Past, present, future


Written by Javed Jabbar • Cover Stories • August 2010

Whereas the future of Pakistan will become its history, the future of Pakistan-India relations lies buried deep inside a thousand years of history already lived.

When we generally refer to history there is an assumption of finality, of certainty, even of unanimity. Some historic facts are indisputable. The dates on which leaders like Mohammad Ali Jinnah and Mohandas Gandhi passed away. The dates on which both countries almost simultaneously became independent nation-states.

Yet there is a large part of history about which there is no unanimity. On the validity of the two-nation theory i.e. of Muslims and Hindus being two distinct, separate nations. On the reasons and factors leading to the creation of two new sovereign entities. On the roots of violent conflict between extremists in both religions. On the why and the when of the bloodshed that marked the partition of Punjab. And on several other subjects.

Like the unfolding present and current times in which we awake every morning, history too is a living, breathing realm that remains open to the oxygen of continual research and interpretation. When the additional potent chemical of well-armed States which have gone to formal war with each other on three occasions (1948, 1965, 1971) and are also capable of using nuclear weapons is added to the inter-active equation, history becomes a volatile body requiring almost ceaseless inquiry, diagnosis and treatment.

The so-called trust deficit is a deficit of dissent about history. Though there have been phases of non-conflict and non-tension (e.g. the Liaquat-Nehru pact, the Indus Waters Treaty, the 2004-2008 period) and active co-operation, there is a lingering, unresolved disagreement on the rationale and justification about, for instance, the creation of organizations such as the Hindu Mahasabha and the Muslim League. In 2010, that kind of old, unsettled question finds expression in the often violent extremism of the RSS, the Bajrang Dal and the VHP as also in the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, the Jaish Mohammad and other off-springs. To a degree that is disproportionate to their representative status, the 2 State entities are held helpless hostages to groups that have limited electoral support and yet stoke base passions in tens of thousands.

One manifestation of how the past pulsates through the present is the content of school text-books, of college books, even of university-level tomes that portray the genesis and growth of the two countries to each young, new generation and to those who shape public opinion. Despite improvements over the past two decades and removal of inappropriate material, the other one of the two countries is invariably presented in adversarial and alien terms. To some extent, this is understandable because of the three wars fought by the two States in the past six decades. But the fact that distortions, and even more important, crucial omissions are deliberately made is evidence of how history continues to haunt the horizon.

As news media write history every day the knots and twists and scars of yesterday abide in the manner in which every new event is reported. Even when commenting on the most recent meeting of the two Foreign Ministers in Islamabad in mid-July 2010, analysts on both sides dredge up conventional stock phrases and presumptions about ISI or Indian obduracy that could be verbatim reproductions of sentences written several years ago. In turn, those retrieved biases were pulled to the surface from the depths of darkness past.

On the sports field, and in cricket in particular, all the pent-up pressures of primeval passion simmer and erupt with power. The partisanship of patriotism post-1947 masks parochialism on unacknowledged communal lines pre-1947. And yet, to be fair, with equal speed and intensity, people on both sides show the capacity to overcome rivalry on the field with friendship on the streets. Whether it the warmth with which Pakistani cricket fans visiting East Punjab were received or whether it is the remarkable spectacle of the Indian team being cheered for its performance from a jam-packed stadium in Karachi, there is proof that, on some occasions at least, the demons of discord can be overcome by the angels of harmony.

Similarly, in entertainment, music, the arts, culture, literature and areas of creativity, elements and colors and sounds and tastes and fragrances shared in a distant as well as in a near past become binding chords that heal, temporarily, the wounds of memory.

Perhaps trade and economics are the most effective liberators of an imprisoned past. Misgivings persist about the threat of Pakistan being swamped by floods of goods and services from India. But with the awareness that tariff and non-tariff measures, policy reviews, market trends, demand and supply factors, pricing mechanisms can all be carefully calibrated to protect vital interests, there is a growing confidence in the potential for this dimension of the relationship to gradually transcend the ditches and the trenches and the ruts of history. At the same time, economic co-operation cannot become a substitute for political dialogue and political reconciliation. Trade can be a pivotal contributory factor in illustrating to both countries and peoples the tangible benefits of exchanging goods and services, of even promoting cross-border investment and yet economics cannot ever, here in South Asia or anywhere else, simply make abiding, unresolved political disputes disappear into thin air.

So how can history become an engine of change for the better rather than remain deadweight of the past? To begin with, we need to remain engaged with the exploration of history, to look for new routes into the past in order to be better able to understand the present. A joint, shared, collective approach in which each individual researcher's right to search is respected and enforced as much as each country's duty to encourage intellectual freedom and respect for the other's views and perceptions. The news media and the entertainment media need to refine and enhance their capacity to rise above traditional prejudices and portray the true range and richness of reality, if not the truth itself.

On the political level, easily the most important basis for attempting to deal with history as a benign instrument to mold a future of productive peace, several tasks await the leadership. Sustained, uninterrupted dialogue at the official and the Ministerial levels, not or never subject to the occurrence of terrorist acts. An activation of the Joint Anti-Terror Mechanism already agreed upon but not acted upon so far by India. Regular, more frequent summit meetings rather than the existing trend of sporadic, or annual ceremonial inter-actions at SAARC conferences or other multi-lateral moots. Maintaining the existing Track 2 Dialogue and reviving the secret back channel process. Reviving a more liberal visa regime. Initiating contact and dialogue between the senior-most military commanders, starting with exchanges between the staff colleges and universities of the respective armed forces. Reduction of troop deployments on both sides of the Line of Control in Kashmir. The convening of an annual conference of political leaders of both countries. Strict enforcement by both States of laws and rules that prohibit publication or broadcast of hate material. Implementation of other measures already agreed upon, including specially trade. Prevention of any activities by extremist groups that pose a threat to stable relations between the two States.

As we probe history to learn more about the diverse factors that have shaped our present, the peoples and governments of both States share the responsibility to carve the contours of a new future that is less conflictual and more harmonious, which enables us to disagree about the past and even the present but which at the same time allows us to work together to alleviate poverty, injustice and human suffering.