by JAWED NAQVI
When dense smoke was billowing from deadly firings across the Line of Control on Friday, smartly turned out military columns from 23 countries were paying homage at Moscow’s Red Square to the 27 million fallen men and women of the USSR who defeated Nazi Germany, captured Berlin and forced Hitler to shoot himself. Had the South Asian neighbours been more agreeably engaged than pursuing a destructive campaign against each other, the thought is too enticing to ignore that Indian and Pakistani troops would perhaps be marching in lockstep with Chinese, Russian, Uzbek, Egyptian and other comrades to pursue a new world order for equitable peace and sustainable prosperity. There are powerful antibodies stalking the possibility, however.
Mercifully, the fires have been doused in South Asia at least for now even though they were doused by the world’s most incendiary nation that ever wielded the firehose. For all their macho victory cries over claims of damage they inflicted on each other amid a display of grief and valour, India and Pakistan found themselves leaning on foreign shoulders yet again to resolve an essentially bilateral issue, illustrating not for the first time that they have not quite attained adulthood to shepherd the destiny of over a billion souls. The brokered peace, nevertheless, links the tragedy in Pahalgam with a world of power politics.
Be sanguine that the pointless flare-up wasn’t triggered by some four mysterious hate-mongers who showed up to kill innocent men in Pahalgam only to disappear without trace (as yet) in one of the world’s most militarised and policed places. That the foursome called out their victims’ religion turned into a tool to profit from with the time-tested game of identity politics. Remember that in the 2002 communal carnage in Gujarat, after a train fire tragedy in Godhra, it was Pakistan that was first named as the accused; only later mobs were unleashed on unsuspecting Muslims.
Religious politics in South Asia of the Hindu-Muslim variety was nurtured into deep fault lines by colonialism as a protection against another 1857 uprising. ‘Divide et impera’ they called it. Saadat Hasan Manto captured religious frenzy in several short stories that accompanied the violent creation of India and Pakistan. ‘Mistake’ was a story about the murder of a wrong man, the error discovered when his dead body was stripped and revealed he belonged to the killer’s community. The popular Indian leader who plies identity politics to fetch electoral windfalls was not around at the time. But he has spoken of a simpler way whereby one could identify Muslims by their attire. (And thereby also figure out the non-Muslims.) The monsters of Pahalgam missed the trick or perhaps needed an audio track for their crime.
Moscow and Beijing have found growing numbers of applicants from across the world keen to join the coalition against Western hegemony.
Step back from Pahalgam, and you might find a clearer action-reaction pattern. Pahalgam spawned a third military stand-off to involve a BRICS member. It couldn’t be a coincidence that Iran and Russia, key pillars of the coming multipolar world, are in the crosshairs of the West. Unlike the military crisis facing Iran, which has risen as a powerful symbol for the Global South, or Russia, a founding leader of BRICS, which sees itself as a pivot to a multipolar future and therefore is sought to be ‘weakened’ by the West through a grinding proxy war, the South Asian conflict disrupts BRICS more diabolically. India, a founder member of BRICS, balks at the idea of its South Asian rival joining the immensely powerful group. India is a leading member of BRICS but is increasingly perceived as its weak link. Pakistan, on the other hand, being an ardent supporter of BRICS, can become a full member only if India doesn’t obstruct the path. The Pahalgam terror attack of April 22 therefore can be explored as a trigger to sow seeds of discord in the ranks of the Global South and thereby of BRICS.
Dawn for more