Speech at South Asian Conference

[Mumtaz Khan]

South Asia perspective on regional stability

State role: Democracy, Dictatorship and Extremism

Ladies and Gentlemen, and distinguished speakers; the discourse of today has been arranged to examine the challenges and opportunities South Asian region represents in the regional and global perspective. South Asia is mosaic of different beliefs, cultures, ethnicities and people with shared history. The region of over one and half billion population has great human and economic potential for investment, trade and culture for rest of world. South Asian region has had long history of peaceful coexistence but foreign invaders and colonial rule has direct impacts on its culture, politics and society where it altered communal relationship and communal and ethnic conflicts were intensified. Colonial division has further exacerbated and deepened these conflicts that remain unaddressed and unresolved after decades. South Asian problems are not unique but embedded in the colonial legacy and were further deepened by the failure of States to involve people in nation and state building. Some States successfully pursued the path of democracy while other derailed this process, and fight over power resulted into dictatorships and political instability. The process of nation-building requires true representation and participation on all levels decision- making and of all its constituents and people. However, failing to involve the people in political process and descion making has caused genuine and serious socio-economic and political grievances in some countries in particular but South Asian region in general. Therefore, we witness that some states turned to dictatorships and encouraged the religious and non-democratic forces to dominate the political landscape those share anti-democratic agenda with them. The extremism and terrorism is not coincidence but product of politics and policies any State have pursued over the years and denied fundamental rights, freedoms and ownership on their resources. Political autonomy, economic empowerment demands to encourage participatory politics and capacity building but this notion is still alien in some countries in South Asia.

As a result of internal politics and external policies today South Asian region is facing serious challenges of extremism and terrorism and pose serious danger to the regional and global security and political order. However, this threat is no longer confine to South Asia since its transnational character has altered this regional dimension to the international threat. Even though, ethnic, religious and political tensions within South Asia are rife from Sri Lanka, Nepal, Afghanistan to India but these conflicts had internal dimension and never became transnational threat. However, threat emanates from Pakistan based extremist groups have transnational character and connections which is worrisome and needs serious attention to understand the complexity of the challenge and threat these groups pose to the region. Their attacks in India had already caused serious military tension between two countries and had brought to brink of war, and halted affected diplomatic ties too. Their involvement in Afghanistan and beyond the region is no longer secret to the world but question arises how to address this threat when State remains in continuous denial to accept the responsibility by bringing forward different arguments and interpretation of their activities. However, the argument Islamabad advance about Taliban and other extremist groups presently based in Pakistan, holding US responsible who supported these groups against the Soviet invasion in Afghanistan. One might accept the logic of this argument but involvement of the same groups in India and Indian administered Kashmir is raised Islamabad advance brings forward Kashmir conflict or historical fault-lines to defend them not reject their activities. The fact is that terrorism cannot survive long term unless it has some ideological underpinnings and is validated by the society and State. The promotion of Jihad culture in Pakistan in the name of Kashmir cause is not new phenomenon but provided and sanctified these groups’ Jihadi culture and activities by the State and media. And these groups’ ideological underpinnings were not only validated by the society of Pakistan as they freely preach Kashmir Jihad but State openly validated their cause in the name of Kashmir and Afghanistan.

Recently, Wikileakes has revealed that last year during in Camera Parliament session, Pakistan intelligence officials briefed Parliamentarians that Taliban and other groups were their asset, who can be useful in future against enemy. Similarly, when during Kargill war, where Pakistan’s regular Army was involved, they claimed that those were Kashmiri militant groups who occupied those posts and had provoked another war. But if we examine the historical roots of these development it dates back to the partition of India and creation of Pakistan where Islamic ideology not only became the basis of Pakistan but same ideology was later used by Pakistan’s successive rulers to use it as unify different nationalities and ethnic groups under the banner of Islam and denying their identity, ownership of resources and political participation.

As history is witness that soon after the creation of Pakistan, same Tribal’s, those are now called Taliban,  were infiltrated into Kashmir to capture Kashmir when neither Indian forces had entered into Kashmir nor Maharajah had indicated any intention to go with India. Pakistan’s Major General Akbar Wrote in his book “the raiders of Kashmir” that he had been assigned the agenda to chart out the plan how to capture Kashmir. He further narrated that how he managed to acquire weapons for Tribal’s Lashkers, and recounted Tribal’s involvement in loot, killings and rapes due to which they failed to capture Kashmir but it certainly forced Maharajah change his mind. Lord Mountbatten, last Viceroy of India has written in his memoirs that he visited to Kashmir to persuade him to join India but he avoided to talk about this issue and he returned without any answer but later Tribal invasion changed the political landscape and divided Kashmir. The fact was that Kashmiri’s most popular leadership Sheikh Abdullah’s was never in favour of Pakistan and it tried to win Kashmir through military means. As Ayesha Siddiqa has quoted Brigadier Siddiqui that winning Kashmir through military has changed the dynamics of Pakistani politics where Security and Indian threat became future policy and politics of Pakistan.   

 Similarly, another plan was prepared in 1965 which Altaf Goher wrote in his book that how guerrillas were infiltrated into Indian administered Kashmir disguising as Kashmiri in 1965 to persuade Kashmiris on Indian side to rise against India which resulted into 1956 war. The conflict with India always referred to justify these groups’ activities but as matter of fact it has less to do with Kashmir than to protect the entrenched military political and economical interest in Pakistan. The internal military control over politics has created its commercial and economic interest within Pakistan while using Indian threat to justify military rule and their support to extremist groups has created so close affinity and nexus between them that still some circles are reluctant to give them up. As, Mushraf recently acknowledged with a German magazine that he supported militant groups to bring India to the negotiating table. This statement indicates the policies of Islamabad and unless clear shift take place within Pakistan military structure, politics and support for extremist groups and proxy war cease winning war in against extremism and terrorism is extremely difficult.
Mumtaz Khan