Daily Times

Nationalism can offer a positive vision when linked to dignity and democracy. It serves as the political glue that binds together disparate peoples into a nation state. The ideal state is a secular and pluralistic democracy where citizenship is territorial and all minorities, ethnic and religious, are treated as equals. Millions are devoted to and inspired by nationalism, so much so that historian Sacvan Bercovitch described it as, “succeeding in uniting nationality and universality, civic and spiritual selfhood, sacred and secular history, the country’s past and paradise to be, in a single transcendent ideal.”

As we know, nationalism can also be a negative, destructive and divisive force. It fans the flames of conflict, often rooted in a lack of national confidence and political failure. It assures citizens of the moral rectitude of their nation, suggesting that it was fair, righteous and without blame. In contrast it demonises rival nations, caricaturing them as aggressive, scheming, deceitful, backward or uncivilised. It assures the people that in the event of a war, their nation would emerge victorious. This toxic, aggressive, exclusive, competitive, belligerent nationalism is the very opposite of a relaxed, self-confident, inclusive view of the nation and the world. It binds and encloses. It does not liberate. This is precisely the kind of nationalism that Rabindranath Tagore described as a “great menace”.

Nationalist arrogance and overconfidence is fuelled by a jingoistic press. Bellicose, harsh and ignorant oratory replaces civilised and reasoned discourse. The pages of newspapers are often packed with nationalist rhetoric, inflammatory stories about rival nations and other forms of sabre rattling. Journalists, politicians and government officials contribute to nationalist hysteria by kowtowing to the powerful, the dominant and the xenophobic in society. The chest-thumping and martial brouhaha drown out reasonable voices committed to harmony and coexistence.

In the South Asian context, a negative hyper-nationalism has been on display of late. India has focused upon Pakistan, which is demonised as a country, society, state and regime that is inherently inimical to India and with which peaceful coexistence is virtually impossible. Indian leaders describe the Pakistani state as a thoroughly corrupt, compromised and unreliable entity. India is justifiably sceptical that Pakistan has entirely renounced jihadist proxy warfare against India. In response, the Pakistani statements — which included provocative reminders that India is not the only subcontinental power with nuclear arms — once again exposed the deep-rooted suspicions and lingering potential for conflict between the longstanding rivals. India is lambasted in the local press as a “cunning” enemy, which has never reconciled to Pakistan’s existence and has posed the greatest threat to the country. It seems that resurgent nationalism is developing into a potential threat to the stability and security of the region and beyond.

The rhetoric between India and Pakistan is high-pitched. The trumpets of hate are prevailing over pleas for peace. In India, we see the revival of a militant, chauvinistic and violent Hindu nationalism. In Pakistan, the fear and loathing of India bind together the people much more strongly than any weakly constructed and imposed nationalist identity.

In the short run, windy nationalism is the very last thing South Asia needs. A concerted effort should be made to keep negative hyper-nationalism at bay. Otherwise, it will be a force for trouble unless it is curbed. A further deterioration of relations between India and Pakistan, both nuclear armed, could threaten the stability of the world. However, shunning triumphalism and taking the high road will not be easy with formidable hurdles standing in the way. But as the leaders in both countries move into a tension-filled summer, it is the essential road for them to take. In the long run, South Asia needs mature leadership and deeper institutionalisation, and the pooling of intelligence resources to combat terrorism to facilitate greater cooperation and trust.

Specifically, India’s growth, security and future are tied to its identity as a pluralistic, democratic and secular nation that is a pillar of stability in a region and world that is becoming increasingly chaotic. It must resist forces that would want to turn it into a morass of obscurantism, superstition and communal prejudice. Pakistan has to boldly reverse its pathology, marked by its mix of Islam and politics, the military and the mullahs, the Taliban and terrorism. The choice for Pakistan is clear: between a ‘recalcitrant’ religious state and a modern, moderate, liberal, tolerant society.

After a lost over half-decade of conflict, India and Pakistan need to get along to focus on the huge task of lifting hundreds of millions of people from poverty and creating jobs for a young and hungry population. Nation formation is a more complex job compared to chest thumping about military might in an area populated with the world’s largest number of illiterates and malnourished, where open defecation and corrupt governance are continuing global spectacles. South Asia must settle, not aggravate, its differences and it must not allow xenophobic nationalism to get in the way. A commitment to pluralist democracy and to a positive form of nationalism is the only effective deterrent to the re-emergence of hyper-state nationalism.

The writer can be reached at shgcci@gmail.com