Tuesday, October 11, 2016

A Reality Check!

A REALITY CHECK

A 2-Pager by Ajit Chaudhuri – October 2016


What is statesmanship? Different dictionaries have different definitions, but none quite bring out the multiple flavours and nuances of this term. Comparing statesmanship with other constructs of leadership gives one a better perspective, (such as an article on the difference between Israeli Presidents Peres and Netanyahu[1]). Some wit, differentiating between statesmen and politicians, suggested that the former were like vegetables, ‘you don’t like them but they’re good for you’, and the latter ice cream, ‘yummy, I’ll worry about the stomach ache later’.


I was not around during my country’s formative years as an independent nation – my generation spent its late teens and twenties in the 1980s, a time bereft of anything resembling statesmanship. It was later, after extensive travel in the neighbourhood[2], that I came to the conclusion that I may not have seen it, but we definitely had it – many things that we take for granted (the ability to elect and change leaders, an army that is under civilian control, a secular and functional constitution, an independent judiciary, the existence of institutions such as an election commission and a comptroller and auditor general, et al) simply do not exist in other places – and we have much to be thankful to our (currently much maligned) early leaders for.


I am reminded of the term ‘statesmanship’ in the current climate of mass jingoism, chest beating, and clamour for war, where morons and provincial upstarts are masquerading as policy makers, and where an intellectually challenged leadership (across the political spectrum, may I add) are displaying their absence of vision in the manner of the flashers that hung around outside girls’ colleges in the 1980s.


Here is a reality check for you, my friends!


One: ‘You can fight history, but you can’t fight geography’ – Pakistan will always be your neighbour, and you will always share a long border. What sort of a relationship do you want, in the long term, and how do you propose to go about building it? Don’t forget that countries are unlike homes, where the neighbourhood bully can Haryana-style threaten and harass someone it doesn’t like into vacating and moving away.


Two: Nobody wins a nuclear war!


Three: You may not win a conventional war! Pakistan may be a mess, but its army is not – like us, it is a professional army that knows how to fight. Unlike us, its hardware, spares and ammunition come from a single and reliable source (we obtain these from 6-7 countries, most of them notoriously unreliable[3]). It is by no means a given that a conventional war will result in a quick and painless victory.


Four: You will not have international support! There may be widespread exasperation with Pakistan, but it would be foolish to assume unequivocal support for us if hostilities escalate[4]. And, don’t forget, they (unlike us) have an all-weather friend with veto powers in the UN’s Security Council.


Five: Do unto others as you would have others do unto you! Ninety percent of Pakistan’s fresh water comes from India, but threatening to abrogate treaties and divert rivers at the first sign of tension is remarkably short sighted (even by the current abysmal standards) given that three major Indian rivers originate in China.


Six: Goodbye, permanent membership of the Security Council! Our own narrative of ‘a jaw for a tooth’, etc. in the recent escalation of tension is at odds with others’ view that this is a silly fight (to quote The Economist, ‘the tenor of recent exchanges between the two countries is suggestive of playground conflict’[5]) but for the facts that we are lobbing live mortar rounds at each other, thousands of villagers along the LoC have been evacuated, and both countries are nuclear armed. We need to maintain a modicum of maturity to be taken seriously at the world’s stage.


Seven: Pakistan is an army with a country (and not the other way around)! The rational security calculus that emphasizes the primacy of national interest and a calibration of the costs and benefits of conflict, which would demonstrate the necessity of compromise with India (more so after having lost three wars to us), does not apply here. To them, ‘not winning, even repeatedly, is not the same as losing. Simply giving up and accepting status quo and India’s supremacy is, by definition, defeat’. And victory is ‘the ability to continue fighting, regardless of the consequences for the nation’s development, welfare, or international opinion’.[6]


Eight: You are losing Kashmir! The valley has been rocked by protests and curfews for the past four months, which seems fine with everybody except the average Joe on Kashmiri streets, the poor Johnnies at the receiving end of the protests, and me. I am deeply uncomfortable with what is happening there which, according to Kashmiri friends and colleagues, is the worst they have lived through. So what, our policy makers would say, screw them and screw you! So this – as per seven above, the Pakistani state will not give up its relationship with non-state terror groups as long as they, i.e. the terror groups, have operational utility. And they will have utility as long as we have a bad relationship with Kashmir[7]. So if you don’t want these buggers crossing the border and doing their stuff, sort out Kashmir. Nothing binds Pakistan’s deeply fractured polity and society more than protests in Kashmir. Not even Islam!


