India-Pakistan: Hawkish media fuels tension

Till a few days ago, Delhi and the entire Northern India was in the throes of an unprecedented cold wave. Chill, though, was just visible amongst ordinary people as they huddled around fires and heaters and not in the relationship between India and Pakistan that seemed to be getting better — even though ever so slowly. That was till January 7. The next day in thick foggy conditions, two Indian soldiers were killed in retaliation to casualties suffered by Pakistan army in an earlier exchange of fire at the Line of Control (LOC) that separates the two countries at the disputed region of Kashmir. Soldiers die in these testing tit for tat exchanges all the time, but this time around the Indians claimed that their soldiers were mutilated and one of them beheaded.

Army's top brass on both sides are loathe to admit it as it violates the Geneva Convention, but troops from both sides had been engaging in barbaric rituals to provoke the other side. The outrage that followed after the mutilation was extraordinary. True to our times, the TV news channels went ballistic demanding reprisal against the perfidy of the Pakistani army at a time when the political leadership of both the countries were trying to normalise ties by liberalising the visa regime and trade. Armed with the views of all kinds of superannuated diplomats and strategic affairs specialists — many of whom make a living by selling war or peace depending on what is in vogue — were fielded to demand action against Pakistan. So shrill and aggressive were some of the TV anchors and their hawkish guests that they seemed to be ready to give a bloody nose to Pakistan on their own if the government or the army did not respond adequately to their exhortation. The government that has tried not to repeatedly respond to the incessant demand from the TV channels to react to every incident was as usual circumspect, but it was only a matter of time when they, too, succumbed to the pressure. The Chief of Indian army, Bikram Singh, promised to take tough action at a time of its own choosing. Congress leader, Rashid Alavi, uncharacteristically supported the outrage expressed by the lunatic fringe represented by the Shiv Sena, which was agitating against the Pakistani hockey players who were taking part in the professional hockey league tournament. The opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) expectedly criticised the government for being soft towards Pakistan and overlooking grave provocation. Finally, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who had invested so much diplomatically in peace and amity with Pakistan, was also forced to fall in line when he said that in the wake of such barbaric acts "there cannot be business as usual".

The net outcome of this sabre rattling was that all the steps that had been announced in the name of Confidence Building Measures (CBM's) were put on hold. The liberalised visa regime that allowed people above 65 years ago to get "visa on arrival" that was to start from January 15, was put in pause mode. The bus that went up and down across the Line of Control braked to a halt. Trade between the two countries that held so much promise and was seen as a way to get around the Kashmiri dispute, too, was put on hold. All these may yet start if the Pakistan government responds positively to the demand of New Delhi to punish the mutilators. Would life return to normalcy very soon? Would the hockey players return to the astro turf in Delhi and the women cricket players taking part in the World Cup continue their stay in Mumbai? And what about the trucks laden with tomatoes and other perishable goods heading to Pakistan? Will those reach their destination or just allowed to rot on the highway to nowhere?

If the manner in which the tension is being escalated by the TV channels with the government reluctantly and the opposition parties like the BJP-vociferously supporting the narrative of vengeance, it is unlikely that things are going to return to normalcy any time soon. This is despite the fact that both sides have promised to scale down tensions. What is truly intriguing is how this messy skirmish got so much traction in India when there were widespread recognition that the civilian government in Islamabad is not in a position to address India's concerns and sensitivities. What does the Indian government really gain by casting aside all the diplomatic gains made in the last few years to bring peace to this region? In a democracy, the ruling party does assess whether a policy is bringing in electoral dividends or not.

After being hounded in its second term on the issue of corruption and policy paralysis, the ruling Congress realises that Manmohan Singh's policies are unlikely to bring them to power. And that includes his much vaunted policy to normalise ties with Pakistan, whose intelligence agencies were allegedly involved in the brazen Mumbai terror attack in November, 2008. Pakistan government had denied its own involvement and had not displayed the necessary speed to the repeated demand of New Delhi to punish the guilty. Indian probe agencies whose findings were corroborated in investigation by the Western agencies suggested involvement of Pakistan's deep state in the terror attack. After 2008, the Indian government had cancelled the composite dialogue with Pakistan. In 2009, at Egyptian sea resort of Sharm-el-Sheikh, the two countries had issued a joint statement that had resolved to carry on with an uninterrupted dialogue unhinging it with any terror incident. This statement had created a furore in India and Prime Minister Singh was compelled to back off. Despite the trashing of the Sharm-el-Sheikh, India and Pakistan came closest in the last 30 years even when they took baby steps in the last few years.

