Right, Wrong and Correct

Before the deluge of budget news yesterday, all eyes were on the meeting of foreign secretaries of India and Pakistan. Our nation has a certain view and position on issues ranging from the arrest of 26/11 perpetrators to what is the best and lasting solution to the Kashmir problem. It must have been plenty obvious by now that Pakistan doesn't see things the same way as we do. So to expect that Pakistan will be overawed by our gesture to talk and will change its views overnight is sheer insanity. If our ability to persuade was so magical, and if Pakistan was willing to objectively approach matters, then the impasse would have been resolved long ago. As the editor of The Dawn pointed out on Newshour, we are sitting on the opposite sides of the table, for God's sake!

It is now too late to sit in judgement and say who's right and who's wrong. 50 years back maybe that was an option, but not anymore. To even make an attempt to try and get Pak to see our side of the story is a waste of time and resources. The only way forward is to acknowledge the current situation and evaluate options as alternatives to status quo and not the originally stated positions of the two countries. Agreeing to LoC as the international border must not be evaluated against whether Kashmir rightfully belonged to us or Pakistan; rather, it should be compared to the constant firing that currently takes place, and will continue if no resolution is reached. Some concessions have to be made by both sides.

Today's HT has a piece by Gopalkrishna Gandhi on Prez K R Narayanan, who once asked the Mahatma that the struggle often faced by humans is not so much to choose between the right and the wrong, the truth and the untruth, but rather to choose between one right and another right, and one truth and another truth. Apparently, he did not receive a direct answer, even from the Mahatma. It is easy to distinguish the right from the wrong, but the right option is not always the correct one.

Domestic Terrorism

The recent shooting rampage in Texas by an army psychiatrist has complicated matters for the US. It was a simple open and shut case if the gunman was a Hispanic, European or a South East Asian. But he turned out to be a Muslim. Even then, had he refrained from taking the name of Allah, as some reports suggest, the matter could be conveniently sidelined. But the combination of these two facts poses a question that cannot be avoided: Was the Texas firing an act of terrorism? Apparently, there is now evidence that the gunman was in contact with an individual sympathetic to Al Qaeda. That may not mean much, but it is hard to ignore that the US Army, supposedly the mightiest in the world, has just been shown to be vulnerable.

Now this is precisely the problem India has faced since Independence. A small minority of our population has perpetrated terror attacks on our soil. Inevitably, they owe allegiance to Pakistan and happen to be Muslims. To separate the criminals from the innocent majority is no mean feat, and we have failed horribly. And as support, the US has offered nothing more than platitudes such as India being an important ally in the war against terror. The US had no idea how difficult it is to tackle domestic terrorism. Until now.

When you are attacked by foreign forces, the enemy is clear (not necessarily easy) and you can kindle the spirit of unity and patriotism and get into a war. But when attacked internally, you dont know who the enemy is. Where do you start?

It will be interesting to see what the US does now. I doubt if they will let this pass as a one-off incident. But then there is no way the US can create two classes of citizens based on religion - that will be a slap on the face of American values. Neither can it afford to assume that all US citizens are beyond doubt. The current case of David Headley is an example. Even pulling up Asians for additional security checks post-9/11 caused a huge backlash against "racial profiling".

One thing is certain. Whatever measures are adopted, we wont know the complete details. The American intelligence agencies are good at these things.