Pakistan, India ‘came close to N-war’

WASHINGTON: India and Pakistan came alarmingly close to a nuclear war during the Kargil crisis in the spring of 1999, says Eric Margolis, a Canadian journalist in an article that analyses the traditional rivalry between South Asia’s two nuclear-armed neighbors.

“As the two old foes battled fiercely in northern Kashmir above the strategic city of Kargil, over 1.5 million troops on both sides were ready to attack. Powerful Indian armoured “strike corps” were poised to strike into Pakistan and cut it in half. Unable to match India’s overwhelming conventional might, Pakistan prepared to defend itself with tactical nuclear weapons,” says Mr Margolis.

Fortunately, cooler heads prevailed and the Kargil confrontation abated, but not before a horrible scare, he adds.

Quoting Western defence experts, Mr Margolis says that a nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan would kill up to 2 million people outright, cause 100 million casualties, and pollute the entire globe with radioactive dust.

He points out Pakistan’s and India’s nuclear forces remain on hair-trigger alert even today as both nations fear a surprise, decapitating first strike by the other. Such a strike could destroy the nuclear forces and nuclear command units of the other.

“Flight times of India’s and Pakistan’s nuclear-armed ballistic missiles are only minutes. Neither side has adequate early warning systems against nuclear attack – or the time to consider a response when enemy missiles or aircraft are reported incoming.”

Mr Margolis observes that India’s ‘shaky’ nuclear command and control system further increases the risk of a nuclear conflict in the Subcontinent. Pakistan, he points out, is believed to have a “more reliable and highly professional” command and control system.

“False reports approaching enemy missiles or aircraft, or a missile test gone astray, could trigger a nuclear exchange. Even the most advanced early-warning systems can fail or give false readings,” Mr Margolis says.

“With these grim thoughts in mind, the just-concluded agreement between Delhi and Islamabad to exchange advance notice of missile tests is welcome and long overdue news. They also agreed to extend the cease-fire along the Line of Control that divides Kashmir,” notes the author.

But he also warns that Indians and Pakistanis just can’t seem to miss a chance to one up each other. Pakistan’s decision to test its first nuclear-capable, 500 km-range cruise missile, Babur without informing India, he says, is the latest example of how the two nations continue to play this game of one-upmanship.

Pakistan says that Babur was an air-breathing missile and thus a different class of weapon from ballistic missiles and that’s why it did believe it needed to warn India before the test. Mr Margolis calls it a ‘lame excuses,’ which displeased New Delhi.

“If anything, the terrain-hugging Babur, which is almost invisible to radar, poses even a greater threat to India of a surprise first strike than Pakistan’s 2,000 km- ranged Shaheen II ballistic missiles,” argues Mr Margolis.

He says that Babur’s advanced radar mapping technology and engine puts it in the class of western and Russian cruise missiles – and will undoubtedly produce a firestorm of protest from America’s right wingers and pro-Israel lobby.

“Development of the cruise missile is a significant achievement for Pakistani defence technology,” says the author, noting that now India also has announced that its 3,000 km-range Agni-III nuclear capable missile would be tested by year end.

—A.I.

The malaise of democracy

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s failure to develop a strong and sustainable democratic political culture is probably the major factor responsible for the inability to build democratically structured political parties and a viable society. Progress remains handicapped because of anachronistic feudal and tribal interests.

These could have been countered by a strong public opinion in favour of democracy if truly representative political parties had been able to function with proper constitutions and manifestos.

Unfortunately since the creation of Pakistan even the party Of independence, the All-India Muslim League which changed its name to the Pakistan Muslim League after partition, could not survive for long because of the feudal and tribal culture strongly the western wing. East Pakistan with a population of the poor and middle classes and few feudal or tribal interests escaped this social, cultural phenomenon. Of course, there were thriving landlords and money-lenders there also, but not of the kind that existed in West Pakistan. East Pakistan was the only province in Pakistan which was ruled by an elected Muslim League government and assembly without feudal/tribal influences. The absence of such influences even now in Bangladesh has enabled it to retain a democratic parliamentary political system as its culture even after suffering the 1970-71 upheaval.

In West Pakistan, which had at partition a weak League government only in the province of Sindh, the Muslim league just managed to form a squabbling government in Punjab, whose larger political share in governance and revenues of Pakistan because of its territory and population created conflicting interests in the organization of the party. It could never claim to be a party representing all of West Pakistan.

The formation of several splinter groups followed, all claiming to be the genuine League but in fact representing none else except again the same well-entrenched feudal interests and families of old or serving as the king’s party whenever martial law or authoritarian rule intervened. A successor party to the All-India Muslim League was never given serious attention. According to reports or rumours that were current then, the Quaid’s wish was to see Mohtarma Fatima Jinnah take over the party soon after he laid down his party office. This was ignored by power-hungry political merchants and adventurists. And what followed is before us now. The civilized and democratic manner of going to the polls to resolve political differences has disappeared.

