|
Title:
Conflict Unending -Pakistan Tensions since 1947
Author:
Sumit Ganguly
Publisher:
Columbia University Press, 2002
187
pp. $18.50 (paperback)
With
four wars, numerous military crises and the recent escalation of
nuclear power for India and Pakistan, many politicians and social
commentators in the West strongly side with the statement that the
South Asian subcontinent is "the most dangerous place on
earth." But a new book that examines the underlying genesis of
the interminable conflict challenges that notion.
Conflict
Unending: India-Pakistan Tensions since 1947 by Sumit Ganguly
offers a plethora of analysis and scrutiny that explains why India
and Pakistan have such a sour relationship and probably always will
be at odds. Ganguly's concise book goes where other analysts fail to
venture – beyond the recent nuclear hoopla to the roots of
deep-seeded suspicions and tensions since the time of partition.
While
the nuclear capabilities of India and Pakistani are a cause of great
alarm for the rest of the world, Ganguly argues in his book that
nuclear war is extremely unlikely because Indians and Pakistanis
understand its consequences – the "Nagasaki Taboo."
Ganguly,
an Asian Studies and Government professor at the University of
Texas, Austin, lays out a triple-reasoned explanation for the
ongoing conflict between India and Pakistan: 1) Contrary ideological
pledges of Indian and Pakistani national elites in each country's
anti-colonial movements; 2) "Irredentist/anti-irredentist
relationships" between the countries pertaining to Kashmir; and
3) Opportunistic battles fought by both sides to lay claim to
Kashmir or other issues.
While
many historians and politicians will first point fingers to obvious
religious differences that were the beginning point for the ongoing
tenuous relationship, Ganguly argues that it is but one factor, and
one that shaped each country's own tumultuous government rather than
pitting Muslim Pakistan against predominately Hindu India.
Ganguly
describes the first three wars, which focused on Kashmir and
Bangladesh, as gentlemen's battles where neither side was able to
declare an absolute victory because they had great background
knowledge of each other's tactics.
"How
did they know each other's plans?" Ganguly asked at a recent
discussion of his book at the Indocenter in Manhattan. "They
were virtually telepathic for one simple reason: [The Indian and
Pakistani generals and military leaders] had gone to the same
schools together.”
"They
had an extraordinary grasp of each other's military thinking and
could anticipate what the other side was going to do," Ganguly
added. Those early wars, though matched in passion with recent
conflicts, were much more humanitarian in scope than battles of
late,”
For
example, in the 1971 war between the two countries over Kashmir,
90,000 Pakistanis were captured as prisoners of war by India. All
were repatriated in 1972, with not one being tortured, according to
the book. "Quite remarkable given the passions of both
sides," Ganguly remarked.
However,
recent skirmishes – like the Kargil battle along the Line of
Control in Kashmir in April to June of 1999 – are not, and
probably never will be, gentlemanly in nature, Ganguly said. This is
largely due to the escalation of nuclear power, which culminated
with the testing of nuclear weapons by both countries in 1998, he
writes in the book. "We are in a completely new era,"
Ganguly said.
But
by no means is South Asia the most dangerous place in the world, he
stated. "As long as Indian and Pakistani officials are aware of
[the power and endgame of nuclear weapons], I sleep fairly well in
New Delhi or in Islamabad," Ganguly said. The bottom line is
that "you don't mess around with an adversary beyond a point,
because if you do it will be a detriment for both countries."
The
main focus of the conflict continues to be the disputed territory of
Kashmir. Ganguly painstakingly dissects the history of the conflict,
highlighting each geopolitical nuance that has manipulated the
conflict from its beginning. Ultimately he believes the issue of
Kashmir cannot be resolved without outside intervention from the
United States.
"Indian
and Pakistani governments can't even agree on the shape of the
universe, let alone who Kashmir belongs to," he said. But one
thing is for certain - neither country will stand for an independent
Kashmir. "They face the ‘Demonstration Effect’, Sindis
wanting a Sind-ustan state, Punjabis wanting a Punjab state and so
on," he noted.
While
Ganguly's book and statements at the Indocenter reflected upon his
vast knowledge of the Indian-Pakistani conflict, some things were
still left uncovered, like an examination of the fundamental
religious differences that are the underpinnings of the conflict.
But perhaps those differences are better left to a book dealing with
the partition of India and Pakistan itself.
As
for post-1947, Ganguly hits all the major marks of the conflict and
lucidly backs his theories up with carefully researched facts. He
also gives fairly equal space to exploring both Pakistan and India's
problems with Kashmir and other disputes. As Devin Hagerty writes in
Foreign Affairs, "Ganguly's work provides South Asianists with
an invaluable foundation from which to reinvigorate their efforts at
creating a stable and just sub-continental order."
|
