[sacw] Is Peace Unthinkable?

[Harsh Kapoor]

July 5, 1999
FYI
(South Asia Citizens Web)
=======================

The Hindu
Online edition of India's National Newspaper on indiaserver.com
Sunday, July 04, 1999
Features | Previous | Next

Is Peace Unthinkable?

By KALPANA SHARMA

Last week, in Karachi, a true South Asian being crossed a line - separating
life and death. Seventy-six-year old Mumtaz Noorani, fondly called Mumtaz
Apa by all those who knew and admired her, represented a generation in
Pakistan and India that knew the pain of partition and of divided families
but did not nurture the bitterness. One of the pioneers of the contemporary
women's movement in Pakistan, Mumtaz Apa fought passionately against
injustice and believed firmly that the two countries could be friends and
not permanent foes.

I feel privileged to have been a guest in her home early this year. She
welcomed me, a total stranger, like a member of the family. Within a few
days I too was calling her Mumtaz Mami. News of her passing was
particularly saddening at a time like this, when people look at us
strangely if we mention the word "peace.'' Yet, in the midst of the emotion
and rhetoric surrounding the "war-like'' war along the Line of Control, we
should not forget that there is a difference between what the governments
of India and Pakistan represent and what people on both sides of the border
want. And that there are thousands of people like Mumtaz Apa on both sides
who deeply desire and believe in peace between India and Pakistan.

Today, everyone is ready to dismiss the bus diplomacy that brought the two
Prime Ministers together as nothing more than a tamasha. It was a tamasha,
an event, and the media loves events. So it got its share of coverage. But
the media tends to forget that a process has been in place for many years
slowly building trust and friendship between the people of India and
Pakistan. And that the nuclear tests of last year by both countries have
rekindled the desire for peace on both sides. The expression of opposition
to war, particularly nuclear war, and the belief that only through dialogue
could disputes be settled has been articulated much more strongly this last
year than ever before in the past. But given the media's preoccupation with
political personalities and events, it is not surprising that a peace march
that began in Khetolai, Rajasthan on May 11, anniversary of the nuclear
test, and is now making its way towards Sarnath, birthplace of the Buddha,
has been almost totally ignored. Is the demand for an end to war and for
peace by this group, which includes the former Chief of the Naval Staff,
Admiral L. Ramdas, totally unsupportable at a time when Indian soldiers are
dying on the border? On the contrary, these are voices that also must be
heard because they represent the desire of many in this country for a
lasting and workable peace with our neighbour.

Pakistan is now being called "the enemy'' every single day in the official
briefings being televised. There are even voices that argue that we should
not play cricket with the Pakistanis. And the government in its infinite
wisdom has blocked the transmission of Pakistan TV. Thus, once again, the
line separating people and government has been obliterated even though the
preoccupations and convictions of the two differ greatly. In a democracy,
it is essential that a government is reminded of this divergence between
what it says and does and what people feel. It is alarming to hear people
arguing that there should be no voicing of dissent at "such a time''
because it will "demoralise our jawans.'' What the connection is between a
healthy and open debate on the future relations between India and Pakistan,
and the ways to settle disputes, and the morale of our jawans is
unfathomable.

Those who have lived through the Emergency are familiar with "the nation is
in danger'' argument for curbing democratic rights. It is important that
this does not happen now, particularly as we are being governed by a
government which has lost its mandate. No one questions the need to restore
control of territory on our side of the LOC. But surely it is the
democratic right of every citizen to hold its government accountable for
the conduct of war and to ask questions. How can such questioning be
suspended? It is natural that even a generation that has never known a war,
or even a "war-like'' situation, should be stirred with the media reports
of families grieving for husbands, sons, brothers who have been killed in
the inhospitable terrain of the Kargil sector. But we cannot forget that
hundreds of men have been killed in Kashmir, in the northeast and Assam,
over the last two decades and more but their coffins were not followed by
television crews, nor did anyone know the fate of their families. The
"enemy'' then was within, our own people, who demanded rights which the
government of the day was not willing to concede. That is why these men
could not be deemed martyrs like their brothers who are killed in the
current battle. But for the families who have lost someone, the grief is
not diminished because one is recognised and the other goes unsung.

At the beginning of 1999, our "enemy'' was being declared our friend.
Half-way through the year, it is once again "the enemy.'' Will India and
Pakistan enter the next millennium still hovering between war and peace? Or
will a generation on both sides of the border, that is not burdened by the
history of colonialism or partition, take a more pragmatic view of the
future and seek out solutions? I end with a quote sent to me by a friend of
what the mother of one of the slain Indian soldiers reportedly said at his
funeral: "The mind does not find consolation in the thought that my son
gave his life for a good cause. Such consolation would have been possible
if this war had been with an enemy country. Aren't people who should be
loving each other now killing each other? May this mother who has lost her
son, ask just one thing: at least now, can't we love each other?''

------------------------------------------------------------------------

eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/act
http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications