By Jagdish N Singh
February 13, 2015
Abstract: Empress Razia Sultan and King Akbar sidelined communal fanatics with the help of India’s broad, liberal base of society and their military prowess. New Delhi could use this social asset and military prowess to combat Islamist terrorism today as well.
Can you imagine what would happen if one released some venomous serpents into your land and you refrained from killing them and just got them cornered into a part of your own territory ? Just think of the inevitable that would follow : the serpents would always be in a look out to infiltrate the rest of your land to sting the souls around . This is precisely the story of terrorism India has been faced with since her Independence.
In October 1947, just a couple of months after the tragic partition of the undivided British India, Islamabad invented the ideology of Islamist terrorism and dispatched its warriors (Pakistani soldiers in guise of Pakhtoon raiders) into India’s Kashmir to capture it. Mahatma Gandhi could foresee the consequence thereof and advised Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru not to submit to the raiders and have them driven out. The Indian Army, too, was in a position to deal with the menace appropriately. Yet, instead of eliminating the warriors of fanaticism totally, New Delhi cornered them into a part of Kashmir (Pakistan-occupied Kashmir) and took the matter to the United Nations resulting in the loss of the 2/5ths of its own territory. And since then the menace of terrorism has been spreading out to other parts of India. According to authentic studies, since 1980, India has lost 150,000 lives on account of terrorism alone.
It is ironical that New Delhi still seems to be in favour of developing a concerted global strategy to combat Islamist terrorism. At a recent Munich Security Group meeting, organised by the Observer Research Foundation, in New Delhi India’s National Security Advisor Ajit Doval said that the three major challenges in dealing with India’s security threats were - “invisible cyber enemies, outdated intelligence-gathering techniques and a disunited approach to tackle terror” and suggested a Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism.
Doval argued that the idea of such a convention was first mooted by the National Democratic Alliance government in 2001 but it did not take off, for countries such as Pakistan would not agree to describe groups they wanted to call “freedom fighters” as terrorists. He lamented that “those days, no one saw India’s point of view on Afghanistan and Pakistan. Osama bin Laden’s capture in Pakistan has changed that.”
New Delhi would do well not to waste its time on any such idea. A global convention on terrorism is very unlikely to receive genuine support from most of the states – the Organization of Islamic Countries, in particular – in the world even today. They have had a very backward, reactionary socio-economic and political agenda. They would never like a pluralist, democratic India to flourish in the world and be a model for their citizens to overthrow their own oppressive anti-rights regimes.
Experience indicates that the United Nations, an international forum, has not been a solution to Islamist terrorism in Kashmir or any other part of India. It has rather proved to be harmful to India on Kashmir. It passed a resolution of ceasefire (December 31, 1948) dividing the state. The 1951 UN resolution provided for a referendum under the UN supervision after Pakistan withdrew its troops from the part of Kashmir under its control. But it never pressurized Pakistan to honour its part.
It may be recalled that even the legendary moralist Prime Minister Nehru got disillusioned over the conduct of the UN system. He wrote in a letter to his sister and then Indian Ambassador to the then Soviet Union Vijaylakshmi Pandit in February 1948 : “I could not imagine that the Security Council could possibly behave in the trivial and partisan manner in which it functioned. These people are supposed to keep the world in order. It is not surprising that the world is going to pieces. The United States and Britain have played a dirty role, Britain probably being the chief actor behind the scenes.’
One finds on the issue of Kashmir—apparently, the root cause of Pakistan-sponsored terrorism against India--- there is little change in the approach of the United Nations. The United States and the United Kingdom have recently cooperated more intensely with India in combating the Islamist terror. But they continue to overlook the deeds of Pakistan’s notorious Inter Service Intelligence (ISI). Islamabad’s traditional policy towards Kashmir remains unchanged. There is a near consensus across the Pakistani politico-military spectrum on raising the Kashmir issue at the United Nations and various other fora.
According to knowledgeable sources, the ISI is still fully helping terrorists against India. Efforts are being made from across the Line of Control to push terrorists armed with highly sophisticated weapons into the Indian side. The ISIS has recently recruited jihadists in India. The al-Qaida has formed a new wing called Qaida-al-Jihad for the Indian sub-continent. The ISIS and al Qaeda may join hands with Lashkar e-Toiba and the Indian Mujaihideen and launch suicide attacks across the country.
The sources say New Delhi may not get into any complacency in the wake of Pakistan’s security forces’ offensives against the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan in the wake of the recent cold-blooded massacre of 132 children and others in a Peshawar school . Islamabad has confined its action against a select group of militant Islamists--- the Haqqani Network and safe havens of al-Qaida and Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan—alone. It has taken little action against its India-centric terror groups such as the Laskar-e-Taiba (LeT) aka Jamaat-ul-Dawa (JuD), Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ) and others. LeT and LeJ have been patronized by many of the Pakistani politicians.
Viewed against this background, New Delhi would do well to be tough on terror and eliminate all its sources. Essentially, the modern-day terrorism is just a new tool of certain self-styled Islamists to invoke a fanatic interpretation of their otherwise liberal religion, capture power and install an absolutist theocratic regime. History bears out this is not new in India. In medieval times rulers like Empress Razia Sultan and King Akbar too faced such fanatics who sought to challenge the then secular state. But with the broad, liberal base of Indian society, including the Muslim community, and their military prowess, those great regimes could successfully contain their challengers.
New Delhi could do the same today as well. The patriotism of Muslim community or that of any other religious community in the country is intact. In an interview with CNN in September 2014 Prime Minister Narendra Modi rightly said, " Indian Muslims will live for India. They will die for India." New Delhi could use this social asset and military prowess to crush terrorism.
The author is a senior Indian journalist based in New Delhi. Views expressed are personal.
No comments:
Post a Comment