What is now planned for the next three to eight years by the present administration under a political dispensation designed by the military is also before us. A dress rehearsal for the next parliamentary polls is due in the next few days in the shape of the local elections. The elections are formally meant to be non-party and campaigning or contesting on the basis of open affiliations is legally prohibited. But it is as clear as daylight that the local bodies are being contested with political support. Religious-political parties and several narrow-based groups are in the lead to exploit popular sentiments in their respective areas. The major opposition parties too have their panels, although they don’t seem to have a clear strategy. They have yet to decide as to whether they will contest under a broad understanding. Without such an understanding, those elements will be strengthened who are going to be seeking official patronage and support and will then entrench themselves at the grassroots level.

This situation can prove to be a great handicap for the opposition parties, particularly those whose leadership for one reason or another is forced to stay in exile. This may result in another enactment of the so-called Majlis-i-Shoora of the General Ziaul Haq era.

Remember that the Majlis-i-Shoora elected also on a non-party basis survived three long years till its creator Gen Zia died. His legacy created unstable conditions for the major parties who remained locked in petty rivalries and eventually were overtaken by another upheaval with the leadership of the two largest parties forced into exile. Any lessons they might have learnt from their disastrous two terms each during the 1990s are not yet visible.

Independence Day at the Koocha

KOOCHA-i-Saqafat last Sunday had a special significance. It was Pakistan Day. People, particularly women and children, thronged the Koocha and kept coming till late night. The evening air was cool and short episodes of showers made the weather even more pleasant. The stage set up for the presentation of music, song and dance items, including skits, was surrounded by a cheering crowed.

Under an illuminated tree, Fatima Hasan, poet and story writer, had set up a stall for the sale of her books. It was a pleasure to see her selling her volume of selected works, Yaad ki Bareshain, to noted prose writer and humorist Mushtaq Ahmad Yusufi.

The volume contains three of her works, Behtay huey Phool, Dastak sey Dar ka Fasala and Yaadain Bhi ab Khawab Hueen. The writer Lutfullah Khan, widely known for his extensive audio library, and his wife were also there. Fatima and her husband, Shaukat, proved good sales persons and sold many volumes. But the money went quickly as their children bought books of their own choice from nearby stalls.

This time it was felt that there were more book stalls than ever and children’s books were in greater demand.

THE night before, the poet Shahnaz Noor in her ringing voice was reciting her ghazal:

Mohabbat laey ab saughat koi
Badal dey soorat-i-halaat koi

Noor’s poetry collection Nishat-i-Hijr and her poetry were under discussion at a largely attended assembly of writers and poets at the Muslim Gymkhana. Prof Abdul Majeed Khan, principal of a college, was the host. Khalid Alig chaired the deliberations and was happy to note that Noor’s ghazal reflected as definite progression.

Sarwar Javed said she was a genuine poet. He criticized the trend among today’s young people to suddenly appear on the literary scene with poetry collection composed by a senior ‘ustad’ (master) and pose as poets. Javed stressed that this practice must be stopped.

Dr Huma Mir supported Javed’s comments, and said that the fault lay with those characterless ‘ustads’ who were polluting literature with absurdities.

At the outset Naukhez, a college teacher, read out a paper on the “kindly and generous” approach of Shahnaz Noor when she was deputed as a censor officer at the Press Information Department during Gen Zia’s martial law. She would go out of her way to favour journalists.

Poet Parvin Javed presented a quartet in memory of the Quaid-i-Azam and also a verse on the poetry and person of Noor.

The evening ended with Noor reciting her ghazals. Some verses:

Yeh kaisa etbar-i-zindagi hae
Din apna hae, na apni raat koi
Main bar-i-gham utha sakti hoon tanha
Merey shanay pay rakh day haath koi

ON August 11, writers and intellectuals at the YMCA remembered the historic address of Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah that he delivered on that day in 1947, proclaiming the equality of all citizens of Pakistan without any discrimination of religion, race, caste or creed.

The writers had gathered at a seminar organized by the YMCA’s literary committee which was followed by a multi-lingual mushaira chaired by well-known progressive writer and lawyer Abid Hasan Manto. Dr Jaafer Ahmed, Faisal Malik, Bishop Sadiq Danial, Mazher Jamil, Muslim Shamim and Najma Khan (secretary of the literary committee) were among the speakers.

Abid Manto emphasized the humanitarian message of the Quaid and suggested that the Aug 11 speech should be included as the preamble of the Constitution, replacing the Objectives Resolution, and it should be pasted on the walls of the Constituent Assembly.

Dr Jaafer Ahmed contended that the Quaid never wanted the division of a single Pakistani nation into a majority and a minority. In nation states all citizen were equals, and there did not exist any such division.

Thomas Gulfaam, Francis Joseph of Karvaan-i-Amn, Father Pascal Robert and also Pandit Ram Naath Maharaj, the latter representing the local Hindu community, addressed the audience. Sadiq Danial said that the Quaid’s speech was the basis on which all citizens could be engaged in building the country as equal citizens.