The solution is peace

by Shahab Usto

Finally it seems that the blinkers are coming off, with the Indian government softening its rhetoric on Pakistan. Though both governments are showing a mutual desire to work anew for peace and progress, the question remains whether the war mania that gripped the region until recently will give way to collective amnesia?

Let's hope not. This time round the political grandees must get down to business and find ways and means to deal with terrorism. Here are some points to begin with.

One, the Mumbai attacks have clearly shown the limited capacity of the state and the unbounded reach of the terrorists. Tackling terrorism continues to be an intractable task for the states.

A small group of 10 militants has brought two nuclear states to the brink of war, stalled the decade-long peace process and sent a wave of shock and awe across the globe.

The attacks did not result merely from the inefficiency or negligence of the state apparatus. Instead, they reflect the state's helplessness before the terrorists who were bent upon causing mayhem employing virtually all the powers that work in this globalised world - connectivity, contiguity, callousness and creed. Above all, their most lethal weapon was their death wish.

Therefore, let alone preventing terrorism, even catching a terrorist in action has become a virtual impossibility for every security apparatchik.

Thus, evidence of terror has superseded its prevention. Why not? Imagine, had Ajmal Kasab not been caught alive, wouldn't the blame game and the international fulminations against Pakistan have taken a rather less credible mode?

Two, the Mumbai attacks have brought the intelligence agencies under critical focus. But what is forgotten is that just as the navy was paramount in the mercantile era, the army in the colonial period, the air force and missile technology in chastising 'rogue' states, the human and technical intelligence apparatus has come to play a prime role against non-state actors. True, their role at times turns too pernicious for their own good but that happens only in restrictive and undemocratic states.

Moreover, security and intelligence agencies all over the world are fed on a mixture of ideology and nationalism. Therefore, whenever a state does a volte-face as did Gen Musharraf after 9/11, the intelligence and security apparatus finds it hard to adjust to the new ideological moorings. There are many instances when the governments faced tough resistance from their security apparatus.

Gorbachev faced a near-coup in the wake of his perestroika. President Kennedy had to contend with a hawkish military brass during the Cuban missile crisis. President de Gaulle also faced tough resistance from the colonialist generals who were bent upon retaining Algeria as France's colony. And for good measure, one can also cite the Kargil incident manufactured by Gen Musharraf to abort the Indo-Pak peace process.

Therefore, to assume that the security and intelligence agencies would easily toe new ideological orientations would be a euphoric thought.

However, defence establishments do fall in line when governments enjoy an overwhelming mandate of the people. In the wake of democracy in much of Latin America, the governments are no more threatened by ultra-rightist security and intelligence forces.Three, traditionally the South Asian region has witnessed wars that were fought either because the governments ignored the will of the people or they manipulated public opinion. For example, it was the generals who planned and prosecuted the wars in Pakistan. People were denied their right to oppose them.

But in 'democratic' India, a great majority of people was swayed by successive governments in the name of Mahabharat and lately Hindutva.

According to a report, India has now as many as 174 terror groups. Out of India's 608 districts, at least 231 are perennially faced with various insurgent and terrorist movements. Recently, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh also regretted that India was "failing in its efforts to crush" a Maoist rebellion plaguing vast swathes of the country.

And ditto for Pakistan. It is also faced with insurgencies in two of its four provinces. About 40 per cent of its people live in abject poverty.

Yet, it spends 4.5 per cent of GDP on defence (1.4 per cent on education), despite the fact that its security-state status failed to save the country from dismemberment in 1971 and its ideology has rent apart the social fabric.

But it is very heartening to know that the people of both India and Pakistan have come of age. Keeping aside the initial frenzy whipped up by a coloured media, they appear to have rejected the jingoists and support efforts to bring about peace. Thus, it is for the first time that the region has seen a sea change in public perception, which if mobilised could go a long way in establishing peace in the region.

Four, the Mumbai attacks should also encourage a serious debate on developing a regional approach to resolve a plethora of problems that afflict this region. South Asia is a honeycomb of many genuinely aggrieved national, religious, cultural and political groups which are continuously persecuted by one or the other states, forcing many of them to take up arms.

It is time states stopped relying only on their coercive apparatus and created a conducive political atmosphere for all people.

Finally, instead of supporting dictatorial regimes, the US, and also the international community, should oppose all those states which are violating people's rights including the universally recognised right of self-determination.

Let the rule of law prevail and constitutionalism take root to inculcate democratic norms in the region. Only then will terrorism be defeated and South Asians live in peace and amity. (Courtesy: Dawn - December 27, 2008)