On Feb 28th, after
Pakistan announced the release of Wing Commander Abhinandan held captive by
Pakistan, Information Minister Fawad Chaudhary submitted a resolution to the
secretariat of National Assembly recommending Prime Minister Imran Khan for Nobel
Peace Prize. Alluding to his contributions in averting plausible war between
India and Pakistan after terror strikes on Balakot, Pakistan held ode to Khan’s
good will gesture. It is not just Pakistan which called for such coveted honour
for Khan, India’s left-liberal brigade, the fervid “Aman ki Asha” advocates started
similar propaganda in India. Minutes after Pakistani government’s made approved
release of Abhinandan, the brigade lost no time in eulogising, former Pakistan captain
for the international honour. Castigating the Indian Prime Minister as the
aggressor, started an online petition under the hashtag of
“NobelPeacePrizeforImranKhan”. After the initial frenzy the issue seemed to
have faded from public memory. But what made this development interesting, is
the endorsement by Indian bigwigs which included former Supreme Court judge Markandey
Katju. In a telephonic interview to Pakistani news channel, Geo News, he
praised Khan for displaying “real
statesmanship” and added, “his speech
was balanced, mature and full of wisdom. With calmness, he explained that war
is not a solution. I think the speech should be circulated throughout the
World, not just in our subcontinent. He deserves a Nobel Prize”. Two days ago,
Eurasian Times carried an article stating that Imran Khan has been nominated
for Nobel Prize by American publication, The Christian Science Monitor, terming
it as “perhaps the biggest surprise in
the peaceful leadership-and most critical to the World”.
The news of Khan’s nomination for
Nobel Prize by an agency now demands an unbiased scrutiny. As of now while
Indo-Pakistan tensions have cooled, it is important to explore if Khan’s
self-aggrandised appellation of “Naya
Pakistan” was any different from earlier Pakistan regimes. Hours after
taking charge as Prime Minister in a televised address to India, pledged to
take two steps for every one step taken by India to reduce tensions between
both countries. For all the grandstanding nothing changed on ground. There was
no decline in the cross-border infiltrations, unprovoked firings and terror
attacks in Kashmir. The valley continued
to bear the brunt of unabated terror under Khan.
Infact, giving peace a chance,
India approved talks between foreign secretaries of both countries along the margins
of UNGA at New York. But New Delhi called off the talks at the eleventh hour due
to brutal murder and mutilation of three Indian security forces by Pakistani
forces. Besides, as an endorsement to insurgency in Kashmir, Khan’s government
unveiled postal stamp of terrorist Burhan Wani extolling him as a martyr. For
the first time in recent times, Punjab awoke to a bomb explosion on Nirankari
Bhavan at Amritsar, signalling resurgence of Khalistan movement. To counter
Modi government’s intense crackdown on terror operatives in Kashmir and free
hand to security forces, under the guise of honouring religious and cultural
sentiments of people Khan pushed the long pending Kartarpur corridor
construction proposal. Through influential Pakistani sympathisers in India,
Khan effectively pushed the Kartarpur issue to forefront. India relented and
conducted foundation laying ceremony with immediate effect. With Pakistan’s
army chief Qamar Bajwa overseeing ground breaking ceremony of Kartarpur corridor
and special invite extended to Khalistan leader, the bluster of Khan’s
administration stood exposed. Every year Kashmir valley would experience a
break from the terror episodes during the winter months. But this year there
was no respite from terror for the valley and Indian security forces made some
major breakthrough by neutralising hardened terrorists sheltered in the valley.
Having suffered a massive setback, Pakistan terror operatives with the support
of deep state plotted Pulwama attacks. While JeM claimed responsibility minutes
after the attack, Pakistan dilly-dallied and reluctantly condemned terror
attacks referring to Kashmir as “Indian
Administered Kashmir”. This has been the “Naya Pakistan” of Khan in brief.
Against this background it really
makes no sense to even believe that the current regime of the so “statesman” Khan is any different. As mentioned
earlier, Khan announced the release of Wing Commander under International
Pressure as signatory of Geneva Convention. It would be ridiculous to even
think Khan’s act as good will gesture, since Pakistan has been relentlessly escalating
tensions across the border. Civilians near border areas have been witnessing heavy
artillery shelling since air strikes. As
of now, alert Indian Air Force shot down six Pakistan’s spy drones entering
India across the Western border. Indeed, unexploded bombs dropped by Pakistani
drones are recovered from the residential areas Rajasthan’s Sri Ganganagar. For
all the tall promises, Khan didn’t make any sincere attempt post-Pulwama to
cull and extricate terrorists.
On the contrary, Pakistan
government stopped UN team from interviewing Hafiz Saeed, mastermind of 26/11
Mumbai attacks and sought removal of his name from the UN list of banned
terrorists. While Pakistan government announced that Saeed won’t lead Friday
prayers, he is replaced by Abdul Rauf, a designated international terrorist, chief
of banned outfit JuD (Jamaat-ud-Dawa). Similarly, Khan is all set to appoint retired
Brigadier Ijaz Shah, as National Security Adviser (NSA), suspected of plotting
Late Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto assassination and known to have close links
with Taliban. Indeed, such is the reputation of Shah, that Australia refused to
accept his nomination as High commissioner. These and several other half-hearted
so-called reported counter terrorism measures, hold mirror to Khan’s real
intentions. The indiscreet measures of Khan, the “yes man” of Pakistan military is a reflection of the country’s deep
state anti-India agenda. At a time when influential Indian left brigade is
tirelessly pitching Nobel for Khan, Pakistan’s Supreme Court is about to hear
his disqualification case for hiding parentage of a daughter with a partner
Sita White in his nomination papers. Coincidentally, Khan’s estranged wife
Reham Khan, opened up a Pandora box by divulging stories of about the personal
attributes of the former Captain that reeks of racist bigotry and religious
intolerance. Abound by contradictions, the only saving grace has been Khan’s humble
submission saying that he is not worthy of Nobel Prize. But any person who resolves
Kashmir issue would deserves one.
