July 13, 2003

Though exchanges of parliamentarians is, indeed, a sign of progress, only exchanges between the people and the media can bring about a change in real terms

OF late the Wagah border has become the single most important separator, second only to the Line of Control, between India and Pakistan. We all know the seismic activities surrounding the LoC, leaving the Wagah to deal with the diplomatic influx.

Every time a Pakistani or an Indian steps across it, the place alights with movement of a different kind though. Cameras are zoomed in on the people taking that huge humanitarian step, ready to be garlanded in marigold. Peace activists, as they are called, have turned the patrolled wasteland of Wagah into a media hyperbole.

There was much trumpeting when a 12-member group of Pakistani parliamentarians went to India, in early May, on a week-long peace mission to India, reciprocated by the Indian side in mid-June. For what it is worth, crossing the Wagah has at least become very glamorous, or so many feel.

“These people get high class treatment wherever they go. Other than enlisting the problem areas, which are not classified information anyway, do you really think they have managed to come up with a single solution?” retorts a critic.

As part of the Track II diplomacy that visit was soon followed by another one of six Indian parliamentarians to Pakistan. They entered Lahore through the Wagah on June 17 to continue with the people-to-people contact severed on the government level since the attack on the Indian parliament on December 13, 2001.

Arranged by Dr Mubashir Hasan, chairperson of the Pakistan chapter of the Pak-India Peoples Forum for Peace and Democracy, the visit had all the trappings of success. The media people scampered to click their cameras, the NGO brigade stood on ceremony ready to break into a chorus of salutation for the six-member group. It was all so powerfully emotive that many a people wondered how Indians and Pakistanis could live as nations out at each other’s throat for the longest time memory could serve. But that is the way it has been.

A new beginning — away from the past — is what the members of this organization are trying to build on. “We must not live in the past,” said Kuldip Nayar, a member of the Rajya Sabha, the upper house of the Indian parliament. Of course the two countries cannot afford to live in the past, neither can they afford to start afresh based on diplomatic amnesia. What is required is not a total negation of the events which has led to this shutter-down policy, primarily from the Indian side, but a mature reflection of where and why things went wrong between the two neighbours.

It was a whirlwind trip of the people-to-people contact, starting from Lahore flying off to Islamabad, then on to Karachi, and then back to Lahore finally ending the nine-day visit. Very little of it could be described as a people-to-people contact because most of the communication that took place was not between an ordinary Pakistani and Indian, but among the parliamentarians and intellectuals who already knew each other. That need not be taken as a criticism of the peace process. Most of the people want it. The core of cynicism lies in the way the peace menu is set by a few people, attending dinners, heading seminars, meeting the highest in official hierarchy under the misnomer of ‘a-people-to-people-contact’.

“No, I’d say, it’s some people’s contact with select people. Where is the public in all this? Did you see Mr Nayar, Shahid Siddique or Kartar Singh make a contact with the masses? I didn’t! I didn’t even know they were here till I switched on the TV,” sparred a retired professor of history. Such comments should not hurt the peace process. If anything, they should be taken as a cue to bring it down to the level of the people.

It was back in September 1994 that 24 similarly aimed people from India and Pakistan set up a committee to form a Peoples’ Forum for Peace and Democracy. The same year the committee’s next meeting was held on November 25-26 in Delhi attended by the same people gathered earlier in Lahore to give definition to the Forum’s targets.

Promotion of peace and democracy in Pakistan with a strong emphasis on networking with parallel groups in India; identifying common disputes and causes between the two countries; exchange of delegations and utilizing mass communication as a means to strengthen better relations, were specifically spelt out in the Forum’s manifesto. From the time of its inception till now, the Forum has held five joint conventions, each one attended by nearly 300 delegates. Flashpoints of both the countries were exhaustibly discussed without building substantial pressure on either government to influence its policies. Arguably, this has been one of the Forum’s definite failings, raising the public discontentment with the people-to-people contact.

And even if that is swept aside to keep up the optimism in peace, which in any case is what we all want, the Forum has been a washout on more than one count. One of them is the constant characterization of Pakistan as a baddy versus the whiter than white India in Bollywood movies and TV serials. The fearsome ISI and the Kashimiri freedom fighters, or according to Bollywood screenplay, money motivated gun-toters are the latest in the Pakistan jibe and jab contest. Premiered worldwide, these silver screen productions pose a vicarious victory over an underhanded, welter weight nuclear, terrorism importing state.

The rancorous infested content of these movies has turned around the flagging careers of many producers and actors. The release of Gadar, starring the fading Sunny Deol, whose movies were failing to pack cinema halls, and Ms Amisha Patel, threatened by near oblivion after a one time hit-and-run success of Kaho Na Pyar Hai, became one of the most shining stars of the Bollywood constellation. There were others, which would only help in severely undermining the intentions of the Forum, and many more profiting on ‘keeping the past alive’.

Based on the roles accepted by Bollywood deities, many people in Pakistan carry an unequivocal belief that malice is the closest to a sentiment those living on that side of the subcontinent feel for them. These movies have such a hands down appeal to the masses that the people-to-people contact becomes no more than a cynical syntax.

On a bus ride to the Wagah, before catching the train back to Delhi, Mr Kuldip Nayar appeared surprised at the venom-spitting Bollywood movies. “Really? Are we producing such movies? I haven’t seen any of late. I know that Border was banned, but didn’t realize there were others.” Though Pakistan is not far behind this bash India contest, the Lollywood circuit of viewership is much restricted than one of the largest movie producing industry of the world.

“This is why I insist on cultural, intellectual and other exchanges. I’ve been asked several times in India whether Pakistan women wear a veil or not. They don’t even know that women work here. And similarly, I am asked by Pakistanis if the Jamia Mosque still exists in Delhi or has been demolished,” said Mr Nayar.

These attitudes are too serious to be set aside as absurdities. With the Internet’s accessibility to deliver information right on desk, how can the two countries remain screened to each other’s society? The problem is not a lack of contact. The problem is a deliberate attempt to remain out of contact. That is a fact on which the Forum should work. And the task can only be achieved if India adopts a less puerile approach towards Pakistan. People will connect if they see a connection on the top and a serious attempt to respect each other. “I don’t think there will be a change in attitude in my lifetime. The coming generation might see better ties. In all honesty, I am tired and disappointed in our relations. Despite that, the struggle must go on. I will keep on trying for that,” said a less than hopeful Mr Nayar.

The bus ride came to an end. The six Indian parliamentarians entered Indian territory amidst loud shouts of welcome. Though their achievement as peaceniks was nominal, the same could not be said of their reception. If nothing else can be shown on the achievement card, the two countries have at least agreed upon the common rules of reception.

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)