Obsessed with Pakistan, Manmohan Singh failed to promote India's larger interests in the neighbourhood during the Cricket World Cup tournament.
India’s neighbours like Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan and Maldives legitimately complain that they are ignored and SAARC Summits are reduced to a farce by turning such gatherings into India-Pakistan soap operas. They rightly claim that Indian political leaders, officials and mediapersons ignore the progress and achievements in fostering a feeling of South Asian togetherness, and behave as though all that matters is the bilateral meeting between leaders of India and Pakistan on the sidelines of SAARC conferences.
The 2011 Cricket World Cup tournament was scheduled to be hosted in South Asia by Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. Engulfed by terrorist violence, let loose primarily by outfits earlier backed by the ISI, Pakistan was ruled out as a host by the International Cricket Council. The tournament was, therefore, hosted by Bangladesh, India and Sri Lanka. Rather than using the occasion to foster solidarity between the three hosts, our leaders and mandarins showed deplorable insensitivity in dealing with co-hosts Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.
The World Cup was inaugurated in Dhaka on February 19 by Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed. It was an event which electrified the country, evoking an immense sense of national pride. It was the largest international event Bangladesh had hosted after its bloody war of independence 40 years ago. Sheikh Hasina is unquestionably one of the friendliest leaders we have in our neighbourhood.
Sheikh Hasina has extended a hand of friendship to us, proclaimed her country a secular republic, clamped down on extremist groups and handed over separatist leaders from our North-East who were hosted and feted by her predecessor. Wanted ULFA leader Paresh Baruah, earlier feted by Bangladesh and Pakistan, now hides along the borders of Myanmar and China, enjoying Chinese patronage. While India beat Bangladesh in the match, the hosts fought gamely and nearly made it to the Quarter Finals after beating England.
The World Cup inauguration was an ideal event for India to show its solidarity with, and empathy for, Bangladesh with our Prime Minister sharing the dais with Sheikh Hasina in Dhaka. Astonishingly, in a manifestation of callous diplomatic indifference and insensitivity, New Delhi chose not to send either a high-level goodwill delegation or, more appropriately, sponsor a goodwill visit to Dhaka by the Prime Minister for the event. Similar indifference and lack of imagination was shown towards Sri Lanka where cricketing legend Muthiah Muralitharan, whose contribution to the cricketing glory of his country were personally lauded by President Mahinda Rajapaksa, was playing his last World Cup.
If Team India fought for the coveted World Cup for Sachin Tendulkar, the Sri Lankans did so for ‘Murali’ as he is fondly known. Most importantly, Murali, a Tamil, is a symbol of how Tamils and Sinhalas can live together in a pluralistic Sri Lanka. An Indian Prime Minister lauding Murali in Colombo would have reinforced and driven home this message. Alas a Prime Minister, who is totally focussed on — some would say obsessed with — Pakistan, could obviously not entertain such thoughts. It is tragic that our diplomatic establishment and politicians could not also imaginatively look beyond their noses on neighbourhood diplomacy.
Many years ago, Mir Khalilur Rehman, the founder of the Jang newspaper, remarked to me during the course of an India-Pakistan cricket test match in Karachi, when the crowds were going berserk as Imran Khan decimated the Indian batting line-up, “The problem with my countrymen is that they treat the cricket field like a battlefield and a battlefield like a cricket field.” He said it was this attitude that led them to disaster in the 1971 conflict with India, adding that they would feel similarly when the country’s cricketing fortunes were reversed.
The Mohali World Cup semi-final pitting India against Pakistan was touted as the harbinger of goodwill and the elixir for eternal India-Pakistan friendship. But what was the reaction across the border when Pakistan, a remarkably talented but mercurial side, crashed to defeat? Much has been said about Pakistani captain Shahid Afridi’s comment, “Indians will never have hearts like Muslims and Pakistanis. I do not think they have the large and clean hearts Allah has given us.” Compare this with the gracious comments of Sri Lankan captain Kumara Sangakkara: “We didn’t take enough wickets and in the end the best team won. Yes we are a bit sore that we lost. It will take a while to get over that feeling. That’s cricket.”
