Okay. Like a cricket writer would put it - "India dominated the first two sessions of an opening day of a Test match against Pakistan and then collapsed in the final one." I don't know if I could apply this analogy to the events in Sharm-al-Sheikh, when events leading upto this Summit were undone by a second, irreversible version of the original Himalayan blunder back in 1949. One look at that rather shabbily drafted joint-statement and even a proverbial rocket scientist will tell you that it stank of concessions of grave proportions by India - lowering our posture in this diplomatic "I-will-not-talk-to-you-until-you..." standoff. What should stir everyone concerned about that joint statement, is not the language i.e. English, but it's most notable word - one word - Balochistan.
And, that one word is not yet a Frankenstein that could one day eat up South Block's policies, but even it's mention in a paper, not a "legal document" as some would argue, has put a largely ignored region of Pakistan into the world map. Yes, it will be equally foolish if New Delhi perennially lived in denial about it's possible involvement there, given the Ministry of External Affairs so proposterously came out with a statement, condoling Nawab Bugti, a Balochi insurgency leader's death in August 2006. Logic would say, it wasn't something we should have done, but that was the first sign when India seemed to lose the plot, and its Baloch policy came out in the open. As expected, the diplomatic circles played it down, but there were signs that India was up to some activity there. Then, the opening of not one, not two, FOUR embassies along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, probably gave it away. Again, not something we did with superior wisdom.
But, Balochistan intrigues me, it always has. I remember watching this rather shabbily shot documentary in Doordarshan (2002) about what Balochistan means to Pakistan vis-a-vis natural resources and how it has been exploited, not given its due by the various governments there. Fair enough. I mean, it accounts for 48% of oil and gas supply to Pakistan, and all it got in return was a dummy Prime Minister in the form of Zafarullah Khan Jamali. Again, a policy of appeasement recognizing the inflammability of the region, thanks to an insurgency which began in 2004 under the leadership of Akbar Bugti. Okay, now this begs me to ask the question, why should India involve itself in a region we don't even have geographical access to ? Bangladesh was logical, but Balochistan ? The old argument would have been to defeat the concept of Pakistan, it's idea and it's foundation. The newer argument smacks of a tit-for-tat, nothing else. If India thinks it's involvement in Balochistan is going to stop Pakistan from fueling more 'jihadis' in Kashmir, it is a foolish argument - one backed ever so least by common sense. On the contrary, it could and probably has increased the already existing anti-India sentiments within Pakistan, and gives our neighbours that one weapon to pin India down in many an international summit. Everytime we justifiedly talk about terrorism, or Ajmal Kasab, Pakistan could make up an Indian Kasab and bring it to the table. When we demand proof from them, they'll make up dossiers, not quite intending to punish India but just implicate India for acts they might/might not be involved in. Something for the South Block to think over.
My question is does India need Balochistan as much as Balochistan needs India ? It's again not rocket science to know that insurgencies look for funds, logistical support and covert backing. Do we even need to have a Balochistan policy ? If we ever had or have one, it's time to take our hands off it. I don't think India will benefit a great deal by involving itself in Balochistan, except to satisfy it's big-elephantine ego of "Hey, if you do this to us, we'll do this to you". It's time we realize that we're achieving zilch by even mentioning that word. If interfering in some other country's affairs gives us immense pleasure, sure, there's a reason for us to be involved. Close those embassies in Afghanistan, no one goes there and people who don't have the money to sustain themselves won't surely visit India. It's a virtual giveaway, simple.
Enough said, I rest my case here. The gist of all this, if you have had the patience to read it - is as my friend on twitter @thecomicproject would say, jab ungli karne nahin aata hai, kyon karte hai hum log ? (If you don't know to meddle, why do we even do it ?)