Khan’s statement eventually takes
us to another Nobel Prize nomination. Unlike Khan, President Trump in a press briefing
days before the iconic Hanoi Summit with Chairman of DPRK, Kim Jong Un
disclosed that he has been nominated for 2019 Nobel Prize. Soon, International
Media is abuzz with news of Japanese Prime Minister forwarding President
Trump’s nomination for the Nobel Prize. Nobel Prize nominations are supposed to
be anonymous. The phenomenon of trending of nominations for Nobel marks beginning
of a new era. After President’s historic Tuesday joint agreement on the denuclearisation
of Korean Peninsula at Sentosa Island, Singapore, 18 Republican lawmakers wrote
to Nobel Committee endorsing President’s nomination for Peace Prize. Per-Willy
Amundsen right wing Progress Party of Norway had recommended Trump for the
Prize after President’s first summit meet with Kim.
Kim’s rigorous pursuit of nuclear
ambitions began to pose severe threat to the stability of the North East Asia,
President Trump after the initial war of words, offered to negotiate peace
talks at South Korea’s behest. Putting aside decades of acrimony, both leaders
agreed to establish new links between the US and DPRK, renew efforts to build a
regime of longstanding peace and stability, vowed to work towards denuclearisation
of Korean Peninsula conforming to 2018 Panmunjom Declaration and to recover and
repatriate the remains of PoW (Prisoners of War)/MIA (Missing in Action). As
confidence building measure, North Korea repatriated remains of American soldiers.
But when it came to real objective of denuclearisation, both countries failed
to make any substantial progress. While US awaited a decisive, verifiable
action on dismantling of nuclear facilities and arsenal, DPRK wanted a complete
lifting of sanctions regime. Much ahead of the Singapore Summit, Strategists were
sceptical about the American efforts given the DPRK’s fears of regime change.
Notwithstanding these doubts, Trump argued that he would break the jinx and
create history for himself by clinching a mutually agreeable denuclearisation agreement.
Interestingly, Japan, who felt threatened by the nuclear proliferation,
enamoured by the American initiative is believed to have commended Trump’s
efforts to restore stability in the region. While some reports suggest that Trump
administration has requested Japan to nominate him for Nobel Peace Prize. Unlike
Khan, who openly said that he is not worthy of Nobel Prize, Trump who is intent
on scripting a history never lost a chance to trumpet his attributes. He even defended
Nobel nomination for his efforts to bring peace in Syria while America’s closest
ally Israel was spooked by his decision to withdraw troops from Syria.
President Trump, aspirant of Nobel,
months before 2018 Singapore Summit, unilaterally pulled out America from the conscientiously
worked out iconic Iranian Nuclear Deal alleging Tehran’s non-compliance and
unabated missile testing. Trump’s abrogation of treaty and reinstating highest
level of sanctions irrevocably miffed Iranian fundamentalists approved nuclear
proliferation. By arbitrarily terminating the Iranian deal, Trump not only
destroyed the deal but pushed the volatile Middle East into abyss. For all the
bravado of commitment to denuclearisation, recently Trump announced America’s
withdrawal from the Regan era, Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty.
Leaving the burden of resurrecting the treaty on Russia within 180 days, America
alleged since 2013 Moscow has been grossly violating the agreement by developing
new ground launch cruise missiles in the ranges between 500 and 5500 kms. Irked
by Trump’s charges, Russia announced its immediate withdrawal. As a result, the
treaty will now automatically annul in six months. This development has sparked
fears of new arms race. Soon, Russia announced successful test firing of Yats
Intercontinental Ballistic Missile System capable of carrying thermonuclear war
heads. Russia alleged America continues to test its ICBMs several times a year launching
from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California to the Marshall Islands. As of now
America and Russia’s nuclear arsenal are kept under restraint by 2010 New Start
treaty which expires on 2021. But with both parties hardly evincing any interest
to negotiate five-year extension, fears of global security are abounding. Trump’s
boastful claims of a breakthrough fell flat after his talks with Kim reached a
deadlock at Hanoi. Days after Hanoi Summit, DPRK has resumed missile testing with
the same gusto throwing a spanner into the much boastful claims of President
Trump’s denuclearisation attempts.
The case studies of Trump’s and
Khan’s nomination for Nobel Peace Prize has opened up a new dimension about the
rectitude or commitment of individuals motives for greater global harmony and
peace. According to Alfred Nobel’s will- “person
who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations,
the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion
of peace congresses” shall be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Since World
War-II people who made phenomenal contributions towards nuclear disarmament,
human rights, democracy and peace negotiations were richly rewarded with Nobel
Peace Prize. Considering the hysteria for the Nobel nominations in recent time,
it is time to contemplate whether a feverish rallying for undeserved people by themselves
or their lobbies is even desirable. This imbecilic euphoria for the coveted global
honours should never be held hostage for narrow political gains or to prove a
point.
@ Copyrights reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment