Even though Bangldesh is surrounded on three sides by Bharat (thanks to the Radcliff Commission’s criminal decisions on the boundaries) the Bangldeshis (without nuclear weapons) have vociferously opposed transit facilities to Bharat (aka India). The transit issue became so contentious in on 14th August, 1975 a group of Bengali patriots assassinated Shaikh Mujib Ur Rehman and annulled the Indo-Bangladesh treaty of Friendship which would have in affect reabsorbed Dkhaka into Bharat. For the briefest moment, Khondkar Mustaque announced a confederation with Pakistan.
Sri Lanka has also paid very dearly but has stood strongly against hegemony and diktats. In the 80s, during the height of the cold war (when Delhi was in the Soviet orbit) Sri Lanka tried to form agreements with the US which were at the time not deemed in the interest of Delhi. Bharat unleashed the terror of the LTTE (complete with suicide bombers) on Lanka to teach it a lesson. Lanka after thirty years has finally come out of the terror trap laid by Bharat.
Bharti (aka Indian) intentions towards Afghanistan are more than innocent and the Afghans know it. Mr. Hamid Karzia is selling the Afghans short, first by encouraging NATO, ISAF and the US to continue to wage war on the Afghan people and secondly by selling what’s left over to to Bharat.
Propelled by the US engine, and the Bush activities, Delhi is bent upon regional domination and world hegemony. It waged incessant war in Sri Lanka for about three decades through its poxy in Sri Lanka, and tried to absorb Nepal by playing all sorts of dirty tricks in supporting the royalty and then switching sides several times. It tried to use instigate a rebellion in Tibet to bifurcate China so that the imperial powers to parse it out among themselves–Ughuristan to Russia, Manchuria to Japan, Tibet to India, the area beyond Hong Kong to Britain and the rest divided up into small cantons. Bharat tried to occupy Sri Lanka ostensibly under the guise of helping Colombo. She tried to reincorporate Bangladesh using Musjibur Rehman when an Indian general ruled Dhaka through the Rakhi Bahni. Bhrar also tried to take over tiny Maldives, and routinely intimidates Thailand and Mayanmar. Bharat supports, arms and trains the TTP just like it nurtured and developed the LTTE in Lanka. Bharat has resurrect the cold war relic called the BLA. Delhi at the behest of Israel is now actively supporting the Junduallah to cause problems for Tehran. Thus Bharat has the unique distinction of waging wars on each of her neighbors. Delhi however has not had much success in creating “Greater India” or Akhand Bharat. Most of her schemes have failed.
It is pedagogical to see what Bharati leaders have been saying for the past several decades. Lala Hardayla was one of the seminal forces in Bharat in the forties and remains an icon for the RSS and the BJP. Shuddi means reconversion back to Hinduism, and Shangtram means “Spanish Inquisition type of ethnic cleansing and deportation. In this statement, which he called his political testament (”The Pratap” of Lahore), Lala Hardayal said:—
“I declare that the future of the Hindu race, of Hindustan and of the Punjab, rests on these four pillars:
(1) Hindu Sangathan,
(2) Hindu Raj,
(3) Shuddhi of Moslems, and
(4) Conquest and Shuddhi of Afghanistan and the Frontiers.
So long as the Hindu nation does not accomplish these four things, the safely of our children and great-grandchildren will be ever in danger, and the safety of the Hindu race will be impossible. The Hindu race has but one history, and its institutions are homogeneous. But the Musalmans and Christians are far removed from the confines of Hindustan, for their religions are alien and they love Persian, Arab and European institutions. Thus, just as one removes foreign matter from the eye, Shuddhi must be made of these two religions. Afghanistan and the hilly regions of the frontier were formerly part of India, but are at present under the domination of Islam. . . .
…Just as there is Hindu religion in Nepal, so there must be Hindu institutions in Afghanistan and the frontier territory; otherwise it is useless to win Swaraj. For mountain tribes are always warlike and hungry. If they become our enemies, the age of Nadirshah and Zamanshah will begin anew. At present English officers are protecting the frontiers; but it cannot always be. . . .If Hindus want to protect themselves, they must conquer Afghanistan and the frontiers and convert all the mountain tribes.” Excerpted from Dr. Ambedkar’s book “Pakistan”.
Many Hindu nationalists have discussed Hindu ambitions to rule the people of Kabul through an imaginary land East of Bali, Indonesia called Raj Kalhani.
