 88% of the other lives lost, just because they are from a different religion....

In my eyes, we are human beings first and the religion comes last. If I see a person on the road after an accident, I don`t enquire about his religion before rushing him to a hospital....I don`t damn care about it....

If 500 people gets killed in a train accident in Bihar...and another 500 gets killed in Karachi the same way, both will give me the same sadness..it is 500 precious human lives to me.....



Grow up Iqbal...grow up...



regards

SKumar

To Tariq and other pakistani stereotypes,

There is a remarkable coincidence in the above class of chowkwalas, they talk about 700,000 indian troops in kashmir. The number is simply absurd, but may be has been repeated so many times in the pak media that it is being quoted with out much thought.

Then there is the hindu suppression of muslim freedom. here again the idea of what is in india is derived from the pak experience. The 8th amendment to the pak constitution has eliminated ay type special consideration to the minorities and other religious groups. In india the situation is very different.

It would be very useful for some knowledgebale person to comment on the 8th amendment.

In conclusion, as usual I would like to come to the religious concept, the events in Kosovo. the western countries bombed and strafed and got rid of the serbs due to attrocities, now the muslims are back. What do they do, they have driven out the serbs, christians. In other parts of yugoslavia muslims live with the serbs. Kosovo, the muslims have tured it to pakistan. A repitition of indo=pak situation. One has to look at the religion, wonder whether the killing of kafirs and jihad has something to with the problems in Kosovo and in kashmir.

Prof Najam:

A Well written and Frank article. Seems we Pakistanis are honest and moreself-critical than some of our Indian friends.

We are our own worst public relations enemies. We have also managed to earn the

leadership we deserve.

Iqbal dreamt of an exemplary Islamic state free from influences of past Arab

imperialism which could have been an example to the rest of the world. Jinnahmanaged to harness our energies to get one for us. And then....most of the sincere leadership passed away and it was free for all. Talk about being free!!

Solutions to our problems lie in education. A Jihad should be declared against

Illiteracy. I find lot of criticism on this website by my fellow Pakstanis but no plan for any remedial action. I guess it is easy to talk than to walk the talk. It is always someone else`s fault.

We need to organise our selves into a plan for action. For those living abroad, perhaps it would be wise to get in touch with those on ground working sincerely towards promoting literacy and support them with regular donations of money and materials.

As far as the Kashmir problem is concerned..Does anybody cares what the Kashmiris want...Hello? Am I missing something? In the ultimate analysis it is upto them to decide their future. Case closed.

Mubaschir

dear najam,

you are based in america, which is often presented to us as the land of the free press. i had a faint hope that you would be having some understanding of the manner in which the media operate. more so, because of the fact that your namesake ``najam`` was recently locked-up by the pakistani establishment. but to my disappointment, you hardly seem to understand media and the issues related to it. your argument that the international media did not treat pakistan well because of its anti-muslim bias and the indian propaganda does not really do any justice to your status as a scholar in international relations. in fact, instead of blaming the western media, you should have first read the pakistani papers before rubbishing the international media. no newspaper can ever turn a blind a eye towards facts in any situation for a long time. if the pakistani army regulars were fighting in kargil, how could the media overlook this fact? then there is an element of intellectual deception in your writings. you try to strike unreal postures (consider that you are not a pakistani) to essentially strike home a purely partisan pakistani argument. just relax, go through your article again,and then decide for yourself as to whose cause you have served. certainly, not the cause of peace. this should be the essential goal of us, all those who visit the chowk-indians or pakistanis.

Let me present a theory of why we lost out on Kargil:

WHEREAS

1. As is clear to all except the most blind, Pakistan started the incident by sending army people across the LOC;

2. The Indian military responded with a unexpected force, and threatened to escalate beyond LOC.

THEREFORE

So far this was a repeat of history (1965 war).

HOWEVER

in 1999, (a) the India vs. Pakistan scale for conventional military is decisively in favor of India compared to 1965. (b) Pakistan has the Bomb.

THEREFORE:

3. In 1999, the final step that all but the most blind could see could easily have been: India could have marched into Pakistan, and before succumbing someone in Pakistan would have lobbed a couple of A-Bombs towards India. That would have killed millions of innocent people in India and (through after effects, in Pakistan as well).

So let us thank our stars that somehow the politicians in India, Pakistan and in the West, had the good sense to stop the whole thing short of a holocaust.

And let us stop going on about how the media war was lost, the west`s dislike of Muslims, superior India proproganda, and so on. While in Pakistan for a couple of weeks during the crisis, I was dismayed to see how the simple facts above seem to have eluded so many commentators and other otherwise very sensible people.

Re- Najib Reply#24

I would invite you to evaluate India`s conduct in Kashmir and consider whether secularism, democracy, federalism, and human rights have had any role in it beyond rhetoric and propaganda.

As early as 1947, India`s stated interest in Kashmir relied on the justification that it needed to control Kashmir as it was a regional great power. That was the period of honesty. Later

as India got entrenched on the basis of its alliance with populist (but not democratic) National Conference, we first heard the justifications based on democracy and secularism.

Faced with Abdullah`s assertive nationalism and his egalitarian policies on the one hand, and with

the integrationist demands of the Hindu communalists, as early as 1953, Nehru chose to support the latter. During the 1960s, in response

to Balraj Puri`s pleading for democracy and federalism, Nehru told him, that both could wait

indefinitely.(See Balraj Puri`s Towards Insurgency

(1994).

Coming to the more recent period, observe the

chronology of events leading to the insurgency in

Kashmir in the late 1980s. Puri`s book is a good reference. The reference in the Report by the Committee on Initiative in Kashmir(See, Asghar Ali Engineer ed. Secular Crown on Fire 1992) is more detailed. You will find that the political movement leading to the insurgency was progressive in that it was demanding participation in a democratic process. The movement turned violent as a response to the extremely brutal repression, initiated by Indian Governor Jagmohan. Jagmohan also took steps to

communalise the situation in Kashmir, as he asked

the Pundits of Kashmir to leave before he began his asault on the people of the Valley. There ewre no Mujahideen in Kashmir at that time.

The root of India`s dilemma in Kashmir is this: India does not permit discourses demanding independence, even when these are not accompanied with violence. In Kashmir, atleast among Muslims, there are no legitimate political groups which would be willing to adhere to discourses espousing loyalty to India. As a result, India is compelled to suppress all institutions of civil society.

For secularists and democrats in South Asia, these

are very sad days indeed. Someone had said that the pessimism of the intellect should be accompanied with the optimism of the will. Indians, Pakistanis and Kashmiris need to ponder in this spirit, how we can try to start putting things in order in consonance with the principles of secularism, democracy and human rights.

Re: Najib Reply #: 25

``... you are a Muslim only because you were born in a Muslim family. Had you been born in the Vatican, you would have been a Christian. Had you been born ...``

How simple - yet so absolutely true.

There is cleverness and there is intelligence. Intelligence includes cleverness but the converse may not be. It takes cleverness to build missiles and bombs. It takes intelligence to realise simple truths.