|
 Stanley Wolpert is an American historian. Currently he is the Professor Emeritus of History at the University of California, Los Angeles. He specializes in the modern political history of India and Pakistan. His well-known books include Morley and India, A New History of India, Roots of Confrontation in South Asia, Jinnah of Pakistan, Nehru:A Tryst with Destiny, etc. In an exclusive interview with SouthAsia, Stanley Wolpert talks about Indo-Pak relations and how he sees their future.
Why does the conflict between India and Pakistan continue to be the world's most dangerous crisis?
India and Pakistan are now both nuclear-weapons nations, with delivery systems capable of reaching each other's major cities in less than ten minutes. No reasonable leader of either nation would be reckless enough to launch a nuclear bomb, but terrorists in Pakistan might attempt so destructive an act if ever they gained access to a nuclear weapon.
Which leaders of the two countries would you say have played a positive role in improving ties between the two countries and which have created obstructions in the process?
Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah and Mahatma Gandhi played the most positive roles in seeking to improve ties between India and Pakistan, yet both died too soon to do so. Liaquat Ali Khan and Nehru might well have reached agreement over Kashmir, had Liaquat lived to meet with Nehru, which he was to have done soon after he was assassinated in Rawalpindi. Prime Ministers Z.A. Bhutto and Indira Gandhi tried to end the conflict over Kashmir, but both were killed by their own military "protectors." Their youthful heirs to Prime Ministerships of both countries, Rajiv Gandhi and Benazir Bhutto, might have agreed to resolve that Kashmir conflict as well, but neither was permitted to live long enough.
Did the two countries come really close to solving the Kashmir dispute when Gen. Pervez Musharraf was president of Pakistan?
They tried to agree, when Musharraf met with Vajpayee in Lahore, but that happy moment of potential peace was shattered by the Kargil War.
You have keenly studied both Indian and Pakistani society. What are the key differences between the two?
Indian society has always been more democratically civil, multi-cultural and tolerant than Pakistan, which has primarily favored military rule over its still partly-feudal Islamic State, sadly torn by dreadful suicide bombings of ethnic minorities in its largest cities of Lahore and Karachi as well as along its North-West tribal regions.
Do you notice a basic change in India, such as the emergence of Hindu fundamentalism that could negatively impact the future of the subcontinent?
Hindu fundamentalists do pose a very dangerous threat to India's democratic and progressive majority, but fortunately they remain a political minority. In some States, however, where the BJP has won elective power, primarily in Gujarat, it has allowed dreadful violence against its Muslim minority to go unchecked, as during the terrible massacre of 2002.
What opportunities of progress has Pakistan missed?
Primary civil education for Pakistan's girls as well as boys should from the start have been made universal, and every citizen of Pakistan, whatever his faith or gender, should by now have been safe within his or her home, as on every street and road in Pakistan, where insecurity continues to terrify too many people, and corruption remains rampant.
Would you agree that besides Jinnah, Liaquat Ali and a few others, the absence of depth in leadership right from the time Pakistan came into being, is an inherent weakness that has continued to this day?
Yes, I think that is regrettably true. The most brilliant Pakistani global diplomats and statesmen, of course, like Jamsheed Marker, and Muhammad Zafrullah Khan, were minorities, who never could aspire to elective power, and though one popular Bengali, H.S. Suhrawardy, did become Prime Minister, he was swiftly removed from that highest civil office.
In your opinion, had Jinnah lived a little longer and had had time to lay down a more defined blueprint for the country's future, things would be different - and better?
I do agree that if Jinnah had lived longer he could have helped Pakistan solve many of its long festering problems, but he said enough, in fact, to provide a general blueprint for those determined to try to follow his inspirational lead. The Jinnah Society has just produced a new enlarged third edition of The Jinnah Anthology published this year by Oxford University Press, Karachi, which illuminates in detail his hopes, dreams, and plans for Pakistan. Oxford Press-Pakistan, has also recently published a small pamphlet of Jinnah's pithy statements, Quotes from the Quaid (OUP,2007), from "Advice to Students" through his "Vision of Pakistan," which should be read by every Pakistani. I would also like to see the development of a "Quaid Corps" of young Pakistani volunteers, willing to devote at least one year of their lives, possibly before or just after college or university toward building a modern and dynamic new society in Pakistan, based on Jinnah's ideals, and his faith in honesty, integrity, justice, equality, freedom, and Islam. So many Pakistanis admire Jinnah, and if only a few hundred such young people would devote a year of their lives toward helping to educate and train their less fortunate fellow citizens I think Pakistan could make remarkable strides toward achieving his fondest dreams and judicious hopes.
What pragmatic steps can both Pakistan and India take to learn to live with their bilateral conflicts?
They should first of all re-establish trust in each other's honesty and friendship, Pakistan by placing on open trial all those responsible for training and launching the ten terrorist killers sent from Karachi to Mumbai in November 2008, India by reducing its military occupation of Kashmir's Vale and openly trying any members of its force there, charged with unprovoked violent assaults or the murder of any innocent Kashmiris. Indo-Pakistani joint Anti-Terrorist and Human Rights Commissions should immediately be appointed to meet regularly in Islamabad and New Delhi, as well as in Srinagar and Muzaffarabad. They should work together with the most popular Kashmiri Hurriyat Conference leaders to resolve all violent disputes in Kashmir. There should also be joint Commissions on Water and Tariffs, to focus on those vital issues as swiftly as possible, recognizing that the sooner they agree on the resolution of all outstanding conflicts the sooner each of their polities and economies will benefit from rich dividends of peace and cooperation.
What is your road map for the subcontinent's future?
I hope that India and Pakistan, with the full round table cooperation of all respected elected and APHC Kashmiri leaders will as quickly as possible sit down together to resolve their conflict over Kashmir. Neither curfews nor stone-throwing will resolve that tragically prolonged conflict, which has over the last 63 years claimed so many innocent lives, costing countless billions in South Asian resources. High time to turn away from violence by all parties, converting the pain of that longest Indo-Pakistani conflict over Kashmir into the blessings of peaceful cooperation, returning Kashmir's Vale to its beautiful status of "Paradise on Earth." Working together to help each other, sharing their resources for development, rather than wasting them on warfare, sharing their creativity as well, making Music of Peace, as Salman Ahmad's great "Sufi rock" band Junoon does, to lift the hearts and voices of South Asia's billion and a half people, India and Pakistan can lead smaller SAARC neighbors to glorious new heights of harmony, good health, joy and Peace by 2015. 
|
Show/hide comments
Show/hide comment form
