Musharraf--the down to earth soldier
Men, Matters & Memories

By M L Kotru

It would be a lie if I say that I have not always been wary of the Commando in the Pakistani military dictator, President General Pervez Musharraf. It's not just that by training the commando believes in the power of surprise or that sometimes the commando's over enthusiasm or pride in his calling leads him into misadventures. Take the Kargil episode as an instance.

He moved into Kargil not only that he might catch the Indian defenders by surprise but principally because he wanted to dethrone the man (Nawaz Sharif) who bypassed many of Musharraf's seniors to instal him as the Chief of the Army Staff. And because it suited him at the time he used the most hawkish of his colleagues, Gen Aziz Khan, to stage an aerial coup to assume power in Pakistan- the same Gen Aziz whom he has just seen retired from the Army after ensuring himself of a continuing role as President and Chief of Army Staff for years to come. Aziz was just one of the senior men in uniform of whom he was wary and all of them have since been allowed to fade away. That is how commandos work.

But I am happy to confess the General has now done something which none of his predecessors, solider or civilian, ever dared to do. In fact none of them, except Field Marshal Ayub Khan, who offered Nehru a joint defence pact which Nehru rejected, ever dared to mention the great unmentionable: a solution to the Kashmir problem beyond Pakistan's near-Biblical belief that the key to Kashmir lay in implementation of the long obsolete UN resolutions.

The commando for one seems to have acted like a down-to-earth soldier by admitting that the UN resolutions and the call for a plebscite in the former princely State of Jammu and Kashmir are valid no longer. Invalid in the sense that they cannot be implemented. Let us ignore the reasons that may have compelled the General to serve some ''food for thought'' at his meeting in Islamabad with senior Pakistani Editors and bureaucrats. The fact is that the General has chosen to stick his neck out as none of his predecessors did.

I remember how one of Musharraf's predecessors, Gen Ziaul Haq, whom I had the pleasure of meeting several times during an eight year period, was whenever I suggested resumption of Indo-Pak trade say like importing bicycles or broom sticks or coal from India at prices onethird of what they cost in his country he looked horrified. ''I know Indian coal can come to Lahore directly from the pit heads of Bihar by rail but how can I tell my people that it is the right thing to do. Yes, we buy Korean bicycles at Rs 750 apiece when yours would cost about Rs 200 each and we import coal from Australia but.. ''Yet Zia would swear by his desire to resolve the Kashmir issue but only on his terms.

Gen Musharraf in that context has broken fresh ground by suggesting a realistic debate on the Kashmir issue. When he asked for the debate to start, he was obviously addressing his own people and not telling Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to come up with answers. I repeat he was only calling on the Pakistani media, academics and the political parties to take a fresh look at Kashmir. He was trying to shift their attention from the one dimensional obsession of past half century. I heard parts of his speech outlining his ''concepts'' to his Pakistani audience and it never seemed to me that he was addressing Dr Manmohan Singh. What kind of fare is that Musharraf served to his elitist Pakistani audience to savour and to come back to him with their verdict on which of the proposals they think are implementable?

He made it clear that these were mere concepts. His characterisation of seven regions two under Pakistan and five with India- was the cornerstone of his formulations. The first was to rule out the idea that the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir was to be dealt with as a single entity; the second was that while there is a linkage between the populations on the Indian side of LoC adjoining PoK as also between the Balti-speaking Shias in Kargil and the people of Northern Areas (Gilgit, Baltistan) under Pak occupation. There were according to him no similar ethnic linkages on either side of the LoC among the people of Ladakh, Jammu and the Valley.

You would not of course expect him to expound on the demographic overhaul the Pakistanis have undertaken in Gilgit and Baltistan and to a large extent in the PoK.

The third, the more important one, was that a solution of the Kashmir problem should begin with the identification of these regions, demilitarisation and change of their status. His concept of change of status is a condominium, UN mandate or sovereignty. Musharraf may also have deliberately avoided mentioning the fate of territories ceded by Pakistan to China in the so-called Northern Areas but there is some logic behind some of the concepts mentioned by him.

I would not like to go into the details of what Musharraf's ''concepts'' are pointing towards but what is encouraging is that he has at least gone forward with his professed commitment to resolve the Kashmir issue sooner than later.

Personally I did not quite understand the strong rebuttal of the Musharraf concepts by the Indian External Affairs Ministry. Musharraf was only opening his mind to his own people, essentially to opinion-makers in the country.

For Musharraf, with no popular base and entangled in a battle of wits with the fundamentalists as also in his battle against Al Qaeda-Taliban, courtesy his stong US connection, it is important for him to get Pakistani civil society on board. In the present instance Musharraf seems to have acted unlike a commando.

He wants Pakistanis to face the reality of present-day Jammu and Kashmir. Unlike Dr Manmohan Singh who has spoken of ''out of the box solutions'' without taking the nation into confidence about what these might be, Musharraf has at least projected the problem and the possible solutions for his people to consider. The UPA Government obviously believes in holding its cards close to its chest and this can have grave consequences. It's time that Dr Manmohan Singh starts all-party consultations, if only to avoid a situation in which a committed pro-settlement leader like the BJP's Atal Bihar Vajpayee feels sidelined.