To conclude, my dear chest-beating leaders, distinguish between going to war without a strategy and fighting elections in Uttar Pradesh. Don’t let the imperatives of the latter take you down the former path. The cacophony of dumbass supporters may not be synonymous with national interest. Show a little bloody statesmanship!



[1] Ben-Meir, Alon, “Statesmanship vs. Demagoguery’, The Huffington Post issue of 29th September 2016, available at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alon-benmeir/statesmanship-versus-dema_b_12251224.html.
[2] With due modesty, I have visited and travelled in Afghanistan, Bhutan, China, Nepal and Sri Lanka.
[3] Prakash, Arun, “Look Before You Escalate”, Indian Express issue of 26th September 2016.
[4] Mehta, PB, “The Die is Cast’, Indian Express issue of 1st October 2016.
[5] “Reversing Roles”, The Economist issue of 8th October 2016.
[6] Fair, Christine, “Fighting to the End: The Pakistani Army’s Way of War”, Journal of Strategic Security, No. 4, Vol. 7, 2014, Oxford University Press, NY.
[7] Varshney, A, “Inside Outside”, Indian Express issue of 27th September 2016.

20 comments:

Ajit Chaudhuri said...

Absolutely brilliant again Ajit!

Dr. Amirullah Khan

Ajit Chaudhuri said...

I agree with you!

The leaders who fought for independence must be shuddering in their graves knowing the kind of choice the current citizens have made for their leaders, and the choices those leaders are making!!

Natasha Trivedi

Ajit Chaudhuri said...

This needed to be said. Please share your blog widely!

Suvajit Chattopadhyay

Ajit Chaudhuri said...

The article is really good - I was wondering who will speak against war and India's smug attitude on the surgical attacks. Agree with you, instead of statesmen, they are behaving like boys with toys!

Snehlata Nath

Ajit Chaudhuri said...

Thank you for writing this marvelous piece.

I was fortunate to travel to Lahore this March and experience the warmth and friendship of the Pakistani people. There is a lot our countries share, including awful Governments! As you said, there are no winners in any war and it is insane to think that there can be any military 'solution' to the conflict. The situation reminds me of the movie Wag the Dog. Very scary.

Dr. Nandita De Souza

Unknown said...

First of all my heartfelt condolences to you and your family.
In complete agreement with you Ajit...word by word and emotion to emotions!
The kind of jingoism being fueled by our current 'brave' political masters is going to take us in an era which will be even more dark. It will deepen the already fractured Indian society and I am shocked to see that spies (sharing your name) are being projected as the saviours of democracy in social media. The 'bhakt' army feels that speaking against the government policies is not being anti-country.
Congratulations on yet another brilliant piece Ajit.

Unknown said...

First of all my heartfelt condolences to you and your family.
In complete agreement with you Ajit...word by word and emotion to emotions!
The kind of jingoism being fueled by our current 'brave' political masters is going to take us in an era which will be even more dark. It will deepen the already fractured Indian society and I am shocked to see that spies (sharing your name) are being projected as the saviours of democracy in social media. The 'bhakt' army feels that speaking against the government policies is not being anti-country.
Congratulations on yet another brilliant piece Ajit.

Ajit Chaudhuri said...

Coming to your piece, well written, fairly convincing , people like me will be with you for most of it​.

My only concern is who do we consider as politician? Politicians are certainly not honest middle class bank Clark. They need to deal with many diverse interest simultaneously. So to be honest- what is defined as 'honest' by middle class is difficult ​or​ near impossible for a good politician to be. Many times by being honest you may face​​ harakiri, that no one wants.
It reminds me of our ex CM who in his advice to party juniors had shared a learning saying, it's of no use to run the government properly, until you ensure that people "feel" the government is running properly!! So giving public speeches to enhance people's confidence is a part of the game, sober persons like you should differentiate between such talks and implementation in reality. In every profession people do the same with varying degrees, in case of politicians it is hated in many other professions it is considered mature and professional handling of situation.​ I think middle class on the whole is unfair to Politicians.​

Many politicians after going to grave start appearing as Statesman​ to public​, unless they have their own historians during their life time itself!

