- And the nuclear option
Prime minister Khan in his maiden speech at UNGA (United Nations General Assembly) succulently summed up the precarious situation in IOK (Indian occupied Kashmir) and its ramifications for the region as well as the world. Referring to the plight of the Kashmiris under lockdown and curfew now for almost two months by Narendra Modi Sarkar, Khan ominously warned: “if this goes wrong, you hope for the best, but be prepared for the worst.”
The prime minister spoke for fifty minutes, much beyond his allocated time. In his impassioned speech he cautioned the world of a “bloodbath whenever the curfew in Kashmir was lifted.” However, the operative part of his speech was obliquely hinting at Pakistan being forced to exercise the nuclear option if attacked by its belligerent neighbour.
He posed a rhetorical question: “supposing a country seven times smaller than its neighbour is faced with the choice- either you surrender or you fight for your freedom till death?” Answering the question himself he added that, “when a nuclear armed country fights to the end, it will have consequences far beyond its borders.”
This is nuclear brinkmanship par excellence with all its appended consequences. Indian leadership since New Delhi’s latest putsch has been threatening to abandon its no first use nuclear option. Some Pakistani ministers- the enigmatic Sheikh Rashid to name one- have been hinting at Islamabad using miniaturised nuclear weapons in a limited theatre in case of possible Indian aggression.
But now the foreboding coming from the prime minister himself at the highest forum of the world has to be taken seriously. Using nuclear option is not nearly an option. It is to put simply, MAD (mutually assured destruction).
No one will allow a nuclear Armageddon to happen. And no responsible nation will seriously talk of exercising such a threat. PM Khan’s veiled threat is symptomatic of utter frustration of Pakistan at the world’s sheer indifference to the dismal human rights situation in the Valley and warmongering against Pakistan.
Narendra Modi is hardly under any international pressure to lift the siege on Kashmir. That is why in his relatively short speech prior to that of his Pakistani counterpart the K-word was not even mentioned.
Khan during his weeklong stay in New York engaged in aggressive and comprehensive diplomacy on Kashmir- perhaps unmatched by any of his predecessors; full marks for the effort.
Nonetheless the world by and large is not willing to budge by nudging New Delhi to resolve the Kashmir conundrum. There is hardly any pressure on Modi to restore status quo in Kashmir by withdrawing the removal of article 370 of the Indian constitution.
In the meanwhile, Kashmiris continue to suffer under the yoke of continuous lockdown with 900,000 Indian troops breathing down their necks. Obviously India, despite boasting about its development roadmap for Kashmir and fatwas from plaint Muslim clerics justifying atrocities on their Muslim brothers, is loath to lift the siege.
It knows well that the day curfew is lifted the recalcitrant Kashmiri youth will pour out onto the streets against continued Indian occupation.
Not that the situation was any better before India’s ominous clampdown on August 5. More than 700,000 security forces were already there for over a decade perpetrating all kinds of atrocities on Kashmiris, typical of an occupation army.
Perhaps the lesson drawn for Khan since India’s formal annexation of Kashmir is that Pakistan is as strong or weak in pursuing its foreign policy and security goals as its internal strength and cohesion
The Indian leadership for years had been claiming- buttressed by its media- that the rebellion in Kashmir was a direct result of infiltration from across the border from Pakistan. True that late general Ziaul Haq the strongman of Pakistan in the late eighties, in pursuance of his Jihadist agenda, to some extent-fomented trouble in IOK.
But the policy has been long abandoned. But New Delhi continues to beat Pakistan with the terrorism stick. The Pulwama attack last February in which forty Indian soldiers perished was put on Pakistan’s plate without any concrete proof.
This resulted in an abortive attack by the Indian air force on Balakot. But India’s continued clampdown is an implicit admission of failure of its Kashmir policy rather than the festering wound being a function of Pakistan’s alleged interference.
The situation in Kashmir has been internationalised thanks largely to New Delhi’s own scorched earth policies in the Valley. Pakistan has also done more than its bit by highlighting the issue bilaterally and on international forums.
But despite the tremendous efforts put in for the Kashmir cause results are rather mixed. Apart from Turkey and China who have categorically come out to demand India lifting its siege and resume talks with Pakistan on the disputed status of Jammu and Kashmir, no other country condemned Indian moves at the UNGA.
Unlike his predecessor Sharif, Khan has been successful in engaging the US president on the issue. But Trump in the end analysis simply shrugging off his shoulders saying, “Fellas work it out (amongst yourselves).”
The PM in his long harangue at the UNGA lectured the world on the fascist antedates of Hindutva, the corner stone of Modi’s polices. But his arguments largely fall on deaf ears.
Alice Wells the senior US State Department official on south Asia urged India to lift its siege in Kashmir. There was no mention however of revoking the annexation of Kashmir by India.
The bottom line remains that the west remains enamoured by India’s perceived economic clout and strategic potential. Houston’s “howdy Modi” rally was the highpoint of the Indian prime minister’s visit to the US. A massive energy deal was signed a day ahead of the rally.
Trump needs India as a bulwark against his archrival China in addition to its large market. But the biggest disappointment is our Islamic brethren especially the Gulf States.
Pakistan is largely beholden to them for their economic largesse. Despite Pakistan’s close security relations with Saudi Arabia the kingdom has refrained from giving unequivocal support to Pakistan on Kashmir.
Adding insult to injury Modi was honoured with, “The King Hamad Order of Renaissance” by Bahrain (virtually a protectorate of Riyadh) just two weeks after the Kashmir clampdown. Earlier the same day the Indian prime minister was awarded the ‘Order of Zayed’ by UAE (United Arab Emirates) as a mark of appreciation for “his efforts to boost bilateral ties between the two nations.”
Perhaps the lesson drawn for Khan since India’s formal annexation of Kashmir is that Pakistan is as strong or weak in pursuing its foreign policy and security goals as its internal strength and cohesion. Back in Islamabad he should introspect that his divisive policies have only fragmented an already fractured nation.
The economy remains in dire straits despite claims to the contrary. The latest figures released by IFIs (international financial institutions) do not make an encouraging reading. A lethal combination of the highest rate of inflation and lowest GDP growth rate in the region does not leave much room for optimism.
Perhaps a major policy reset is needed. It’s a heady feeling to be a nuclear-armed power. But so was the former Soviet Union.