To Vajpayee's credit, he did strive for a national consensus on Indo-Pak relations. I am still waiting for Manmohan Singh to tell us what his ''out of the box''wares look like. This is also an opportune time for the Prime Minister to pick up the threads of dialogue with all political parties in Jammu and Kashmir including of course the separatists. He has much to offer to get a larger chunk of popular opinion to his side. Yes, even in the context of the Musharraf concepts which rule out a plebiscite or any falling back on the dead UN resolutions. Merely by rubbishing Musharrafs concepts--''food for thought'' for his own people- the Manmohan Government will gain nothing.

Nasty cooking at Best Bakery! …………
Yours Randomly,

By Dr. R. L. Bhat

NGOs and rights activists - particularly of the 'secular' variety - are the toast of Indian democracy. They are high profile people, often from the moneyed backgrounds. They command a clout and say. They can manage funds and finances and lead very 'purposeful' lives in full glare of T V cameras. They sit proudly in the page-3 of papers. Their brochures are printed in high-gloss paper that can easily adorn the coffee tables of the rich and become collector's items for the poor and needy. Often these glossy things are all that the poor-and-needy, weak-and-oppressed get from them, while the activists themselves corner all goodies from publicity to status. They turn celebrities, rubbing shoulders with the film stars, uppy politicians and channel fames. Sometimes they work. A few even 'tell' the truth. More tell lies. They lie about their work, their finances and their working. Now it turns out they even fudge figures, cook facts and mislead the people and the world over things upon which their cause and work is pegged.

Some of their recent cooking has been done at what has come to be known as the Best Bakery. Gujarat riots, including the Best Bakery, have been called 'a shame' by the government of the time and that should tell a lot. And, justifiably so. In worst situations the best men and women stay cool. That is how it should be. That is the desired, ideal situation. For, civilization means coaching the brute lurking in man. Unfortunately the world is not an ideal place and it is not the perfect men and women who people it. Indians are no exception. They, of course, are good people. They bear wrongs; Turn the other cheek, even turn their eyes away from stark injustices, inequalities, and biases. That is why inspite of provocations and incitements, India has stayed secular country and followed a democratic creed in a sea of stark madnesses from religious to tyrannical. Betimes the bandhs are broken. An Indira is killed; a 'would be' prime minister is blown to bits; a train-full of passengers is roasted; the nation is treated as dirt for too long a time. Then there are flare-ups and riots. People, imperfect as they are, lose their customary cool and 'shameful' things happen.

They happen everywhere in the world. They happen in India too. In a trice, in a moment of passion, in a lunatic fury, much madness is perpetrated. Innocent people get killed; heinous crimes are committed against women and children. The nation gets a 'shame'. But, the saving grace is that it is never a lasting passion, a continued madness that collects money in prayer-houses and eateries on a regular, recurring basis to finance persistent crusades in the name of religion or creed. Usually, the moment passes. People are shamed in their deeds. They make amends and live normal lives again. Today the greatest votaries of peace with Pakistan are the refugees who were chased out of their homes in Pakistan with killing, loot and arson, in anticipation and wake of partition. The 'federation' and 'peace-plans' in J&K are piloted by the people who were, similarly, made to flee POK. It all tells that India is a country unique in its conception, resilient in its idea and lovable in its being. Hence it becomes a greater shame when this nation is not understood but is sought to be belittled with pretext and excuse. It becomes inexcusable if this disparaging is done with specious logic, facile arguments and fictitious facts.

That is exactly what seems to have been done in Gujarat post-Godhara. At the height of the events, the celebrity author Arundati Roy invented a (properly) Muslim, 'friend' in there and cooked a whole 'eye-witness' account. She even gave the 'address' of this imaginary 'friend' to make her account look more authentic. That, of course, gave out her lie - the address did not exit nor did the person she had 'talked' to. That was two years ago. It did neither dim her enthusiasm for the 'cause' nor made her wipe blot her 'report' had besmeared the nation with. India the only democratic country in whole of West and South Asia, upholding a tolerant creed, was damned as if it were an irrationality. The same thing happened in a more devastating form last July when Zahira Sheikh of Best Bakery recanted her statement to the trail court and said that she had been coerced into making it. That statement had led to the acquittal of several people accused in the case. Summary acquittal in such case in not an uncommon happening. None of the 'accused' in the 1984-riots could be prosecuted, as there was no 'evidence'. There is also 'no evidence' against Yasin Malik who himself has admitted having killed 12 Air Force personnel in Srinagar. There are scores of other instances where 'known' accused have gone scot-free. But the activists seized on Zahira. As it now appears they actually 'coerced' her into recanting her statement, even made her 'identify' the 'accused', she had never seen. Now Zahira has admitted it all, and has even identified some high-falutin activists who make her do the recanting!

Somehow the civil liberty people, who avowedly are fighting for 'peace' and 'truth', are not happy at this. They are more worried whether their dream case would stand in face of the prime witness having recanted all she had been 'taught' to tell the court. And, that is the shame. The greatest shame. The question here is not whether the case would stand or not, not probably even how Zahira was coached and held under duress to do, what systematically defamed a whole people and gave the nation a bad name. The question is what are these secular-rights-liberties activists actually aiming at? Why they should not be made to answer for this downright fraud on nationalism? Why their intentions, agendas and integrities would not be called to account? For, theirs is not an ordinary cheating.

It is misinforming the nation, misleading the world and giving the whole nation a bad name. It is treason that is being cooked in the name of truth and peace and secularism by celebrity people for reasons best known to them.