"India cannot prosper in spite of Pakistan, and Pakistan can prosper because of India."
The following is a letter I wrote to Dr. Farrukh at the "Strategic Foresight Group." I will await his response. Meanwhile, your comments are invited.
Hello Dr. Farrukh,
I like your posting, "The Cost of Indo-Pak conflict"
on
http://www.strategicforesight.com/sfgnews_74.htm
Clearly, you are a proponent of peace and sanity, and a defender of the Pakistani point of view. I hope that if I differ with you on the latter, that you'd not discount my devotion to the first (to peace and sanity.)
The core thesis I want to run by you is: "India cannot prosper inspite of Pakistan, and Pakistan can prosper because of India."
To expand on the statement above, there is no way India can be a flourishing democracy without being a growth-economy. To grow, India needs foreign investment, for which it needs security, which it cannot have if the current relations with Pakistan continue. I hope my words don't sound critical of Pakistan-- it is great country, and a greater nation, though a suffering state. But Pakistan has the potential to hold India back.
Equally, India has the potential to help Pakistan grow-- India, with it's mercantile success, experience with democracy and liberalism (I would unhesitatingly accept all specific criticisms of Hindu fundamentals,) and progress on property rights -- can help Pakistan build a stronger economy, fashion stronger institutions, reverse the politicization of the military, and reduce the exhausting spending on defence.
I think the realization (that Pakistan can hold India back) is stronger in the subcontinent, than is the realization that India can help Pakistan grow. The first has built a jaundiced Indian foreign policy, and a militant Pakistani approach. A realization of the second can help reverse the venom of the first.
The flowering of culture and arts that attended the first contact of Islam with India is indicative of the synergy of Islams virility with India's fecundity. In no other country have Muslims created such vast and fabulous empires, contributed so much to arts, learning, and defence.
Where, given today's rancor, do Indians begin to solve the current problem? What do we need to do to fight the impression that Pakistan has succumbed to militancy? Can India do anything to strengthen progressives within Pakistan and weaken the irridentists? Finally, I have long believed that India should recognize the LOC in Kashmir as an international border, and the two countries should move on beyond that dispute-- your thoughts?
In the interest of full disclosure, I am a Hindu, the son of a military officer, grandson of a Gandhian, and now a resident of US, working for a multinational. If you see my antecedents burdened with agenda's inimical to the interests of Pakistan, please know that if nothing, I will be honest with you.
Sphere: Related Content
Friday, December 26, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
Hmmm...Interesting point of view. Although, a few pages from history may lead to a different thought process.
I will focus on the the contention that because of the insecurity created by the Pakistan posturing, investments (esp. foreign) are not going to come in and that will prevent India from growing. This may not be entirely true, as the USA attracted huge foreign investments even during the height of the cold war. So, India may be able to move ahead inspite of Pakistan.
I think that Pakistan needs a 'national identity' other than the Kashmir issue to define it and to help a population heal itself of hatred and move towards progress. This is easier said than done.
The recent polls in Jammu and Kashmir saw a large turnout inspite of the ususal boycott calls and even the most hardline and separatist leaders are calling for a re-think on the situation.
This is my point of view. And like all others that I hold, it has come into my head through divine inspiration
:)
Rikiya
Rikiya,
Could the foreign response depend on the level of threat? If we construct a "civil threat scale" of five levels,
1. Worst, Like SOMALIA (uncontrolled free agents)
2. Very Bad, Like within Pakistan (quasi govt controlled free agents)
3. Bad, Like in Russia (govt controlled agents)
4. Worrysome, Like in Latin America (Agents controlled by local and foreign governments)
5. Concerning, Like in Turkey or India (Foreign supported agents, some local free agents)
... then maybe we see that while the trajectory to SOMALIA is a long one, and that particular denouement unlikely, the creation of a Mexico city like environment may not be more than a decade away. Not all FDI is in capital assets, and non-capex will probably continue till we become a Somalia. However, my concern is, if the monopoly on the use of force is not limited to a liberal Central Government, then FDI of longterm value may be deterred.
This idea was inspired by your comment, and is 4/5 on a devine-scale :)
Post a Comment