The Long Shadows of Hindu Kush

Urstruly#77

Sikh rule started after Abdali and the Marathas had fought each other. The marathas were defeated and Abdali retreated back to Afghanistan, leaving a vaccum in North India that was filled by the sikhs.

Pakistanis have given up on seeking parity with India on the old concept of one Muslim mujahid equals ten cowardly Hindus. Next was ridiculing the idea of the concept of India as a nation; India has demonstrated however that her notion of unity in diversity works and Indians have, by and large, succeeded in developing a strong sense of nationhood. The latest ploy is to attack the very idea of nationhood as regressive and passé and that South Asians should consider themselves as a number of natural units on an economic and cultural basis (with Pakistan plus Kashmir and maybe even the Indian Punjab being, of course, a natural unit). The basic aim remains unchanged, which is that Pakistan somehow should be equal to India.

Europe has not given up on nationhood: France, Germany, England, Italy and others retain a strong sense of their national identity, although they are willing to trade off some of their sovereign powers for economic benefits and to compete as a bloc with America. There are strong nationalist movements in Spain. The old Yugoslovia has broken into many nations because it lacked a sense of nationhood. Soviet Union broke into several independent states because of the strong nationalist feelings among constituents. Canadian nationalism is strong enough that beer companies have ads. touting Canada`s distinctiveness vis-a-vis the US, just as Pakistanis tout their distinctiveness vis-a-vis India. And the same beer company dares not run that Ad in Quebec because the feeling of Quebec nationlism there will mean a reduction rather than an increase in the sale of their product. Closer to home, there are strong separatist movements in Sri Lanka, Indonesia and Kurd areas. There is, of course, the Kashmiri separatist movement as well, even though it is strictly speaking, not an independence movement but an alienation from India based on the concept of an Ummah (the slogan being: Pakistan se rishta kya, La Ilaha L`il Alah!).

Nothing in the above suggests that SAARC countries should not develop into a strong economic bloc a la Europe. This would encourage friendship, reduce tensions and create interdependencies and business lobbies against war with each other. Pakistanis who are against the concept of nationhood do not realise that their government has consistently refused to allow Indian businessmen to invest in their country regardless of whether or not that investment would benefit Pakistanis.

Re:dost-mittar#81

I think the Pakistani disillusion with nationalism has more to do with their own lack of success in forging a strong nation, rather than an urge to compete with India. Basically Pakistan is currently being held together mainly by military force. The events in Balochistan, the strife in NWFP, the simmering disconent in Sindh over water, the squabbling over Punjab`s dominance are all symptomatic that people in Pakistan think more in terms of their local identity than a national identity. Earlier, the one method to keep everyone together was to raise the bogey of a threat from India but now even that has lost its appeal. If the army ever becomes weak in Pakistan, the country might evolve into a loose federation of provinces.

India, on the other hand, has managed to forge a national identity, in spite of having many secessionist movements. By and large, people in India have developed a national consensus on key issues and a stake in staying together, not to mention leveraging the economies of scale. India has truly developed into a showcase for the whole being more than a sum of the parts. Therefore, no one in India is willing to dismantle nationalism and it will stay united like the USA.

Therefore, I predict that the subcontinent is going to move more towards a hub and spoke model. The hub is a centralized united India of the present and the spokes are regional economic alliances between adjoining provinces of neighboring countries. So one spoke would be Indian Punjab, Pakistani Punjab, Indian Kashmir and Pakistani Kashmir with perhaps NWFP and/or Afghanistan joining in. The other spoke could be Rajasthan, Gujarat, Sindh and Balochistan. Yet another spoke would be W. Bengal, Bangladesh and North East states.

DMji and Amit,

Great posts! I would guard against anyone playing with integrity of India`s neighbours. Any disintegration would mean that the resultant smaller states would be even more malleable to the wishes of extra-regional and non-state actors. Just imagine uncle Sam guarding the Pak-Iran border under the guise of Baloch nationalism. Ironically, we may see ourselves rooting for Pakistani nationalism when their own people seem to have given it up for more `universal` causes :-)

rahulmal#83:

I agree. I have said before that even Indian intervention in Bangladesh was wrong. In fact, India lost a golden opportunity then to use its influence with Mujeeb to bring about a reconciliation between East and West Pakistan and earn the goodwill of both wings. And if Indians are supporting insurgency in Balochistan then it is playing a shortsighted game. Indians should encourage a positive Pakistani identity, such as the one promoted by the likes of the author of Indus Saga, to replace the one based only on Islam and being not-Indian.

Re # 84

Kutte ki doom hamesha tedi hoti hai.
Ek din, ek haftah, ek mahina, ek saal baandh kar seedhi rakho, uske baad vaapas
tedi ho jayegi.
Look at Kashmiri and Bangladeshi muslims. This was bound to happen one day, however much rest of the India had done for them. They were bound to find an excuse to do
whatever they have done and doing now. Dimaag hi programmed kiya jata hai.

I think whatever India did was good. Perhaps should do more.

Re #84

``In fact, India lost a golden opportunity then to use its influence with Mujeeb to bring about a reconciliation between East and West Pakistan and earn the goodwill of both wings. ``

I have a feeling Pruthviraj Chauhan must have had such noble sentiments after he defeated Mohammad Ghori in their first battle. We all know what happened to him.

Nationalism suffers in comparison with true universalism. But a true universalist is yet to be found.


Dost-mittar

South Asianists are merely re-emphasizing an older `nationalism.` It`s a mild political ruse, but overall, a respectable one, with positive motivations.

The bitter negative attack on nationalism today comes from two equally negatively oriented, anti-intellectual bed-mates -- Pan Islamists and extreme leftists.

Re: # 82
Interesting idea with the hub and spokes. The only quibble I have is that you idolise India a little too much. Indians declaring India to be a great nation does not mean you are a great nation. In order to be a great nation, that title has to be bestowed by other countries.

You dismiss secessionism as if it were merely a footnote in history. India is in no better shape than Pakistan. With the larger area, India seems to have proportionately fewer problems. In fact, India has yet to effectively deal with Kashmir, Chinese occupation of Aksai Chin, Sikh discontent in Punjab, the eastern hill rebellions, Naxalites etc.

You talk of India being a showcase, but India is still a land of enormous inequalities. Certainly there is a growing and wealthy middle class based on the ``software revolution``. However, there are still hundreds of millions of dirt-poor people with little hope of being noticed by urban elites. Don`t be too confident of the software industry either - bigger bubbles have burst than this.

Come back to us when you are able to show that the vast majority of your citizens have access to schools, hospitals, jobs, drinking water etc. Then maybe you can talk about how strong you are.

By the way, the USA suffered disunity too (look up the Civil War and tell me that wasn`t secessionism). The greatness of the USA was built on the deaths of many innocents - is that your role model?

Stop looking up to distant nations and do something positive for your own poor people and your neighbours.