It has been argued that one should not take the comments of Shahid Afridi, who was dumb enough to get banned for chewing on and seeking to tamper with the seam of a cricket ball with half-a-dozen television cameras focussed on him during an international encounter with Australia, seriously. But anyone familiar with the media coverage in Pakistan would recognise that not merely the traditionally hostile Urdu Press but also mainstream English newspapers were severely and even irrationally critical of India. Even a normally restrained person like Air Marshal Shahzad Chaudhry, who was Director of Pakistan’s Strategic (Nuclear) Command Authority, commenced his article debunking Sachin Tendulkar’s batting capabilities. He averred: “And yet this god of cricket was all at sea against Saeed Ajmal. He could not read Ajmal’s doosra”. He made the astonishing accusation that it was as a result of the tampering of the Hawkeye software by Indian IT experts that Tendulkar was not given out LBW. Chaudhury claimed: “The IT hubs of Bangalore worked overtime to provide Tendulkar the escape in the ‘Decision Referral System’ when he was actually plumb out on an arm ball by Ajmal.” He implied that the Hawkeye software had been tampered with to show that an actually straight ball had spun to miss the leg stump.
The Mohali episode, based on the misplaced belief that ‘cricket diplomacy’ would bring people in India and Pakistan together, is symbolic of how South Block just has no understanding of how Pakistanis think about cricket. Diplomacy is a serious business, not to be based on wishful thinking. No one objects to serious dialogue which promotes people-to-people contacts, enhances mutual confidence and ends terrorism. The invitation to Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani pleased the Americans. But is pleasing the Americans the main criterion for determining our policies and priorities in India’s neighbourhood? The internal turmoil in Pakistan and its problems in Afghanistan call for serious diplomacy and not gimmicks, grandiose gestures, or summits without meticulous preparatory work.
Source: The Pioneer
India’s neighbours like Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan and Maldives legitimately complain that they are ignored and SAARC Summits are reduced to a farce by turning such gatherings into India-Pakistan soap operas. They rightly claim that Indian political leaders, officials and mediapersons ignore the progress and achievements in fostering a feeling of South Asian togetherness, and behave as though all that matters is the bilateral meeting between leaders of India and Pakistan on the sidelines of SAARC conferences.
The 2011 Cricket World Cup tournament was scheduled to be hosted in South Asia by Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh. Engulfed by terrorist violence, let loose primarily by outfits earlier backed by the ISI, Pakistan was ruled out as a host by the International Cricket Council. The tournament was, therefore, hosted by Bangladesh, India and Sri Lanka. Rather than using the occasion to foster solidarity between the three hosts, our leaders and mandarins showed deplorable insensitivity in dealing with co-hosts Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.
The World Cup was inaugurated in Dhaka on February 19 by Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed. It was an event which electrified the country, evoking an immense sense of national pride. It was the largest international event Bangladesh had hosted after its bloody war of independence 40 years ago. Sheikh Hasina is unquestionably one of the friendliest leaders we have in our neighbourhood.
Sheikh Hasina has extended a hand of friendship to us, proclaimed her country a secular republic, clamped down on extremist groups and handed over separatist leaders from our North-East who were hosted and feted by her predecessor. Wanted ULFA leader Paresh Baruah, earlier feted by Bangladesh and Pakistan, now hides along the borders of Myanmar and China, enjoying Chinese patronage. While India beat Bangladesh in the match, the hosts fought gamely and nearly made it to the Quarter Finals after beating England.
