“Thanks for your question ,” so said Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Bilawal Zardari Bhutto, flattering a Pakistan journalist for his question on Jammu and Kashmir to German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock at their joint press conference in Berlin on Friday.
This made it plain that the question was planted and it was aimed eliciting response that could help Bhutto to shore up his credentials as a foreign minister who keeps Kashmir narrative alive even when his own country is struggling to come out of the unprecedented flooding with the help of the international community.
In response to the question, Baerbock had said: “Germany also has a role and responsibility with regard to the situation in Kashmir. Therefore, we support intensively the engagement of the United Nations, to find peaceful resolutions in the region.”
India responded with clarity on the issue and made Germany and its foreign minister aware of the real situation as to how Pakistan was responsible for all the tragedies, and owner of the peace-ruining technology through terrorism.
When MEA spokesperson Arindam Bagchi said that the global community had a “responsibility to call out international terrorism, especially of a cross-border nature.” This was a reference to Pakistan, but Bagchi stopped short of naming the western neighbour.
He also placed it on record “The UN Security Council and FATF ( Financial Action Task Force) are still pursuing Pakistan-based terrorists involved in the horrific 26/11 attacks,” and added: “When states do not recognise such dangers, either because of self-interest or indifference, they undermine the cause of peace, not promote it.”
This reaction was good, but India should not restrict itself to reactions. It needs to focus more attention to understand the genesis of such questions at joint press conferences, particularly where Pakistan leaders are present. And how the responses of this nature play out on the minds of the people, watching and listening or reading the same.
There were two reasons for Bilawal Bhutto to prompt the question and compliment the questioner. First, there is a cut-throat competition in Pakistan as to who speaks louder on Kashmir and how much attention international leaders pay to the narration. This, in itself is rooted in the historical illusions of Pakistan. What could be a greater example of this when Pakistan, in the words of Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif himself, is knocking doors for help with a begging bowl. The view that talking about Kashmir can redeem them and their country is nothing but chimera.
Second, Pakistan is trying to rev up K issue because it also is becoming increasingly aware that the world is losing interest in this narrative. The intense interest in Kashmir in the international community is waning. It also is related to the wisdom that has dawned on the world that what Pakistan is doing to Kashmir – exporting terror and ideology of terror. Here a slight diversification, Bilawal Bhutto’s father Asif Ali Zardari, is on record to have stated in March 2008, when PDP president Mehbooba Mufti called on him to condole the death of Benazir Bhutto, that, “We want to see pens instead of guns in the hands of Kashmiri youth.” This promise was never translated into action as Pakistan continued with its supply of guns and bombs. And terror is always met with force. There is no room for terrorism in any civilised society and it becomes imperative for the governments to deal with terrorism with iron fist. So, if Bilawal thought that his “grave human rights violations” in Kashmir would be accepted at its face value, he was mistaken.
His joint press Conference with German Foreign Minister has now become part of the reaction and counter reaction between Delhi and Islamabad. A lot of diplomatic time is consumed in such discourses. There is a way out which will help quell such angry exchanges in future.
India should not hear about Kashmir and then react. It should talk about Kashmir in assertive tone, point out to the terrorism coming from across the border – no use of euphemism – name Pakistan for all the terrorism factories it is running on its soil and exporting the produce to the neighbouring countries, particularly India.
India should not wait for Pakistan to rake up the K word, and then react to it, to tell the world that how Pakistan is harming peace by nurturing and exporting terrorism. This should be made a permanent feature at the international level. The apprehension that it would internationalise Kashmir issue and make it to walk into Pakistan’s trap must be rethought. India has to talk about terrorism in Pakistan and its export from there, particularly to Jammu and Kashmir. As the facts speak for themselves, Pakistan should be held accountable for each and every act of terror which emanates from its soil. Put Pakistan on defensive.
The origin of the Kashmir problem, since 1947, is because of Pakistan. The international community, though very few in it, listen to Pakistan and respond, needs to be made aware of what this country is doing to the rest of the world. An aggressive anti-terrorism diplomatic campaign is in the interest of the people of Kashmir. The people in the Valley, let it be said with all sincerity, do know what Pakistan has done to them, but they are still less than vocal in condemning the acts of terror. This is left to few leaders to come out with statements of condemnation after some acts of terror, the people at large are unable to speak it out. The fact is that they have suffered the most. The official count that 42,000 died in the past over three decades, is not the exact figure, in a sense that it is death census, not its impact over the emotions and psychology of the Valley. They want a full stop to it. If the terrorism emanating from across the border finds its echo at the international level, it would have its own impact. Kashmiris, who watch, international narratives with interest and utmost attention, draw their own conclusions. Delhi should know that how its changed attitude at the international diplomatic circles will yield dividends. Right now, the frank assessment is that as and when they hear K word from the international figures, be that from Turkey, or Germany, they believe that there is something unresolved.
Simultaneously, the work should start on what Home Minister Amit Shah promised last week; “We will not talk to Pakistan, we will talk to you ( the people of Kashmir) instead, and listen to people here ( in the Valley) than to Pakistan”. This dialogue will yield its results. The development is good, ending social inequities is better, but the best way forward, as Shah, outlined is talking to “our own people”. The work on it should start now, the format need not be through the interlocutors but people to people contact and drawing up of a method in which Kashmir, its problems and its aspirations are understood by the people in the rest of the nation, and vice-versa. That will help Delhi to shun its shyness in talking about Kashmir.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are the personal opinions of the author.
The facts, analysis, assumptions and perspective appearing in the article do not reflect the views of GK.