Raashid Wali Janjua
Only in love are unity and duality not in conflict — (Tagore)
INDIA for sure has failed South Asia. Due to Indian proclivity to dominate instead of forging a cooperative relationship with all neighbours South Asia has not been able to realize its actual economic potential condemning over two billion people of region to a state of penury. According to a World Bank report South Asian region has been attracting FDI at 2.1 to 2.8% of GDP which is much lower than East Asia. New mega regional trade agreements such as Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Trans-Atlantic trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) threaten to take trade away from region but India remains least concerned.
What is the reason of above apathy? It is obviously an Indian predilection to privilege geopolitics over geo-economics. It was Indian bellicosity and misanthropy that resulted in browbeating of smaller neighbours like Pakistan through border conflicts, water wars and a continual conflict in Kashmir. The thirst for dominance was not slaked even after masterminding the dismemberment of Pakistan in 1971. Indians actively encouraged Hindu members of Pakistan’s first Constituent Assembly like Dharendra Datta to inject the poison of language controversy during early sessions of the Assembly in February 1948. The Kashmir dispute was deliberately complicated through prevarication and procrastination by India’s founding father Nehru. Despite his clear asseverations about UN mandated plebiscite in disputed state of Jammu and Kashmir he reneged on his every pledge to plunge state in a perennial conflict.
1971 War was another such attempt to undo the facts of 1947 Partition. Hindu leaders like Vallahbhai Patel and Nehru had predicted that Pakistan would collapse after a few years being an unviable state. With that end in mind they conspired to deny Pakistan its due share of assets in terms of finances and military hardware. These leaders were encouraged by the Gandhi’s ambivalence who in his eighties had become too jaded to control the march of communal folly. Gandhi in fact unwittingly exaggerated the Hindu-Muslim riots at Noakhali, ratcheting up the Hindu-Muslim tension in the neighbouring Bihar. Whereas in Noakhali only 200 Hindu casualties were reported, in Bihar over 7000 Muslims were killed in vengeance. The violent legacy of partition was carried forward into subcontinental politics by Indian political leadership, plunging the whole region into a tense cold war. Like a typical bully that turns on the weak after getting a drubbing by a stronger foe, the Indians trained their guns on Pakistan after an ignominious defeat at the hands of Chinese. The anti-Muslim hatred was carefully cultivated in East Pakistan through an epistemic violence by the speeches and writings of anti-Pakistan Hindu intelligentsia in press and universities. The particular targets were symbols of Muslim cultural unity like religion, language and literature.
The common Muslim heritage was targeted through linguistic prejudice and a xenophobic Bengali nationalism. Bengali leadership that wanted to stay within Pakistani fold was deliberately incited to secede. Shiekh Mujibur Rehman who was part of National Awami Party headed by Husain Shaheed Suharwardy till sixties was surrounded through intrigues by hardliners who derailed every attempt at national reconciliation. According to Major General Khadim Hussain Raja Shiekh Mujib requested him to take him into custody due to fear of separatists who wanted him to declare independence. Mujib who was a staunch Muslim Leaguer and a very active participant in struggle for Pakistan under leaders such as Sher-e-Bengal Fazalul Haq and who also ran election campaign of Mohtrama Fatima Jinnah, was forced into a decision that according to witnesses he regretted later. When news of Pakistan’s dismemberment was broken to him by a radio provided to him by Bhutto, while in custody in a Mianwali jail, he is reported to have wept remarking, ”This was not what I wanted”.
In a book by Asoka Raina titled, “Inside Raw: The Story of India’s Secret Service” it is clearly mentioned that the RAW leadership met soon after the fall of East Pakistan to plan their next operation i e annexation of Sikkim. The treatment meted out to Bhutan in 1971 and then blatant annexation of Sikkkim in 1974 was an insidious attempt at conversion of all neighbouring states to a client status. India instead of encouraging neighbouring states to forge USA-Canada like relations always aimed at creating vassal states in its neighbourhood. Indian model is predicated upon sedulous attacks on sovereignty of neighbouring states and treatment of any state that stands up for its sovereignty as an anathema. Having failed to convert Pakistan into a vassal state the Indians involved her into a costly arms race and a hybrid war through armed proxies in Afghanistan and other countries. Sri Lanka was another country that bore the brunt of Indian aggression. In a book titled, “Indian Intervention in Sri Lanka: The Role of India’s Intelligence Agencies” by Rohan Gunaratna the Indian attempts at stoking the fires of insurgency in Sri Lanka are clearly chronicled.
Nepal which is a Hindu majority state is also at the receiving end of Indian hegemony. King Birendra’s assassination and the continual stoking of anti-Maoist hatred to spite China is indicative of India’s interventionism. Recently Nepal has strongly protested over Indian inauguration of a road in Uttrakhand which leads to territory that is claimed by Kathmandu. So the Indian strategy of browbeat and kowtow continues; browbeating of smaller neighbours and kowtowing to global powers as a regional surrogate. Indians attacked East Pakistan and occupied Bangladesh in 1971 with a purpose to merge East Bengal in West Bengal. The continual assault on Bangladesh’s sovereignty continues unabated with recent Citizen Amendment Act and National Register for Citizenship (NRC) as part of the same strategy.. SAARC that was proposed by Bangladesh due to fears of unfair Indian bilateralism has also been rendered dysfunctional due to the same Indian intransigence. South Asia has a tremendous potential to develop into a rich economic bloc because of internal complementarities and linkages with Central Asia, China and Middle East. The promised dawn of development and progress is being delayed by India which has failed South Asia in every way.
— The writer, a Retired Brig, is a PhD scholar at NUST, Islamabad.
