THE Mumbai massacre has jolted South Asian elites from their dream of being co-opted into a transnational club of the super-rich. Their icons of prosperity and affluence are built on the slum-heaps of the underclass that in desperation often falls prey to the nefarious designs of unspecified non-state actors, if not to direct recruitment by RAW, ISI, CIA or Mossad.

The environment in which these gullible victims live makes them insensitive to the value of human life and lures them towards criminal mafias that play on their religious sentiments and sense of deprivation. It is a pity that the elites are awakened only when their opulent lifestyles are attacked. Even then they start looking for scapegoats instead of solutions.

The understandable outrage engendered by the Mumbai massacre and the siege of two iconic hotels among other important locations in south Mumbai including the city's central railway station (which received much less media attention), was transformed by the Indian media into a hate campaign against Pakistan. Meanwhile, the Pakistani media was busy finding holes in the Indian government's knee-jerk finger-pointing and in spinning conspiracy theories about the involvement of home-grown elements with a culpable link to acts of terror including the Samjhota Express blast. There was little effort on either side to restrain inflamed passions and analyse the situation in the broader context of the history of the Indo-Pakistan relationship.

While the opinion-makers of the two nations are busy finding the 'real culprits' of the Mumbai massacre in each other's political backyards, the real villain of the piece is the development paradigm that both have adopted which caters largely to the elites and pays miniscule attention to the problems of the poor. In Pakistan, economic development has been most uneven and unbalanced, as a result of a flawed political evolution, with the army ruling, directly or indirectly, for practically the whole of its existence.

The dependence on foreign aid, largely the result of its close military alliance with the US since 1954 and renewed after its involvement in the two Afghan wars, has made Pakistan's economy, unlike that of India, incapable of facing domestic and external shocks. Neither country has paid adequate attention to lifting the poor from their existence as sub-humans. The elites are more interested in achieving goals which hardly benefit the poor. Thus, while the Indian elites are keen to see India emerge as a superpower, those in Pakistan are focused on the country graduating into the middle-income category of nations. Neither of these ambitions is likely to be achieved, if at all, without any significant benefit, though with considerable cost, to the poor.

In India, the influence of a functioning democracy, as well as that of its more enlightened leadership — at least in the formative years — did moderate the excesses of its unequal development and the subjugation of its underclass. Something like this began to occur in Pakistan after the emergence of populist politics under the aegis of Z.A. Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party in 1970, only to be aborted by Gen Zia's military coup and later by that of Gen Musharraf.

While both states have promoted a climate of hate and apprehension against each other, the Indian state has done so largely for tactical reasons, such as in the case of the Babri mosque desecration and the Gujarat genocide; the Pakistani state has used it for strategic purposes, such as in the cases of the Kashmir and Bangladesh (and, indirectly, the Afghan) conflicts. Both have used the religious card to foster their own brands of nationalism.

Rather than flaunt the Mumbai massacre as India's 9/11, it is time for India to use it as an opportunity to negotiate a durable peace with its neighbour and to attempt, jointly with Pakistan, to mend the damage done to the polity and economy of the two nations in the haste of partition.

The fact that the people of both countries — despite the efforts of a jingoist minority — have become convinced of the futility of periodic wars and conflicts should give democratically elected governments in India and Pakistan the courage to proceed well beyond the present state of stalemate in their relationship. The success of secular elements in the Indian state elections held at the height of the storm created by the Mumbai massacre testifies to the maturity and understanding of the common people. Similarly, the tough action taken by the Pakistani authorities — albeit under external pressure and with apparently less than the wholehearted endorsement of the military — against extremist elements is unlikely to provoke strong adverse public reaction.

Unfortunately, both countries are trying to reach a solution through third parties — especially the United States — rather than through bilateral negotiations. Pakistan continues to be a faithful ally in the US war on terror mainly because of its dependence on US aid, which Pakistan's elite and the military has become addicted to. India, backed by its business and technocratic elite, had also been seeking a closer relationship with the US in quest of its ambitions to become a superpower and in order to seal the nuclear deal. New Delhi's reported offer to send troops to Afghanistan to fight terrorism can only produce a backlash from fundamentalists and hinder the process of reconciliation with Pakistan.

Mumbai could become a defining moment in the relationship of the two nations and for the future of South Asia as a whole, if instead of engaging in petty politics, the two countries looked at the larger picture and realised that peace and prosperity are indivisible. Neither India nor Pakistan, neither the elites nor the common people, will benefit from living in gated nuclear-armed neighbourhoods. The zero sum game of violence and exclusion needs to be converted into a large positive sum game in which South Asians can live in mutual trust and shared affluence and well-being.

For this, the ball is firmly in the court of India and Pakistan, who have jointly managed to stall the South Asian locomotive by pulling it in opposite directions. India must realise that its own aspirations will not be fulfilled with discontent and disaffection among its neighbours. Equally, Pakistan has to exert serious and sustained efforts to shed the stigma of a failed or rogue state and to cleanse its dysfunctional institutions at all levels. The peace process needs not only to be resumed but taken to a higher level in order to make a significant impact on the lives of the South Asian people as a whole and not only their elites.

syed.naseem@aya.yale.edu