Frontier Post (9/5/99)
Indian dream of dominating S. Asia
Col (R) Masood Anwar
Indian designs to dominate South Asia has remained a matter of serious concern for us particularly
after India managed to dismember Pakistan in 1971 and later in 1974 by joining the nuclear arms race,
her quest for assuming leadership over South Asia was confirmed. Subsequently the Iranian revolution
in 1979, the demise of the Soviet Union and China's ascendancy into superpower category shifted the
focus of the western powers towards India. India was confirmed as the potential South Asia regional
power, capable of:
a. Containing China's influence
b. Maintaining peace and stability in the region.
c. Developing the region into a stable consumer market
d. Neutralising socio-cultural influence of Islam by promoting the Indian culture and traditions through the
oddness, novelty and fascination in myths and mysticism wherefrom the Indian culture takes its origin.
The Indian quest to dominate South Asia is gaining momentum. The agenda is being pursued with
increased commitment particularly after the BJP entered the corridors of power. The Kargil crisis has
further underlined opportunities for India and the western powers to implement this agenda in the letter
and spirit. Before discussing the Indian approach of constituting its dominance over the region, it will be
worthwhile explaining the historical perspective of dominance.
Dominance was symbolised with military supremacy earlier prior to the establishment of the
nation-state and the practice of democratic principles of governance. After the military achieved
complete supremacy, no further steps to consolidate dominance with methods modelled in economics
and socio-cultural agenda were considered necessary. Dominance was effective so long as military
supremacy was maintained. Sooner military supremacy was lost, even the residual effect of dominance
vanished. European colonisation of Asia, Africa, America, Australia in the early 19th century provides
good example of dominance. The effects of the European dominance even now are visible. Legacies
too continue to be followed. By this account, three factors characterise dominance: (a) economics, (b)
socio-cultural factor and (c) political factor. Military power, in my view, is critical but it does not
characterise dominance. Essentially it is an instrument vitally needs to establish progressive
dominance.
Another aspect of dominance is that dominance does not remain limited. Economic dominance
invariably leads to socio-cultural dominance and then to political interference in political systems and
governance. British East India Company and British Trading Company in South Africa are typical
examples. Trading eventually paved the way for British rule in Asia and Africa. That was also how other
European nations established their rules in countries around the world. In the light of the historical
perspective of dominance, we have to examine the Indian approach to establishing dominance over
South Asia and also examine her limitation and strength in this regard.
Indian Approach
The Indian approach is modelled in 'exploitation' of weaknesses and 'capitalisation' of follies. India uses
her cultural strength to dig out such opportunities. She uses the military power to provoke the opposite
party into retaliation. Thereafter diplomacy accompanied with the military power damages the position
of the opposite party.
Limitations
A) So far India has not achieved consistency in ideology and thinking of its people. Diversity in
languages, religious beliefs, dress, habits, traditions, etc, exists
B) Cultures are expressly different. There is no common source wherefrom cultures take their birth
unlike the Muslim culture whose common source is Islam. Indian cultures are based on habits, myths
and mystic beliefs of the people of different communities.
C) Religions have kept the Indian society divided into communities. Hinduism, the majority religion, has
shown uneasiness towards other religious beliefs. Intolerance even within its own belief is a known fact.
Over the years Buddhists, Jains, Christians have been reduced to small minorities. Where it has not
succeeded is in limiting the influence of Islam in India nor it has succeeded in influencing the Muslim
way of life.
Strength
The Indian strength lies in the richness of her culture. Indian culture is rich in appeal. It is bewitching
because of curiosity maintained in mythologies, and mystic beliefs. Humility and modesty artfully
fashioned makes the culture more attractive. Absence of controversies in social and spiritual values
brings clarity in perceptions. Indian strength, therefore, is in value-judgement and value-attitudes, which
share more similarities than suffer controversies.
Our strength, limitations and approach
Dominance among human beings cannot be halted. It could be resisted through economic measure
and through the strength of culture and social values. The other way is to fight against it with the military
force. In view of the fact that Indian design to dominate South Asian region is a fact in existence for
reasons mentioned above, it puts greater responsibility on our shoulders as the second largest country
in this region to exercise greater ingenuity to keep the influence of the Indian dominance well within
control. Following points needs attention in this regard.
A) Pakistan should avoid falling in the trap of initiating a hot war or over-reacting to provocation. Over
reactions from our side would facilitate India to keep check over her internal insecurities.
B) We should counter Indian cultural invasion not by shying away but by countering mythical beliefs with
pure human values presented with attraction, beauty and spiritual grace.
C) We should counter Indian diplomacy through good listening techniques accompanied with cool body
language. Indian diplomacy works through silence and is highly experienced in capitalising situations.
Indian diplomacy focuses more on words than statements, therefore it works more through persons than
personalities.
D) A noticeable weakness in us, Pakistanis, is that we are much obsessed with the phenomenon of
physical dominance __ we are less tolerate toward any form of outside influence. Our conviction that the
Muslims are a superior class of human beings by virtue of enlightened religious beliefs makes us
socially arrogant. Publicised and promotional humility is taken as a mark of weakness. Numerous
examples on this account can be quoted from everyday life. This determines the opposing views of the
Muslims and the Hindus towards respective social outlook in general. We have therefore to make
conscious effort of avoiding over-reaction to situations created by India on purpose or otherwise.
E) A fundamental difference in the outlook of the Muslims and the Hindus exist. A Muslim relies a great
deal, even for routine performance in daily life, on spiritual inspiration. He believes in the divine
philosophy of "Dua" but through excessive ceremonial exhibition, he tends to ruin the spiritual character
of "Dua". His passion for spiritual inspiration makes him more individualistic and a lone-seeker. The
significance of earth as the source of living and fellow human beings as a corporeal source of
inspiration is not given due importance by him. Hindus are different. They pay a great deal of respect to
mother earth. They respect and fully exploit the material sources of living within the earth. They draw
inspiration from fellow human beings and value their material abundance and affluence. The outlook of
the two communities is quite apart. Muslims, are fatalistic, spiritual beliefs provide strength and
perseverance to their character. They are able to take risks, endangering their lives even. Emotions and
passions guide their life-styles. Hindus are more pragmatic. Materialistic inclinations make them good
readers of the human nature. They are, therefore, able to make excellent use of the human potential as
well as they are skillful in manipulating human weaknesses.
Idiosyncracies develop the social psyche of the people. Behaviours and attitude later take lead from the
essential nature of the society developed over years of social practice of habits and mannerism.
Proposal and reactions to given situations too are guided by the essential nature of the society in the
collective mode and by attitudes of individuals in the individual mode. However, the alarming aspects of
the essential nature of our society is its noticeable driftaway from the realities of life. The responsibility
of failing to tackle real issues of life is left to the work of the destiny. Thereafter whatsoever the outcome
it is endured as the divine working upon which human control does not exist. It is also believed that
fatalistic beliefs and spiritual repossession only could ensure destiny to work in our favour and to our
advantage.
Strangely, God has arranged the Muslims and the Hindus to live together and associate in sharing
material wealth. Even to share relationships, sentiments and emotions. There is much in common
between them, yet there is as much divergence in views and outlook. To the Muslims material wealth is
a means to achieving higher objectives; to the Hindus, on the contrary, materialism is a way of life.
Globalisation is trying to bring us close, to live in peace, to tolerate each other's views, to respect each
other's sentiments, to understand and accommodate each other's essential nature. For that a common
ground has to be prepared, a working formula has to be evolved. We cannot afford, therefore, to either
leave everything to destiny or behave entirely realist as to lose the rationale for association where
sentiments, emotions and essential nature play important role. |
