The bleating markhor

 

The bleating markhor by ChatGPT

"States do not fail overnight. They bleed from within, long before they crumble." Paraphrased from Ashraf Ghani's insights on failing states.

While Ashraf Ghani's prophetic words are now evident in Pakistan's situation. Let this be an honest effort to understand the situation in Pakistan. Why is it that Pakistan lies to its people, and they readily accept these lies? While it has much to do with history, there is a lot that we need to understand. Right from its conception, Pakistan has been under an illusion, perpetually grappling with an identity crisis. The core of the identity question for Pakistanis was 'We are not India.' Without clearly defining what they are, they merely created an alternate identity: 'that which is not India'. This exclusionary definition of existence, as history shows in other nations, rarely works. It fails unless there's a clear, absolute criterion based on various parameters; otherwise, it fosters the exclusion of diverse individuals, potentially leading to genocidal tendencies within the populace.

Historic genesis of the identity issues

The issue has haunted the nation since its inception, stemming from the very seed of the two-nation theory in 1947. However, it was solidified by the national Muslim identity reinforced by Zia-ul-Haq's dictatorial government. K. K. Aziz, in his book "The Murder of History," explains this phenomenon most logically. The nation's quest to find a new identity has been a profound struggle, leading it to lie to its citizens merely to establish its relevance in the world. When they claim this land belongs to them and initiate investigations, they uncover the remains of the great city of Mohenjo-Daro. This further confuses the identity question, as they trace their lineage from the invaders of India. This frustrates the nation builders even further. Nonetheless, Pakistan's intelligentsia has long stated that the nation has had 'daddy issues' (a euphemism often used in the context of the question of identity). The dictator only aggravated the situation. Furthermore, this question was answered differently with each new ruler. The intelligentsia began questioning the basis of the Two-Nation Theory, and in desperation to make a point, it became crucial for the leaders to impose this idea of two nations, with violence, to justify their existence.

The quest intensified, and the question was answered aggressively each time it arose. Immediately after the nation's formation, in 1947, it attacked Kashmir to annex it by force. The premise of the war was clear: since Kashmir had a Muslim majority, it belonged to Pakistan. Later, the question was again raised: why do we need a divided Pakistan when Muslims of India also live peacefully? The answer to that question was given in the 1965 war in the form of Operation Gibraltar, which asserted that Kashmir belonged to it because of its majority Muslim population. For this, a silent operation was planned to distance the population and then create an uprising. A similar question was raised by Bengalis of the erstwhile East Pakistan. The question was slightly different this time: though they had wanted Pakistan and voted for it, this time they asked, 'What is our identity? '' The answer then was that they are Pakistanis, and to prove this, they needed to accept Urdu as their lingua franca. It was the result of the exclusionary definition embedded in the nation's identity from its inception. This led to widespread dissent among the Bengalis, and the rest, as is well-known, is history and a damn well-recorded one. The war of 1971 has always reminded us of the image of Lt. Gen. A.A.K. Niazi signing the instrument of surrender, which led to the surrender of 93,000 Pakistani soldiers in Dhaka. While there was an attempt to answer that question of identity in blood, it failed yet again.

Soon, the markhor understood that any attempt to formally invade India would be in vain, as it is very capable of protecting itself. This led to the second wave of seeking an answer to the question, 'Who are we? ' This time, an attempt was made to find an answer within the nation itself. This led to the exclusion of sections of Muslims, such as the Ahmadiyya community. This was largely due to Zia-ul-Haq, who refused to grant any rights to this minority faction of Muslims. Despite being an Islamic nation, the very people who fought vehemently for its creation were not considered pious within the nation they helped establish.

The question has further kept the nation sleepless for many nights, intensifying the question of identity after Zia's actions. People were forced to ponder why Muslims were not safe in a country they had sought for safety. A fault line appeared between various sections of society, exacerbated when Sharia was implemented by Zia. Shia vs. Sunni, Ahmadiyya persecution, and then the infamous Muhajirs were also assaulted. The exclusionary definition also negatively impacted minorities; the Sikh, Hindu, and Christian populations of the nation were already distressed and were further harassed after clear exclusionary definitions were introduced. While society grappled with this definition, socio-ethnic fault lines also began to appear for various reasons, ranging from discontent due to autonomy and ethnic violence against them, to the usurpation of power by the Punjabi Muslim community. Later on, political fault lines also emerged in the form of the "Pashtun Tahafuz Movement," the "Muttahida Quami Movement (MQM)," etc. The core of the issue boils down to the single question of identity. These fault lines were always present, but from time to time, the state—or 'the establishment,' as they call it—chose to answer the question in the most brutal way, which acted as fuel to the burning fire and further divided the country along various lines.

