‘Interference’ as a state policy

Bhopinder Singh
As Pakistan struggles to come to terms with the divisive impact of its genealogical disorder i.e. the over simplistic and retrogressive ‘two-nation theory’ that is falling apart with the bloody sectarian violence, religious fundamentalism and violent separatist movements that threaten to implode the Shangri-La of the ‘land of pure’, from within – therefore, its seeks succor, distraction and unity from its internal faultlines by way of invoking the ‘soft-spots’ of other countries as a means of unifying its own disparate comity and redeeming its own flawed DNA rationale.
Recently, Bangladesh joined the ranks of the regional countries who had to publicly rebuke Pakistan for stoking unrest with blatant ‘interference’ in its domestic affairs. The trigger was the hanging of the Jamaat-e-Islami party member Mir Quasem Ali, who was formally convicted in 10 charges, including murder and kidnapping during the pogrom that preceded the formation of Bangladesh in 1971. Accused of being a key commander of pro-Pakistan Al Badr militia in Chittagong during the restive times – the Pakistani establishment of today reacted to the news of his hanging by expressing regret and alluding to mal-intent on the part of the current Bangladesh Government. Yet again, Pakistan felt it important to comment on the legal proceedingsof a sovereign country which was just recovering from the horrors of the worst terror attack in the infamous Dhaka Café that claimed 22 lives. Pakistan said that it was, “deeply saddened” and commented on the qualitative aspect of the conviction by saying that Mir Quasem was hanged for, “alleged crimes committed before December 1971 through a flawed judicial process”. This was provocation enough for Bangladesh to summon the Pakistani Ambassador to protest against the Pakistani ‘interference’ in the internal affairs of Bangladesh. Clearly, the implied maligning and sullying of the Pakistani role and policy framework (which continues) till date, irks the Pakistani establishment as the creation of Bangladesh and its unforgiven and unforgotten wounds on the Bengali psyche are clear validation of the flawed ‘two-nation’ theory that never envisaged the Bengalis, as equals.The rocky Pakistani-Bangladeshi relationship has seen multiple summoning of the envoys in the recent past, including the expulsions of diplomats for carrying out ‘anti-state’ activities and spying.
Similarly the recent thawing of the US-Iran relations following the nuclear deal has taken Iran away from the list of ‘rogue’ nations and open to embrace and groupings alongwith the likeminded partners in the region – here the emerging bloc of the ‘India-Iran-Afghanistan’ trinity has posited the strategic Iranian Chabahar port, as a willy-nilly counter to the Chinese-Pakistani developed Gwadar port in the region. Already, the sectarian faultline divides the Iranian and Pakistani narrative irreversibly, and the recent warmth and strategic understanding between Tehran and New Delhi will ensure a certain drift away from Islamabad. Geopolitically, Iran and India are aligned on the Afghanistan theatre and their combined interest is at opposite variance to that of the Pakistani interest and proxies in the form of the Afghan Taliban that is patronized by the Pakistani ISI.However the trust-deficit in the Iranian-Pakistani relationship has a familiar ring of the famed Pakistani ‘interference’ that is an integral part of its international diplomacy. As long back as 2009, the-then Iranian President Mehmoud Ahmadinejad had sent a terse message to the Pakistanis following a suicide bombing in which 40 people were killed, “I ask the Pakistani Government not to delay handing the main elements of this crime to us anymore. The elements that have gone to Pakistan and we are aware that unfortunately some Pakistani agents cooperate with them. They should hand these elements to us”.More recently, hinting at the Iranian handiwork in both the targeted killing of Afghan Taliban Chief Mullah Akhtar Mansour as indeed, in the arrest of the supposed Indian “spy”, Kulbhushan Jadhav has riled Tehran more than once on Islamabad’s attempt at baiting and drawing in the Iranians, in a pejorative sense.
However, it is in the neighbouring Afghanistan that the aversion to Pakistan’s consistent ‘interference’ resonates the loudest and the bloodiest. Masked under the auspices of the ultra-selfish “strategic depth”, the malfeasance of Pakistani intent has made it lose its one-time supporter in Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, who almost gave the Pakistanis the benefit of doubt and restarted the rapprochement process, initially – only to be faced with intransigence and the insistence of the Pakistani establishment to pursue their dangerous courting of both the Haqqani Network and the Afghan Taliban. Today President Ashraf Ghani openly accuses Islamabad of double standards and ‘interference’ when he says, “We cannot understand when Pakistan says it will not allow a group of terrorists to amend its constitution, army act and prepares a National Action Plan against them.
Simultaneously, Pakistan tolerates another group which attempts to undermine the government and bring horror, death and destruction to Afghanistan”. Later he said, “if you don’t take action against them, we won’t trust you” – signaling the duplicity of the Pakistani establishment towards its supposed commitment towards eradication of terrorism.
It is the theory of differentiating the ‘good terrorist and the bad terrorist’ that makes the Pakistani ‘interference’ irk in most of the regional capitals from Tehran, Kabul, Dhaka to New Delhi. It is the deployment of these unconventional means (read, ‘interference’) that Pakistan adopts to take upon its conventionally more powerful foe, India.Late President Zia-ul-Haq was the original proponent of the ‘thousand cuts to bleed India to death’ line of thought that has since been institutionalized in the Pakistani thinking and extended to a host of other neighbouring nations. But pandering to religious fundamentalism is a sword that cuts both ways and the regressive ‘cuts’ are also happening internally in Pakistan. The bogey of co-religionism has been overplayed and diminishing returns are accruing to Pakistan with Iran, Afghanistan and Bangladesh sharing and empathizing with the Indian point-of-view on the Pakistani role in aiding and abetting terrorism in the region.
So while the Pakistani envoy to UN Maleeha Lodhi raised the killing of Burhan Wani as a ‘extra-judicial’ killing, the retort from the Indian envoy at UN, Syed Akbaruddin nailed the Pakistani ploy of gross ‘interference’ when he noted about Pakistan, “a country that covets the territory of others; a country that uses terrorism as state policy towards that misguided end; a country that extols the virtues of terrorists and that provides sanctuary to UN-designated terrorists; and a countrythat masquerades its efforts as support for human rights and self-determination”. ‘Interference’ as a state policy has a very limited shelf-life and already the regional countries are calling the bluff of the Pakistanis in keeping the fire of terrorism alive in the region.
(The author is former Lt Governor of Andaman & Nicobar Islands & Puducherry)
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com

Follow our WhatsApp channel