Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, May 2002, page 58

The Subcontinent

 

Killings in India Continue, and Pakistan’s Musharraf Readies for Referendum

By M.M. Ali

For perhaps only the second time since the horrendous riots of 1947 that ushered in Britain’s granting of independence to India and the creation of Pakistan, communal disturbances in India have lasted for over two months—and show no signs of abating. There is a major difference, however, between the two incidents separated by over half a century. Although larger in scale, the 1947 riots essentially were sporadic, erupting when one community reacted against the other. The current Gujarat killings, on the other hand, are state-managed, with even the police involved in the killing of Muslims. For the first time, the state machinery has been accused not only of failing to protect the country’s minorities but of encouraging the Hindu zealots who were torching Muslim neighborhoods in the state of Gujarat. Thousands of Muslims have been killed so far and tens of mosques have been razed to the ground in and around the state capital of Ahmedabad. Reports of carnage have come from other parts of India as well, including Hariana, Orissa and Uttar Pradesh.

Under the headline “Dance of Death,” the leading Saudi English-language daily Arab News on March 28 led with a story by its correspondent Siraj Wahab: “Without fear of contradiction, I can state that across the length and breadth of India, Muslims are living in fear not knowing which Hindu neighbor will betray them,” Wahab reported. “They have absolutely no faith in the police, the state government or the fascist BJP-led federal government.”

Wahab goes on to describe how Muslims with meager resources have been seeking refuge in ethnic neighborhoods, causing the ghettoization of Indian Muslims. Instead of providing security to Muslims, however, the process is likely to offer easier targets for the surrounding nationalist Hindu majority.

It has become a tradition in India that, whenever there is an easing of communal tension, Hindu extremist groups like the Banjrang Dal, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and the Rashtra Saweyam Sewak Sangh (RSS)—all coalition partners of the ruling BJP—foment new causes for fresh trouble. Indeed, the role of these organizations in the latest massacre of Muslims in Gujarat is beyond ordinary measure. A slaughtered cow (held sacred by Hindus) planted in a public place leads to attacks on Muslim neighborhoods; a wild pig driven inside a mosque brings out the wrath of Muslims. There have been hundreds of such incidents that have led to fierce violence between Hindus and Muslims.

 

The state has been accused of encouraging the Hindu zealots torching Muslim neighborhoods in Gujarat.

To top it all off, the government of Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee has now passed the highly controversial Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance (POTO), which essentially is directed against minorities and already is being used to jail Muslims without trial. Muslims in India find that they have become hostage to intermittent Hindu ire. No wonder New Delhi has never criticized Israel’s continued attacks on the Palestinians. It now is well known that Tel Aviv is equipping and training sensitive Indian law enforcement agencies.

On the other hand, except for Pakistan, hardly any other country has publicly condemned the continued killing of Muslims in India.

Aside from his country’s internal turmoil in India, Vajpayee continues to station Indian troops along the entire Pakistani border. Any miscalculation could trigger a major clash between the two countries. Although the U.S. reportedly has asked New Delhi and Islamabad to cool things down, there has been no change in the situation in the past three months. The two armies are poised for orders to move on each other.

Pakistan’s Political Timetable

In a major 90-minute speech broadcast to the nation April 5, Gen. Pervez Musharraf announced that a national referendum will be conducted on April 30 to ascertain the nation’s views as to whether he should continue to serve as Pakistan’s president for another five years beginning in October.

Musharraf’s announcement had been anticipated by everyone, with the only question being the date of the “referendum” and its parameters. After all, this was not the first time a military ruler had sought a vote to remain in office unopposed. Gen. Mohammed Ayub Khan had done so in the 1950s and Gen. Zia ul-Haq in the ‘70s—with each staying in power for over a decade.

In a rather detailed account of his regime’s achievements since October 1999, when he took power from Nawaz Sharif, Musharraf said: “We have turned the tide in Pakistan from a stage when the country was being described as ‘a failed state’ to a viable growing nation today.“

He reminded the nation, however, that while there is an upward trend in economic development, the country has still a long way to go. Urging Pakistanis to emerge from “idealism” and learn to live a “pragmatic” life, Musharraf specifically addressed those whom he described as “fence sitters,” calling on them to make up their minds and help in in the national rebuilding effort. He ruled out the possibility of allowing former Prime Ministers Sharif or Benazir Bhutto to re-enter Pakistani politics, saying, “They squandered national wealth. Enough is enough.”

Musharraf had been consulting with Pakistani politicians of virtually all shades in recent weeks. Some of them even publicly endorsed the need for the continuation of present policies, thereby supporting Musharraf for the next five years. These politicians apparently had reconciled to the idea of Musharraf continuing as president so long as elections are held for legislative assemblies—in which they would be eligible to run for office. These are scheduled for October. The unacceptable alternative would be the imposition of martial law and an end to prospects for the revival of democracy in Pakistan.

In his speech, Musharraf even provided a political blueprint of the shape of things to come, saying that constitutional changes would be initiated to harmonize relations among the president, prime minister and the army chief. He added, in no uncertain terms, that a National Security Council would be established to oversee the government’s smooth functioning. Perhaps he has the Turkish model in mind.

Prof. M.M. Ali is a consultant and specialist on South Asia based in the Washington, DC metropolitan area.

< Prev		Next >