On May 28, 1998, Pakistan conducted 5 nuclear tests. After this, the answer to the question became even more unclear. The bomb was supposed to "unify" the nation it but it achieved the opposite of its intended purpose. Like the government of Pakistan, it had only one job, which it failed to achieve. These growing concerns and the relentless, haunting question led Pakistan to launch the "bleed India with 1000 cuts" strategy. This initiated the influx of sleeper cells and terrorist infiltrators into India. This was the first time Pakistan felt a sense of winning against India through plausibly deniable operations. It was a win-win for them: India couldn't directly blame them and had to engage with them, thereby making the nation's political and military establishments extremely relevant. That's why it became frustrating for them when the Indian leadership (Modi government) stopped engaging with them.

The bleating starts

After the state became a nuclear power (attributing this to A. Q. Khan, who stole the designs and machines) in 1998, they began to bleat relentlessly, with the repetitive declaration, "we are a nuclear state". The state heavily utilized nuclear rhetoric whenever India retaliated in any form. The world had to heed these warnings, knowing Pakistan was a state unconcerned with potential damage, willing to take drastic steps. Its sole purpose was to bleed India, and it would go to any length to achieve this. Hence, the world community always tried to avoid such a situation; the bleating continued for more than three decades. Every time Pakistan undertook action through its non-state actors, utilizing terrorist links like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM), Hizbul Mujahideen, and now, "The Resistance Front". Though the bleating has continued, its tone has changed from time to time. Here is a very brief timeline of how it sounded:

●       1998-2001: Confident but needy

●       2001-2011: Duplicitous yet demanding

●       2011-2020: Defensive and exposed

●       2020-2025: Desperate and chaotic

Throughout this timeline, it has always maintained an innocent facade while committing nefarious acts under the guise of nuclear weapons. The bleating continued, and the world, even holding the proverbial knife (economic aid and sanctions) capable of severing the bleating markhor's jugular vein, refrained from using it. This was because the markhor consistently maintained the narrative that if its nuclear power fell into the hands of the Taliban and other non-state actors, it would create a devastating global situation. Essentially, it began this 'bleating song' whenever it perceived the world might take serious action, reminding everyone of the potential for severe damage. Over these three decades, India was the real victim, tolerating deadly attacks on its parliament, losing innocent lives, and essentially bearing the brunt of being the bigger power. The elephant tried to warn the world, issuing a rumble that cautioned against the poisoned markhor.

While the world has started and entered a new phase, the markhor still bleats in the same fashion. It's time the world wakes up before it's too late and separates the bleat from the markhor. As an irresponsible nation that has expressed concern to the world about what will happen if its nuclear arsenal falls into the wrong hands, we have already seen what it can do. It's too big a risk for global powers to trust the bleating markhor with such power. It's time that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) take action and denuclearize Pakistan. Since India has already shown restraint and self-imposed a 'no first use' policy, and with time, it has also demonstrated deep respect for the rule-based order. It's time to shift trust towards India and change the status quo. Let the bleating markhor continue to bleat, but let's first remove its horns, or else the world will keep fearing it and being attacked by its non-state actors, time and again.

The pertinent question is: when Pakistan is struggling to even get two square meals a day, does it truly need a nuclear arsenal, especially when it's a known fact that maintaining them is a humongous task? As they say, 'it's easy to buy a white elephant, but to maintain it is a difficult task'. The reported estimated cost of maintaining 165 nuclear warheads is $2-3.5 billion. For a nation that has to depend on International Monetary Fund (IMF) bailouts, it's a huge amount that could be diverted to a better cause. Does the world need Pakistan, a nation that harbours terrorists and bleats nuclear rhetoric after launching ghastly attacks on innocent lives? How many more lives does the world need as sacrificial lambs before it understands that Pakistan is a rogue nation that lives off the mercy of other nations and creates ruckus around the world? While the world is busy making cutting-edge technology like AI and ChatGPT, Pakistan keeps exporting cutting-edge terrorists.

THE WORLD NEEDS TO WAKE UP BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE 

I end this thought with a funny shayari that best describes the situation:

Markhor ki cheekh mein bomb ka rang hai, Magar roti ke qeemat pe sab kuch tang hai. Barood ke saaye mein chaandi maangte hain, Par har IMF deal mein haath bhi jhaangte hain.

Meaning

"In the cry of the markhor lies the tone of a bomb, but daily bread has become a chronic qualm.

It lies under the shadow of gunpowder rain, yet sniffs for coins in every loan chain."