You name the statesman of your choice and read what people wrote during his or her life time, when alive. A lot depends on what parameters one choose to determine so called statesmanship. For example​ if you use getting Nobel peace prize as a parameter for a Statesman working for peace then Kailash Satyarthi will prove t​o​ be​ a​ statesman ​and not Mahatma​ Gandhi.

​Your definition of a statesman actually goes closer to what we call "social reformers"​, politician is a person interested in maintaining balance of power in his / her favour, may it be within the faction, intra party, inter party so on and so forth, they act like clowns to ring masters in a circus of balance of power. It is very difficult to find out who is genuine and who is fraud, secondly both positions are seen dynamic for politician. Many are both simultaneously too. Both the apparent opposite behaviours are embodied in the same body! Most humans are like that. They are not as stupid and foolish as middle class loves to believe and express loudly on TV channels! More later.

Pravin Mahajan

Ajit Chaudhuri said...

The article is really good - I was wondering who will speak against war and India's smug attitude on the surgical attacks. Agree with you, instead of statesmen, they are behaving like boys with toys!

Snehalata Nath

Ajit Chaudhuri said...

Well said Ajit. This is a classic race to the bottom which only misplaced masculinity can curate. and of course, the "surgical strikes" dont seem to have done anything to the infiltration or the levels of militancy!

Cheers.
Shankar V

Ajit Chaudhuri said...

Well said!

Nandu Baig

Ajit Chaudhuri said...

Fully agree .... thanks for writing this

And if I can add an 8th point, something that has been really disturbing me, that 80+ people died at the hands on the Indian police in Kashmir in the last four months, and 100+ were blinded. Sixteen were killed by Pak infiltrators. What is the difference??? They were all citizens, human beings. For the latter we make an international hue and cry. And for the former? ( And what about those 6 or 7 people who were shot by Jharkhand police for protesting the acquisition of their lands? ... the list is outside Kashmir is long too.)

The stakes are so high this time, that Hindu Muslim will not work ... an India Pakistan has to be invoked!

Smita Agarwal

Ajit Chaudhuri said...

The timing of your two-pager is very appropriate. I miss people like you who can spend time to read, understand and discuss the issues.

What is disgusting is the so called 'graduates' working in good firms behaving like Bajrang Dal members and seeing the present PM as the god who has come to rescue India.

Here in the North, retired army officers are more in number and I happen to meet some of them in my apartment complex and university. I see them polluting the minds of others and supporting surgical strikes, war, appreciating the present government, etc.

Few days before the 'surgican strike', I was telling my colleagues about the possible Hindu-Muslim conflicts, problems across the border to gain seats in the upcoming UP elections. They were really surprised.

Sudarshan Naidu

Ajit Chaudhuri said...

I think its a well rounded analysis of various perspectives. Particularly like points 1,2,7,8 (though all of them make a whole lot of sense).

Vibha Chhabra

Ajit Chaudhuri said...

I wholeheartedly agree with your analysis. Sowing dragon's teeth to serve short term gains is a dangerously short sighted game. ( I wish the shouting brigade could all be given a months refresher course on the front lines so that they could get a reality check on life in the trenches ! )

We all take for granted what our founding fathers have already written into our constitution and conveniently belittle freedoms that millions of people in Asia and the world over aspire for and are yet to achieve as unimportant.

And despite all the constitutional guarantees we enjoy, we happily trample over the rights of so many others in various pockets of our country that we don't like/agree with.
Hard times ahead ? I sincerely hope not, and that my belief in the essential common sense in India will bring things back to even keel sooner rather than later.

Viveck Crishna

Ajit Chaudhuri said...

Read your article. Am glad to know that there are a few people out there who see the dangers of this war-mongering. And have cared to write about it in a well-thought and informed manner.

Mona K Dikshit

Ajit Chaudhuri said...

Enjoyed this piece, lining up the spades by their name. Looking forward to more..

Liby Johnson

Ajit Chaudhuri said...

For once we agree on almost all that you have written…
Its disgusting to hear all that is going on round us post Uri..

But yes, thanks for sharing…

Meenu Vadera

Ajit Chaudhuri said...

Couldn't agree more .Sharing with family and friends. Brave of you to write, but as you rightly said some one has to, and must say it.

Manisha Verma

Mist said...

Thought provoking as always. Enjoyed reading your piece, do write a rejoinder on the 'why's too sometime, pointers on why is Kashmir so important to Pakistan (you did touch on it briefly in the beginning) for instance. More power to your pen!

Sorry to hear about your loss, hope you are coping better now.