A Letter to Pervez Musharraf
Dear General,
At the outset, let it be made clear that the prefix "Dear" above has been
used only because it is "the core issue" in any letter written in the
civilised world. Please don't mistake it for anything else. This
fundamentalist Indian (not an Indian fundamentalist) can, you see, never
forget the treachery of Kargil and the thousand cuts of jehad.
Then there's your three-in-one status. You may well have liked to be
addressed by your presidential status. But considering that you're known to
move around in your little country much less in mufti and much more in army
uniform bearing all those badges and medals, you, the realist, probably
detest being in the sheep's clothing. Hence, this letter's preference for
the 'general' tag.
The protocol done with, let's come down to "the core issue" -- your summit
with Atal Bihari Vajpayee, our prime minister with two
repaired knees and one Hindu heart of tolerance unlimited.
Many days before D-Day, you had proclaimed you intended to "create" history
(or words to that effect) during the summit visit. Was it history then that
after four rounds of talks, Agra could not produce even a lukewarm joint
statement?
Or was it history that you became the first visiting dignitary of any
country to tell his hosts before departing that his people don't trust the
host government? Or was it history to deny that you held even a single
Indian as a prisoner of war when your own human rights commission said more
than 30 were languishing in your jails? Or was it history to hold an
arrogant and abrasive media conference on our soil without so much as our
courtesy? Civilised India is not equipped to answer those questions.
Getting ownership of real estate through terrorism and blackmail, without
having the legal papers for ownership -- that would have been history,
wouldn't it? Unfortunately, General, that is rarely allowed in the civilised
world. And in any case, Pakistan is already in possession of a massive chunk
of India's real estate for 54 years without an iota of documentation. So you
shouldn't be too unhappy. After all, you win some, you lose some, and
there's always the next time, as Agra appears to have promised.
In any case, you have indeed made history through Agra. Without much effort,
for instance, you made monkeys out of our media. For weeks before you came
and till you left, they lapped you up and your country's "experts" as well
as commoners in the vegetable market and elsewhere, splashing "the core
issue" in our mainline television channels and newspapers. Why, some of the
latter became so mesmerised that their edit and op-ed pages were often
flooded with articles penned by passionately patriotic journos from your
country; some of those were supplemented by efforts from our own "objective"
pen pushers who, for reasons unknown, were so keen on projecting the Pak
viewpoint. That is why some smart ones in Mumbai conceived of such names as
"The Times of Pakistan" and "The Pakistan Express" over their morning cup of
tea in the last few weeks. And, of course, you saw how our media covered
your visit itself -- from you sartorial style to your begum's culinary
choices. All of it was truly historic, wasn't it?
In fact, General, we know you as one who had made history more than once
even before you got our PM's invitation.
The first was in October 1999 when you staged a coup to dethrone Nawaz
Sharif; it must surely have been the first time in world history that
someone sitting in an aeroplane in the skies had, through remote control,
seized power over a whole country.
By repeatedly proclaiming your "any time any place" intention, it was the
first time ever, says Benazir Bhutto, that Islamabad was begging for a
meeting with India. Begging for succor from the IMF and the World Bank had
started becoming Pakistan's trait, but begging for a meet with New Delhi?
That was unique; it was history.
You also made history when just two days before flying off to New Delhi, you
disowned the Simla Agreement of 1972 and the Lahore Declaration of 1999.
Whatever the reason you gave Gulf Times for it, the deed of disowning
internationally signed accords must surely rank as an event in the history
of the civilised world. Even the latest Bush of the USA has declined the
temptation of a unilateral end to the Anti-Ballistic Missiles Treaty with
Russia. And though you quickly blamed it on a misquote or a
misinterpretation by the Gulf newspaper, your historic act held sway for two
days, even as the truth of your feelings lie imprisoned in your heart.
On our soil itself, you made more history. You became the first Pakistani to
receive a 21-gun salute from the Indian nation-- that's how stupid the
civilised Indian is, General. And you were the first Pakistani ever to be
the guest in our hallowed Rashtrapati Bhavan, reminding one of the tale of
Red Riding Hood.
