Will This Continue?

It’s very spectacular when you see the history of the two countries, or states as we call them right now. For long this region was embroiled in the wars between empires until the gunpowder empire took over (Mughals). The deterioration of the Empire resulted in the advent of princely states or as well call it, new semi autonomous states in the late eighteenth century. Was this region evolving into a capitalist state? Or was the capitalist system in infancy? Like in Britain, which saw the Puritan revolution (mid 17th century) and Industrial revolution (18th Century) subsequently, driving it to become the world power, or colonial power as we can put it. We will never be able to answer this question. When the Mughal Empire was crumbling and new semi autonomous states began replacing the once mighty Empire under Central Asian stock, the British were there to take over, and they did, all due to their efficient economic system in place. Many hold that it was the superior arms that made Britain take over, but it just wasn’t it. The Nawabs/Princes were clever enough to realize the new challenge could only be matched with superior martial equipment and discipline, what they couldn’t match was the new and more efficient economic system in place – that made Britain sail all the way to India, to exploit its resources.

It has been at least 200 years since Indian princes submitted to the might of the British. 80 years since the end of the second world war, when Indians served in the British army and gave their lives for the Union Jack. 78 years since the politicians realized that the mini continent had to be broken down. And the same amount of years since the people of the subcontinent realized that the enemies were within the ranks, not the outsiders! Abysmal as it may seem but the new states became sworn enemies, the new entities who would vouch to annihilate each other, because the stage was set: the new line that divided the subcontinent opened up a new theatre; Kashmir was to be the forever bone of contention.

Hindutva’s Modi was bold enough to revoke the special status of Kashmir in its constitution. And now places the blame of any resistance on Kashmiri soil, on Pakistan.

Pahalgam attacks is not the first time India blamed Pakistan for terror attacks on its soil. The only thing that may’ve been different this time around was the intensity of Hindu centric ideology, Hindutva, which was thumping its fists on the doors of peace. Many would call this ideology as India’s answer to Nazism – and it might seem so, given how media outlets have blown the air to the fire of war and how a good section of India’s population seemed to be wooed by it. The use of religio cultural themes of Hinduism and the populist appeals has become a norm. The new aspiring economic power of South Asia breathes the fire of religious chauvinism. The same religious chauvinism India’s founders criticized Pakistan of, when the latter’s leaders claimed that it was made on religious grounds. The problem may have been in part because Hindutva seeks to divorce itself practically from the secular democratic ideals that were held by the founders of India. Indeed, India presents itself as the economic giant, with rivals being China – compared to Pakistan that hasn’t yet gotten through the chain of loans that it has received (one even during the war!).With the ongoing debt and the political crisis that has confused the nation on who pulls the reins, the situation in its entirety wasn’t good for Pakistan. This political rumble coupled with the dissatisfaction from the political elite may have given India the heads up to hammer Pakistan into a situation where it couldn’t recover.

The situation in Pakistan however isn’t as simple as it gets. With the ongoing wars and forced disappearances in Balochistan and FATA, the armed forces seemed to have been occupied with dealing with domestic issues more than what exists on the outset. To anyone, the situation seemed dire for a country that had managed to become an atomic power, which was obviously to establish a deterrence. India on the other hand, becoming what has to be the rising giant of South Asia, forming alliances with the USA, Russia and other Western powers seemed confident in its move to guarantee dominance which could go rather unchallenged. The 2019 strikes in Pakistan further cemented India’s resolve. It seemed, things would have been pretty easy. From the Indian perspective, the Pahalgam attack presented itself as an important factor to launch a punch of dominance that could put India to the global stage, as the defender of its citizens; a chivalrous knight who righteously acts on the cries of its women to protect their honor – and that would, eventually prove to the world the military dominance of India. At Least in South Asia.

Pakistan has its own share to form alliances. The USA had been Pakistan’s ally but the weakening of ties shifted Pakistan towards a closer entity, China. The latter hadn’t entered the field of active warfare as of now but has been friends of Pakistan, to the end that it had called Pakistan its ‘iron clad’ brother. These alliances do not grow out of nowhere. Pakistan’s economic crisis and political division had made its situation rather muddy; China with the new ‘Chinese Dream’ became a natural ally, considering that it wants to expand its influence by being directly involved (unlike USA), through none other than One Belt One Road Project. With the Kashmir issue not reaching any conclusion, Pakistan always had a feeling: a danger that lurked on the other end. And there was a reason: India had always accused Pakistan of the proxy wars in Kashmir, of the Jihadis that threatened the lives of Hindus in Jammu. As expected, Pakistan denied, vouched for a neutral solution. Khawaja Asif though managed to spill the beans a little, in an interview with the Sky News, he seemed to have conceded Pakistan getting involved in the proxy wars sponsored by its Western Allies from the time of invasion of USSR in Afghanistan. However, Pakistan’s official position is rather principled, to investigate the issue through third party.

All the dangers and contentions follow after the partition during which the migration witnessed massacre unlike any other. The Pahalgam massacre created what was to be, a continuation, a gesture that India would avenge the killers of its Hindu citizens, much like Islamic parties tend to create a scenario for Kashmiri Muslims in Pakistan. Pakistan has, through its foreign policy presented itself as a champion of Muslim rights all over the world, including those in Gaza – not recognising Israel as a state. India on the other hand, as of late, has come closer to Israel. The war, which resulted in both sides showcasing their supersonic missiles and drone capabilities, targeted military installations on both sides. Claims were made of serious damages from both the sides on their respective enemy lines. But it was at the end, how the air force of both states performed, that caught the world’s attention. India’s Rafale had been shot down (at least 1) by Pakistan, using Chinese military technology. The world now witnessed for the first time the effectiveness of Chinese military technology on the battlefield. Pakistan, thus, it can be said, became the apparatus through which Chinese weapons were tested in ‘real life conditions’. The threat of the use of nuclear arsenal may have prompted the otherwise unmoved USA into the war and mediated peace. Who raised the banner of peace first? It has become a source of polemical discourse of course, because, as it is understood, albeit in a very nuanced fashion between the nations, the first one to call for peace was the one who faced the brunt of the war the most!

Much like Princes and Nawabs of India in the 18th century forging ties with European trading powers to undo their rivals; India and Pakistan now seek global support to tarnish each other. We see a section of India demanding war to continue and peace being made on Indian terms, but the reality is, the subcontinent, after the British took over, and left, never seemed to recover from the horrors of colonialism. India had to submit to the US’s intervention. The question of Kashmir still stands, however. Hindutva’s Modi was bold enough to revoke the special status of Kashmir in its constitution. And now places the blame of any resistance on Kashmiri soil, on Pakistan. Same as Pakistan puts the blame of Baloch insurgency on India. Will this continue? Sure it would. And with new bigger players in the region, it seems hard for any of the two to rise beyond being the puppets of Big Powers.

 

The writer is a dedicated teacher and accomplished debates coach with a degree in International Affairs.