“Lord Curzon celebrated India’s importance in The Place of India in the Empire (1909): The central position of India, its magnificent resources, its teeming multitude of men, its great trading harbors, its reserve of military strength, supplying an army always in a high state of efficiency and capable of being hurled at a moment’s notice upon any point either of
Asia or Africa–all these are assets of precious value. On the West, India must exercise a predominant influence over the destinies of Persia and Afghanistan; on the north, it can veto any rival in Tibet; on the north-east . . . it can exert great pressure upon China, and it is one of the guardians of the autonomous existence of Siam. The New Great Game; Why the Bush administration has embraced India.Twining, Daniel
[India was] “the pivot round which the defence problems of the Middle East, the Indian Ocean, and Southeast Asia revolve. Jawaharlal Nehru
“Independent India’s first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, shared Curzon’s expansive vision, declaring India “the pivot round which the defense problems of the Middle East, the Indian Ocean, and Southeast Asia revolve.” Wary Chinese strategists perceive a continuity of strategic design from Curzon to the Congress party today, accusing Nehru at that time of harboring ambitions for a “greater Indian empire,” and more recently criticizing India’s aspirations for “global military power.”
“China and India,” writes the Carnegie Endowment’s Ashley Tellis, “appeared destined for competition almost from the moment of their creation as modern states.” The New Great Game. Daniel Twining
Curzon argued that the defense of the Empire entailed protection of the entire region between Kabul and the Amu Darya (Oxus river) to the North, Colombo to the South, the Makran coast (now in Pakistan) to the West and Mandalay in Burma to the East. Lord Curzon seemd to think that that the Britain’s future lay in capturing and holding Central Asia.
“Turkestan, Afghanistan, Transcaspia, Persia – to many these words breathe only a sense of utter remoteness or a memory of strange vicissitudes and of moribund romance. To me, I confess, they are the pieces a chessboard upon which is being played out a game for the domination of the world.
“Because the successors of the Turkish Ottomans were unwilling and unable to exercise the right to rule many of their Turkish subjects in Eastern Turkistan, Britain evaluated her own right to rule these lands. After the defeat of Britain in Kabul, later British policy abdicated the right to rule Central Asia to Russia.India is considered by many as the successor state to the British Empire in India.
Most Bharati leaders have maintained their vision of reaching the Oxus river (Amu Darya). Pakistan is seen as an impediment to their Westward’s march.
“NWFP belongs to India and Punajb is on the way”. Statement made to henry Kissinger by Indiara Gandhi. Reported by Henry Kisisnger to Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in declassified documents of meetings between Kissinger and Bhutto.
Mr. Adhvani, Mr. Modi and Mr. Thakery routinely make similar statements about the “destiny of India”, which they liken to America’s manifest destiny. It has been half a decade that political scientists witnessed a watershed event in the history of the Subcontinent. India established it’s first military base outside India a few miles from the capital city Dushambe in Tajikistan. The Singh Doctrine is nothing new, it is the application of the American Monroe Doctrine to Asia. The Doctrine defines spheres of influence for powers with “security zones”. To understand the Singh Doctrine, and to confirm that history repeats itself, we need to leaf through the pages of history for lessons learned Lord Curzon has been described as British missionary with a vision.
The highly respected Association of Former Ambassadors (AFA) has requested the speaker of the National Assembly to arrange hearings on the subject of the Memorandum of Understanding signed with Afghanistan on transit trade. Of particular concern in this connection is the opening of the land route through Pakistan (Wagah to Torkham) to trade between Afghanistan and India, as proposed by the Afghan side. AFA has pointed out that the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea grants to the land-locked states the freedom of transit to and from the sea only. Pakistan is not obliged to provide to Afghanistan access to or from a third country also. Despite this, Pakistan has over the years allowed Afghanistan the use of the Torkham-Wagah route for its exports as a gesture of friendship. The association supported the continuation of this unilateral concession to Afghanistan.
The association members said that all stakeholders including members of the AFA may be invited to participate in these deliberations so as to ensure a thorough and detailed examination of this important policy matter. AFA has voiced deep anxiety at the failure of the government to provide adequate information on the concerns raised by the public at the purpose and scope of the proposed new transit and trade agreement between Pakistan and Afghanistan in Washington on May 6 during the trilateral meeting of Pakistan, Afghanistan and the United States. On Kashmir, and most other matters India is agreeable only to bilateral talks. One wonders what got into the minds of the rulers that they agreed to this massive concession to India in trilateral talks, without informing the people, and without even a request from the Indians.