You also created history by being the first Pakistani head of state ever to
pay homage at Rajghat. We're thankful for that gesture, but why did that
solemn occasion provoke the hint of a smile on your face and a broad smile
on your begum's face right in front of the samadhi? The newspaper camera had
never before caught any VIP smiling while standing before a cenotaph, and
that too of Mahatma Gandhi.
Then there was your tea, sympathy and sandwiches (beef most certainly) with
those Hurriyat loudmouths. That was no "non-issue" as our nave government
and Pakistani columnists wanted us to believe. Instead, it was a calculated
insult of the hosts as historic as it would have been if Vajpayee had
insisted on supping with the Cuban Communists when he was President
Clinton's guest last year. But we Indians, General, are stupidly civilised
as you may have fully realised by now.
There's more of your brush with history. According to Ajmer's maulvis, the
welcome that was planned for you at the city's shrine of Khwaja Moinuddin
Chishti would have outdone the one accorded to Emperor Akbar about 400 years
ago. Your visit to Ajmer was to be the most expensive in Indian history --
costing the government in excess of Rs 100,000 per minute. That's how stupid
we cultured Indians are, General. Do you then regret, General, that you
aborted that bit of history? It pained us civilised Indians all right to
note that there was not even an apology to Ajmer from your side. Presumably,
professional commandos like you are trained to deliver only shocks, not
sops.
You really are a queer one on history, General. You want to settle "the core
issue" in accordance with "the wishes of the people". But when you hijacked
the position of Pak's CEO and recently seized the presidential throne --
were both those acts done after securing "the wishes of the people?"
In an interview to an Indian newspaper, you showed disdain for going into
the composite Simla '72 and Lahore '99 documents, saying that, if forced to
do so, you will then go as far back into history as the UN resolution of
August '48. Please do just that, General. You'll find that the promise of
plebiscite came with two prior conditions: withdrawal of Pak troops as well
as its tribesmen from J&K and reverting the administration of J&K to the
state government of the day. That resolution also established that it was
Pakistan that was the aggressor in J&K. All your predecessors ignored that
truth; all of them ignored those conditions that constituted "the core
issue" of the 15 UN pronouncements on the "K" word from January 17, 1948 to
May 18, 1964. Did you then want to create history by pressurising India to
bury that "core issue"?
One last thing about history. What this fundamentalist Indian (not an Indian
fundamentalist) said more than once earlier has now been said, for the first
time ever, by an Indian with political authority. Jaswant Singh the other
day pulled up one of our journalists and told him that the correct
nomenclature of the subject about which he had asked a question is "Jammu
and Kashmir". Your obsession with the "K" word made that historic disclosure
inevitable, for which, many thanks.
In fact, General, you'll be surprised to know that while Jammu is a city as
well as a district in J&K state, there is no town, no city, no district that
bears the "K" nomenclature. If it has taken 54 years for even our
Delhi-based journalists to be educated on "the core issue", one reason is
because our media people are inclined to be skin deep. Another reason is
that the Government of India has never ever bothered to lay before the
nation an official publication on the truths about J&K -- right from its
legally unchallenged accession to India on October 26, 1947 and the great
autonomy it already enjoys to its historic haemorrhage by the Islamic army.
That negligence of our government was "the core issue" behind the hoopla and
the hallelujah so senselessly woven into your visit here, General. As Bill
Clinton might have said, it's the culture, stupid.
Here's hoping, therefore, that
1. If and when you or your successor next come visiting our Taj, he (or she)
and the accompanying aggressive bunch of Pak media will be fully conversant
with the true history of J&K and
2. Our own present lot of Track I, Track II and Track III peaceniks will
also have understood that J&K is not property that the Indian nation can
simply give away in return for imaginary peace and relief from fanatical
jehadi hordes. That reciprocal realisation is the real "core issue" in our
future mutual relationship, General.
Meanwhile, best of luck as you continue passing your beret around to the IMF
and the World Bank.
Yours etc.
ANONYMOUS On this home page, I might include some information about how I originally became a fan and about what makes this star so special in my estimation.
Thanks for taking a look at my site. Be sure to sign my guestbook below or send me a private e-mail with your thoughts and suggestions. I'll be updating frequently, so please check back often. |
