this article reflects real truth about policy making elites of both countries
Why do we need an enemy?
Dr Moonis Ahmar
The writer is Associate Professor,
Department of International Relations, University of Karachi
If people need friends, the state actors need enemies. This is what is quite true and valid in case of South Asia where the enemy image has been given an institutional shape by the upholders of power. The prevailing tug of war between India and Pakistan over Kashmir and other unresolved inter and intra-state conflicts in various South Asia countries is an outcome of deliberate state policies to find an enemy and ensure their benefits and privileges under the garb of threat perception and national security.
The process of elections in the Indian controlled Jammu and Kashmir is a bitter example to prove how committed the official and political elites of India and Pakistan are to sustain the enemy image. Pakistan’s central objective is to make Jammu and Kashmir ungovernable for India by providing all possible support to secessionist forces. As far as India is concerned, its main task is to prove Pakistan as the “epic centre” of terrorism responsible for directly and indirectly supporting terrorism both in its controlled parts of Jammu and Kashmir and also in India proper. For the last three decades, the Sri Lankan Government successfully created an enemy image among the Sinhala majority against the Tamils resulting into bloody civil war and loss of colossal lives from both sides. In Bangladesh, given its geographical location, economic and political reasons, India has been perceived as an enemy responsible for weakening the country’s economy and creating political instability. Some circles in Bangladesh still consider Pakistan as an enemy because of historical reasons and they make sure to keep the symbols of liberation war alive so as to maintain an anti-Pakistan plank. In India and in Pakistan, since 1947 the enemy image about each other has been propagated as a state policy without much change.
The question that why do we need an enemy is the key to the existing turmoil in South Asia. Psychologically, there is tendency among people to find enemies so as to cover their internal weaknesses and contradictions. As long as finding and making enemies does not hurt the interests of the country, it is fine. But, the moment, it becomes a state policy to look for enemies and poison the minds of people against a particular group or state in order to cover up its weaknesses then the result could be disastrous. Since the majority of the people of South Asia are illiterate and powerless in terms of seeking their rights, it has been possible for the state to exploit the social backwardness of people by inducting enemy images. One way to create an enemy image is by teaching subjective, bias and hostile materials at the school level so that the younger generation is also poisoned and start hating a particular group or a country. Therefore, it will not be wrong to argue that if people of India and Pakistan challenge the myth of the enemy image it will be impossible for the ruling elites of the two countries to justify the hostile policies either under the pretext of Kashmir or Hindu-Muslim rivalry.
South Asian elites also need enemies because it is considered to be a short cut to ensure their privileges and hold over power. The huge defence expenditures, politics done by various political groups in the name of religion and the misuse of power cannot go on if there are no internal or external enemies. Since the state structure of South Asia favours status quo and protects the interests of the privileged class, holding and hardening of the enemy image is essential. The moment the enemy image is replaced with friendship and cooperation, failures of the state policies to provide people with basic necessities of life will be questioned.
In those societies where enlightenment and education led to positive changes in the structure of state, the focus of policy makers was not on finding enemies and but to look for friends. In the developed world, the status of enemy image is different as compared to South Asia. In affluent societies, the enemy image does not affect the socio-economic conditions of people but in South Asia the ruling elites make sure that people pay for unresolved conflicts while their own privileges and perks remain unaffected. The United States has created an enemy image about Iraq but an ordinary American is so far not affected by the hostile policies pursued by Washington against that country. During the cold war days, the Soviet bloc was considered as an enemy in the United States and in the Western world. If the taxpayer’s money was used for conventional and nuclear arms race it was not at the cost of basic necessities of people because the Western societies were industrially and economically strong.
How can one bring a qualitative change in replacing the enemy images in South Asia? The interests of people can best be served if the resources are utilized for their welfare and development but the opposite is happening in South Asia. Three measures are required for replacing the enemy images in South Asia and replacing these with positive approach. First, the sense of insecurity, which state actors possess about their survival, needs to be changed. In most cases, the ruling elites of South Asia feel insecure and in order to divert the attention from the real issues they propagate enemy images. Unless there is change in the approach and policy of people at the helm of affairs about the need to focus on the welfare of society it will be difficult to look for friends instead of enemies. Since the state resources are either used for arms expenditures or meagre developmental works, people are without basic facilities and are subsequently trapped in the vicious cycle of confrontation with internal and external enemies. For instance, tax payers money is used to finance counter-insurgency operations in the Indian Northeast states and Jammu and Kashmir or to pay for the mobilization of more than half a million forces along borders with Pakistan. Same is the case with Pakistan where resources, which should have been used for development, are mobilized for dealing with internal security threats or threats along its eastern border. In Sri Lanka, the Tamil uprising was termed as a major threat to the country’s security resulting into the diversion of huge resources for dealing with the counter insurgency operations. In Nepal, the activities of Maoists have forced the Nepali Government to consider them as the enemy of the state. Therefore, in order to replace the enemy image, the change in the state policies in South Asia is essential.
Second, change in the society resulting into more awareness among people about their rights and role is necessary to shatter the myth of enemy images. Till the time the people of South Asia remain uneducated and backward they will be a victim of both the political and official elites’ policy of expediency. Why is it so that the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in India has been able to reinforce enemy image and threat perception about Pakistan despite the fact that the insurgency in the Indian controlled Jammu and Kashmir is the result of New Delhi’s policy of neglect and mishandling. By reinforcing the enemy image, the BJP has been able to enhance domestic support and divert attention from the real issues. In Pakistan, the military establishment has successfully created India as the enemy number one under the pretext of the unresolved Kashmir conflict. What is required is the assertion of civil society of India and Pakistan for resumption of dialogue between the two countries so that the enemy image, which has hardened after September 11, is replaced with better interaction of people. Finally, the role played by media is crucial in bringing a qualitative change in state policy responsible for promoting enemy images in South Asia. Unfortunately, to a large extent, a section of print media in South Asia, particularly in India and Pakistan, is not responsible enough while reporting the events, which cause hostility and bitterness among people. If the media discourages rhetoric and expose vested interests of ruling elite in promoting the enemy image, much can be done to curb fanaticism and war mongering in South Asia.
It is better if the ruling elites of South Asia give a break to people from the decades of animosity and enemy images. Why is it so that those who control the instruments of power are unaffected while propagating internal and external enemies whereas the majority of people pay the price of confrontation? Till the time objectivity and rationality is not pursued by the policy makers, the future of South Asia will remain bleak. If personal interests are given priority over national interests under the cover of threat perception and enemy images, people of South Asia will continue to live in insecurity and backwardness. If the ruling elites are fond of creating enemies, it should not be at the expense of the present and future of people of South Asia because since 1947 till today, they have suffered enough and endlessly because of illogical and subjective policies of state actors. When the people of South Asia share common problems and are at the same time victim of selfish policies of their governments, why should they hate each other. There is nothing, which should divide the people of South Asia and the past, and present cleavages are primarily the result of systematic policies of hate pursued by the ruling elites of the region. Hence the need to change the policy of promoting enemy images with goodwill and cooperation in South Asia.