At the same time, the AFA expressed concern that an announcement on the conclusion of the agreement, about which the Pakistani public was given no prior information, was made in a third country by an official of that country. Actually, it is obvious we are bonded slaves of America. The continuing reticence on the part of the government in addressing these concerns, and the attempt to stifle debate on the question in Parliament, have given rise to serious misgivings and doubts in the minds of the public. The Nation
It is very obvious that the deal is contentious on many counts. First of all it is not an agreement yet. Right now it a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which has no legal standing. Secondly, it is a huge security concern for the Pakistan Army to quietly watch Tata trucks rumbling through Pakistan and traveling on Pakistanis freeways. Indian arms have flooding the FATA and Swati region, how many more Indian arms will be tolerated by Islamabad. Third the Indian goods transported through Pakistan will be directly competing with Pakistani goods being exported to Afghanistan. Fifth, the Pakistani freeway system was not built for NATO supply lines, nor was it built for Indian trade. The purpose of the Pakistani roads is primarily to serve Pakistani businessmen not Indian businesses. Sixth it is a matter of fact that most goods exported to Afghanistan end up being smuggled back into Pakistan. Darra and Landi Kotal are bases which feed the pipeline to Sohrabgot in Karachi and all over Pakistan. If transit trade is given to Bharat, the Pakistani industry will face many challenges from cheap and shoddy Bharti goods dumped into the Pakistani market. Seventh, Pakistan gets no advantage from the transit trade, because neither Nepal nor Bangladesh offer any type of markets to Pakistan. Pakistan can cheaply export good to Bangladesh via existing sea channels that have worked well in the past. Eighth, it is strange that Bharat did not allow land routes to Pakistan from 1947-1971 and now asks for transit concessions from Pakistan without any reciprocal deal on Kashmir. Ninth, If the security establishment is to be believed in Pakistan, Bharat is sending massive amounts of arms to the BLA and insurgents in Swat and FATA. The land routes would help Bharat to do this with ease, using Pakistani roads. At the very least barter trade and currency could easily be sent to Kabul without hindrance or pretenses.
Pakistan almost has a border with Tajikistan. It has links of language, culture, religion and food with Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. A narrow trip of land a few miles wide separates Tajikistan from Pakistan. That strip of Afghan land was deliberately placed their to separate the British Empire from the Tsars of Russia. Pakistan has to negotiate with Afghanistan on that narrow strip of land near Shariarv or the Iskashim Nature reserve in Uzbekistan. Pakistan could build an Afghanistan specific berth in Gwader or Port Qasim or Karachi and declare it Afghan territory but Pakistan has to get direct access to Tajikistan. This would link up Pakistan directly to Tajiksitan. An alternate arrangement would allow Pakistan to build a bridge or a tunnel under Afghan territory to link up to Tajikistan. Afghanistan is totally landlocked and needs Pakistan. Some Pakistani territory can be exchanged with Afghanistan to link up to Tajikistan. It has no access to the outside world. The modern’s relations with the Central Asia states have seen their ups and downs. After 1990, the Central Asia came down in droves to Pakistan selling their wares.
All Paksitanphobes may not Bharatis, but all Indians are surely Anti-Pakistani. may be The unbounded glee of Bharatis around the world and in Bharat about Pakistan’s troubles in Swat or anywhere else tell us reams about who their sympathies are with. After the blast at the Marriot, the Indian Foreign Minster pretty much said “Pakistani get what they deserve”. this is is the theme in Indian newspapers and blogs around the world. In the past thirty years, this author has never found an Indian who had anything good to say about Pakistan. A google search may be unscientific, but will surely prove to the world who Pakistan’s real enemies are.
There is a concerted effort on the part of the Fifth Column in Pakistan to sell the transit trade to India. One of the Chief proponents of Delhi’s interests in Pakistan is of course Mr. Ayesha Siddqa. She has shown her true colors. Ms. Ayesha Siddqa sold Pakistan Army secrets to India (after working for the Pakistani DOD for years), stayed in Delhi for an extended period of time and got her Anti-Pakistan books published in Hindustan. In her June 5th column in Dawn wrote extensively about the trade agreement selling the point of view of Hindustani businessmen. Pakistanis have come to expect pro-Indian rhetoric from Najam Sethi of the Daily times. It comes as no surprise. After all Mr. Sethi, a darling of the West is part of the same 5th column that has never kept Pakistani interests supreme.
Pakistan for six decades has refused Bharat transit concessions ’till Kashmir is resolved. Pakistanis should vehemently impress upon the Zardari government that only parliament can make such huge decisions, and this MOU should never see the light of day.
No comments:
Post a Comment