[Reader-list] Manto thinks..

[Lehar ..]

fyi..
---
qoute:
The partition of colonial India was accompanied by
some of the bloodiest religious rioting in recorded
history. And it is the ghosts from 1947 that continue
to scare off healthy relations in the present day,
post-Ayodhya and post-Gujarat. Why did the killings
take place and on such a scale? 

Explanations depend on which side one listens to.
Saadat Hasan Manto got it right when he wrote: “I
found it impossible to decide which of the two
countries was now my homeland - India or Pakistan. Who
was responsible for the blood that was being so
mercilessly shed every day? (Every) question had
different answers - the Indian answer, the Pakistani
answer, the British answer - but when you tried to
look for truth, they were no help India was free.
Pakistan was free. But man was slave in both countries
to prejudice, religious fanaticism, bestiality and
cruelty.” 

full article:

Open the window and let the sun in 
Khalid Hasan
Friday Times, 21 February, 2003
   
One LONGER DOES ANYONE SEEM TO HAVE time or patience
for the constant bickering between Pakistan and India
that drones on like a worn-out gramophone record,
needle stuck in the same groove. Fifty-three years,
three wars and a lot of ill will later one would think
that the two neighbours would be able to put aside
their differences and call truce not only for the
benefit of the billion-strong population of the
Subcontinent but the four billion others around the
globe. 

The fault for the sorry state of Subcontinental
affairs rests squarely with Pakistani and Indian
governments, past and present. Quaid-i-Azam, a man of
logic and cold reason, believed that once the
contentious issue of who would rule whom after the
British departed could be settled with the creation of
two independent states, it would foster peace and
goodwill between Muslims and Hindus. This did not
happen and Jinnah died of a broken heart. 

The partition of colonial India was accompanied by
some of the bloodiest religious rioting in recorded
history. And it is the ghosts from 1947 that continue
to scare off healthy relations in the present day,
post-Ayodhya and post-Gujarat. Why did the killings
take place and on such a scale? 

Explanations depend on which side one listens to.
Saadat Hasan Manto got it right when he wrote: “I
found it impossible to decide which of the two
countries was now my homeland - India or Pakistan. Who
was responsible for the blood that was being so
mercilessly shed every day? (Every) question had
different answers - the Indian answer, the Pakistani
answer, the British answer - but when you tried to
look for truth, they were no help India was free.
Pakistan was free. But man was slave in both countries
to prejudice, religious fanaticism, bestiality and
cruelty.” 

In Simla in 1972, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto said to Indira
Gandhi that the world was tired of “our quarrels”. How
long, he asked, were the two countries going to go
knocking at the doors of foreign chancelleries
complaining about each other? Mrs Gandhi, to her
credit, saw the point and despite tremendous pressure
from the opposition and her own party opted for a
negotiated peace. 

It is a great pity that the two countries moved not an
inch forward after putting their signatures down on
the Simla Accord. Simla met the same fate as the
earlier Tashkent Accord behind which the then powerful
Soviet Union had thrown all its authority. Another
missed opportunity was 1962. Those who argue Pakistan
should have taken advantage of India’s “helplessness”
and annexed Kashmir are wrong. Even if this had
happened the gains would have been short lived. 

One need only go to the Wagah-Atari border to witness
firsthand the hatred and ugliness that lie at the
heart of official Pakistan-India relations. The
end-of-the-day black opera that soldiers of both
countries stage while hundreds of civilians on either
side watch with the same fascination they would a nest
of cobras in full venomous fury puts out a clear
message: the hatred is mutual and deep seated. The
exaggerated gestures, overdone drill, flaunting of
weapons, thumping of jackboots, banging of gates,
arrogant lowering and folding of flags make one's skin
crawl. If His Heaviness wants to be taken seriously,
perhaps he should consider immediately banning the
ceremony on the Pakistan side. India will have no
option but to follow suit. 

And this brings me to the current expulsions of
Pakistani diplomats by India and Indian diplomats by
Pakistan. It is pathetic that things should have come
to a point where the two governments are unable to
even tolerate each other's diplomats who, everyone
knows, are like garden variety snakes, fearsome in
appearance but quite harmless. 

A former American diplomat of my acquaintance who has
served in the subcontinent for many years and speaks
the language told me on his return from Islamabad and
New Delhi a month ago that Indo-Pakistan relations
have never been worse. The Indian position remains
unchanged-unless Pakistan ends all cross-border
activity into Kashmir, there can be no talks. Pakistan
says it has done so when in reality it has not done
so. 

Not quite. With satellites going over our skies every
90 minutes, don't we realise that those to whom we lie
with a straight face have the capability of
photographing objects as small as four inches in
diameter from the stratosphere. India and Pakistan
must abandon the step-by-step approach they have
followed since 1947. It simply does not work. They
must also take the conduct of mutual relations out of
the hands of bureaucrats at their home ministries,
intelligence agencies and foreign offices. What we
need are quantum jumps that only politicians can
order. It is time for them to act. 

Here is His Heaviness’s chance to leave his imprint on
history by making friendship with India his only task.
He should draw inspiration from the late Prime
Minister Junejo who signed the Geneva peace accords
that ended the war in Afghanistan despite General
Zia-ul-Haq’s bitter opposition. As a first step, no
Indian should need a visa to come to Pakistan and no
Pakistani should need a visa to go to India. Were that
to happen, the basic chemistry of India-Pakistan
relations would undergo a change overnight. The people
of the two countries want friendship. Why are the
governments standing in their way? 
 


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
http://taxes.yahoo.com/