The World Cup inauguration was an ideal event for India to show its solidarity with, and empathy for, Bangladesh with our Prime Minister sharing the dais with Sheikh Hasina in Dhaka. Astonishingly, in a manifestation of callous diplomatic indifference and insensitivity, New Delhi chose not to send either a high-level goodwill delegation or, more appropriately, sponsor a goodwill visit to Dhaka by the Prime Minister for the event. Similar indifference and lack of imagination was shown towards Sri Lanka where cricketing legend Muthiah Muralitharan, whose contribution to the cricketing glory of his country were personally lauded by President Mahinda Rajapaksa, was playing his last World Cup.
If Team India fought for the coveted World Cup for Sachin Tendulkar, the Sri Lankans did so for ‘Murali’ as he is fondly known. Most importantly, Murali, a Tamil, is a symbol of how Tamils and Sinhalas can live together in a pluralistic Sri Lanka. An Indian Prime Minister lauding Murali in Colombo would have reinforced and driven home this message. Alas a Prime Minister, who is totally focussed on — some would say obsessed with — Pakistan, could obviously not entertain such thoughts. It is tragic that our diplomatic establishment and politicians could not also imaginatively look beyond their noses on neighbourhood diplomacy.
Many years ago, Mir Khalilur Rehman, the founder of the Jang newspaper, remarked to me during the course of an India-Pakistan cricket test match in Karachi, when the crowds were going berserk as Imran Khan decimated the Indian batting line-up, “The problem with my countrymen is that they treat the cricket field like a battlefield and a battlefield like a cricket field.” He said it was this attitude that led them to disaster in the 1971 conflict with India, adding that they would feel similarly when the country’s cricketing fortunes were reversed.
The Mohali World Cup semi-final pitting India against Pakistan was touted as the harbinger of goodwill and the elixir for eternal India-Pakistan friendship. But what was the reaction across the border when Pakistan, a remarkably talented but mercurial side, crashed to defeat? Much has been said about Pakistani captain Shahid Afridi’s comment, “Indians will never have hearts like Muslims and Pakistanis. I do not think they have the large and clean hearts Allah has given us.” Compare this with the gracious comments of Sri Lankan captain Kumara Sangakkara: “We didn’t take enough wickets and in the end the best team won. Yes we are a bit sore that we lost. It will take a while to get over that feeling. That’s cricket.”
It has been argued that one should not take the comments of Shahid Afridi, who was dumb enough to get banned for chewing on and seeking to tamper with the seam of a cricket ball with half-a-dozen television cameras focussed on him during an international encounter with Australia, seriously. But anyone familiar with the media coverage in Pakistan would recognise that not merely the traditionally hostile Urdu Press but also mainstream English newspapers were severely and even irrationally critical of India. Even a normally restrained person like Air Marshal Shahzad Chaudhry, who was Director of Pakistan’s Strategic (Nuclear) Command Authority, commenced his article debunking Sachin Tendulkar’s batting capabilities. He averred: “And yet this god of cricket was all at sea against Saeed Ajmal. He could not read Ajmal’s doosra”. He made the astonishing accusation that it was as a result of the tampering of the Hawkeye software by Indian IT experts that Tendulkar was not given out LBW. Chaudhury claimed: “The IT hubs of Bangalore worked overtime to provide Tendulkar the escape in the ‘Decision Referral System’ when he was actually plumb out on an arm ball by Ajmal.” He implied that the Hawkeye software had been tampered with to show that an actually straight ball had spun to miss the leg stump.
The Mohali episode, based on the misplaced belief that ‘cricket diplomacy’ would bring people in India and Pakistan together, is symbolic of how South Block just has no understanding of how Pakistanis think about cricket. Diplomacy is a serious business, not to be based on wishful thinking. No one objects to serious dialogue which promotes people-to-people contacts, enhances mutual confidence and ends terrorism. The invitation to Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani pleased the Americans. But is pleasing the Americans the main criterion for determining our policies and priorities in India’s neighbourhood? The internal turmoil in Pakistan and its problems in Afghanistan call for serious diplomacy and not gimmicks, grandiose gestures, or summits without meticulous preparatory work.
Source: The Pioneer
