There cannot be double standards when it comes to terrorist acts against unarmed civilians, particularly women and children. It is not possible for the people of Pakistan to have supported the Hamas attack on Israelis and then speak out in condemnation of the train attack by the BLA in Baluchistan. Unfortunately, the reality in the present world is that one person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter. It is in this context that India’s struggle for independence stands out for having adhered to non-violence as the fundamental principle.
Pakistan, on the other hand, was created through a violent pursuit of the separatist cause through a series of communal massacres. Is it so strange then that it has not been able to function as a civilised nation? It sponsored terrorism in J&K and Punjab. It even carried out terrorist attacks in Mumbai and on India’s Parliament. It collaborates with other anti-Indian forces to support insurgents that seek to weaken India. And, of course, it is a willing ally of China’s expansionist designs wherever possible. In fact, this collaboration has now become the cause of strong resentment in its own provinces against the Chinese capture of resources, particularly in Baluchistan.
Unfortunately, the global fight against terrorism has weakened because of similar hypocrisy within the developed and powerful nations. Over the years, many injustices inflicted on entire societies and communities have been more or less forgotten, such as the suffering of the Tibetan people. The international laws that were meant to fight terrorism are now used selectively to serve political purposes rather than deal with the problem.
India has paid a heavy price over the years for adhering to the essence of its ancient Kshatriya code but continues to remain principled in its approach to the challenge. There will come a time, hopefully, when the international community will appreciate and acknowledge this fact. Had India been given its rightful place in international fora such as the UN Security Council, it would have had a greater impact on ensuring the world functions on more civilised principles. It has good relations with almost every nation, while at the same time not compromising on the essential civilisational values. As such, when it raises its voice against terrorism, it has far greater credibility. Essentially, hatred based on race, religion and nationality should not come in the way of shaping a better future for the world.
