#dnaEdit: War and peace

The announcement of Nobel Peace prize for India and Pakistan child rights activists, 60-year-old Kailash Satyarthi and 17-year-old Malala Yousafzai, comes at an embarrassing moment for the two countries due to the continuous exchange of fire across the international border and also because the two countries do not much care for the two individuals named for the prize. The Peace prize, which has always been political and controversial, is not going to soothe nerves. Satyarthi is not an iconic figure in India unlike Yousafzai, who has been pushed into the limelight, deservedly so, by the Western media. She is not quite a favourite either with the Pakistan government, media or the people at large.  It will, however, be difficult to ignore the irony of the fact that international recognition comes at a time when the equations between the two governments are not really at their best. The committee at Oslo has committed the cardinal European sin of identifying Satyarthi, a Hindu, as representing India, and Yousafzai as representing Muslim Pakistan. It said, “The Nobel Committee regards it as an important point for a Hindu and a Muslim, an Indian and a Pakistani, to join in a common struggle for education and against extremism.” India would not relish the description.

Whether anyone likes it or not, the famous world prize to its citizen-activists comes at a time when Indian and Pakistani forces have been exchanging fire across the international border and the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir for over a week this month. Till Thursday, the heat was turned on with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and defence minister Arun Jaitley warning Pakistan against indulging in adventurism. Pakistan defence minister Khawaja Asif talked of  a “befitting reply”. Thursday, however, seemed to have witnessed de-escalation, according to reports from the front. 

Interestingly, Pakistan news reports said that Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif had chaired a national security meeting, and the greater part of it was devoted to the army’s success in clearing North Waziristan of terrorists. Sharif had visited the area on Wednesday, met with the officers and soldiers engaged in the operations and congratulated them. It has also been noted that Sharif’s visit is the first by a Pakistani PM to the region. It would appear that the Pakistan government is keen to show that its priority is its engagement with terrorists at home. But the intense exchange of fire which has resulted in the death of civilians on both sides of the border could not have been the work of the local commanders. The fact that United Nations’ secretary general Ban Ki-moon advised that the two countries should solve problems through talks, and the suggestion of US Senator Timothy M Kaine, who is also chairman of the Senate subcommittee on south and central Asia, that UN’s participation could be helpful, point to a certain attempt to bring back an international arbitrator into India-Pakistan relations. This has been completely excluded in the 1972 Shimla Agreement, which laid down that all problems between the two countries, including Kashmir, will be resolved through bilateral talks. 

The exchange of fire across the border might not be an unintended act that it is made out to be. Pakistan appears to revive the Kashmir question through all indirect ways that it can think of. It will have to give up its obsession over Kashmir if it is keen on peaceful ties with India, and if it desires greater economic cooperation with its neighbour.