Trade was being opened up and a new visa regime was announced. If Pew survey is anything to go by then India, interestingly, was no longer the enemy number 1 of Pakistanis, who had reserved this distinction for their government's main ally, the United States of America. It was also suggested that Pakistan's economic ills could be cured if old communication routes were restored and trade was liberalised in all of South Asia. Pakistan was supposed to be a major beneficiary of this bounce. Its power and fuel shortages, too, were to be addressed by India once some glitches were sorted out. Everything seemed to be moving in a progressive way till the recent incident at the LOC.

As soon as the visual media began to aggressively demand action from the government, it became clear that the circumstances were little different from the outcomes that we have seen in recent media driven agitations. Whether it was the anti-corruption agitation led by the Gandhian Anna Hazare or the more recent anti-gangrape protest in Delhi, the visual and social media built in so much pressure that it became difficult for the central government to ignore it. To control the anti-corruption agitation the government was compelled to invite the leaders of the protest to help in drafting ombudsman or Lokpal bill to get people off the streets. Similarly, to quieten the angry young women and men over the barbaric gangrape, the government was forced to announce a slew of measures to provide greater security to women in work places and also promised to bring in a stringent anti-rape law. This time around, too, the government was forced to act.

At the face of it the media campaigns are helping in creating new norms which should drive government and society. They have helped in fuelling anger against poor governance and routine resort of the ruling elite at obfuscation and prevarication to take hard decisions, but in many ways this demand for urgent action ignores our violent history and the complexities of our plural society. These norms are also very upper caste, middle-class and majoritarian in construction. Expectedly, the message flowing out from the Indian TV chat shows is that the government is dithering and is incapable of handling a violent neighbour. There are routine suggestions that the peace process should be called off till Pakistan behaves. Cricket players, singers, artists should be forced to pay a price for giving legitimacy to a rogue government is the refrain of such commentators. Such simplistic messages feed the lunatic anti-Muslim constituency in India, where the wounds of partition still run deep. Time and again the example of USA is given and how it chased down the terrorists in Afghanistan or Iraq — needless to say that both invasions were based on dubious assumptions. Such debates go on ad nauseum. All these years, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh exercised great restraint and did not allow himself to be swayed by this mindless chatter by armchair experts. In 2008, he earned kudos for not sending in the troops after terrorists originating from Pakistan spread mayhem in Mumbai. On a few other occasions, he gave meaning to an expectation that a country like India cannot be a regional power till it sorts out its relationship with its neighbours.

As both countries get into the elections, the space for negotiations is quite limited. Singh would unlikely be allowed to pursue his dream of having breakfast in Amritsar and then driving down to have lunch in Islamabad and later dinner in Kabul anytime soon. Besides the looming deadline of US troops drawing down in 2014 from Afghanistan, what could also lead to hardening of position is the atavism at display in the Pakistani society. In the last few years the sectarian tensions between Shia Sunnis have resulted in hundreds of deaths all over the country. And then there is a serious problem of domestic Taliban that wants their version of Islam to be imposed on the society. Pakistan army, which runs the state, has given an impression of losing its touch with the country faced with so many problems. Increasingly, they have lost their credibility and respect after the US commandoes came inside Pakistan and smoked out Osama bin Laden. Due to these reasons the army has stayed out of the government and allowed the politicians to dirty themselves further.

Judiciary has hurt the political class further with two Prime Ministers coming to grief. Indian government has tried to work closely with Pakistani democratic forces in the belief that it would keep the army in check, but the ground realities are changing rapidly. US that remained so angry with Pakistan for giving refuge to all kinds of Afghan Taliban hotheads has begun to work closely with the Pakistani army overlooking the perfidies of their Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) and the dubious role it has played in the region. Washington hopes that Pakistan army would help in its peaceful exit from Afghanistan in 2014. What is not clear is what Pakistan would get in return? Would it be political or strategic sway over Afghanistan and Central Asia, as Pakistan wanted, or would be more unaccountable funds to sustain dubious covert operations?

From this standpoint, India's tough stand on LOC also masks its own apprehensions of which way Pakistan would go and how Afghanistan post 2014 would unfold. Last time around when the Pakistan was enjoying great influence in Kabul, India had to contend with a violent uprising in Kashmir. India would not want history to repeat itself.

—————————-

Sanjay Kapoor is the Editor of Delhi based Hardnews Magazine (www.hardnewsmedia.com). Hardnews is also the South Asian partner of Paris based publication, Le Monde Diplomatique.