- Will Pakistan and India ever get over 1947?
The newspapers have their front pages bombarded with tensions erupting in Jammu and Kashmir again. With the Indian army unleashing terror on innocent Kashmiris, killing them like vermin, the verbal attacks are also on the rise. Labeling freedom fighters as militants has largely undermined the stature and status of freedom fight in Kashmir. This situation, prevailing, is worrisome.
Even after 70 years of independence, India has not been able to move away from its myopic view of India being an unbreakable entity. Well, it is not! The partition of subcontinent happened in 1947, and while the Indian publications conveniently blame it on Jinnah, historical records suggest that Nehru and Patel due to their stubbornness of not accepting the Cabinet Mission Plan pushed for a country that would be truncated, and not given its fair share! What happened then was the Radcliffe Award, and unfair appropriation of land in a way that Kashmir dispute arose. In absence of certain other districts being unfairly awarded to India, the logical outcome would have been Kashmir being awarded to Pakistan in geographical continuity.
And the fight between the two neighbours continues over the spoils of partition. Not even a century ago, Europe was one of the most war-torn and war-ravaged areas of the world. With two world wars, and numerous intra-Europe wars, there appeared no sign of it veer coming out of its enmity impasse. The Europe of today, however, is different. With free movement of goods, capital, and people, Europe is a perfect example of a liberal world order. France and Germany who always had daggers drawn at each other are now an example of friendly neighbours. A continent that was always looking out for options of war is now a torchbearer of peace and stability.
With Hindutva on a rise in India, however, and Muslims getting murdered just for eating beef, would the same Baal Tahkre ideology ever be tolerant of Muslim practices?
So what happened to Europe? Well, the European Union happened. The formation of European Economic Community and its gradual evolution to the European Union of today put the stakes of all its members in the stability and betterment of each other. If country A has a good deal of economic linkage with country B, why would it want to destabilise it? Or to wage a war against it?
Now let’s come to our part of the world. This is a nuclear flashpoint. Threats of instability are always looming. There has been recent tension over the Line of Control yet again! Pakistan and India never get tired of bad-mouthing each other whenever, and wherever they find a chance to do so.
So what can be done? One option is to follow a liberal model such as that of European Union. Open the borders in SAARC, increase economic integration. Make economics the priority.
And what would be the result? Maybe Line of Control will not matter that much anymore. Maybe with Pakistan and India having stakes in each other’s stability, they will not be interested in skirmishes anymore. Maybe!
Well, this seems like a dream scenario however, there are certain reservations as well. Pakistan opened its borders to Afghan refugees unconditionally and what has happened as a result is not a secret to anyone. And is South Asia mature and stable enough to actually adopt this model? Also would it sit well with the idea that we had already gained independence in 1947? Why then merge?
The answer to the last doubt is that Quaid-e-Azam was a very progressive man. He had never shirked modern ideas and practices. He had envisioned a relationship between Pakistan and India on the same lines as US and Canada. The point of independence was to secure a place for Muslim culture, religion, and ideology, a life full of autonomy and rights fulfilled. Once that was secured, cooperation was never a no!
With Hindutva on a rise in India, however, and Muslims getting murdered just for eating beef, would the same Baal Tahkre ideology ever be tolerant of Muslim practices? If we look inside, the answers to this question are not very promising.
Europe does not have an ideological problem within its countries. South Asia has! The war in South Asia is largely ideological, and not economic. And with this looming, and with the uncannily large size and hegemonic designs of one country (we-all-know-who), the spirit of liberalism fades away.
The idea, yet, seems promising!
