Amin M. Lakhani

Pakistan's singular preoccupation with Kashmir, subordinating it to all other priorities, has been self-defeating. Domestically, it has thwarted the country's economic, social and political development.

Internationally, this single-point agenda has diminished the country's stature and smeared its reputation. Even its spiritual development has been warped by the proliferation, popularisation and increase in relative power-post-partition-of religious groups that represent an intolerant, militant and gender-biased interpretation of Islam.

More importantly, this involvement with Kashmir has prevented the acknowledgment, and hence resolution, of innumerable domestic problems, each more critical and larger than Kashmir. A minimum of 19 Kashmir-sized problems in Pakistan are clamouring for attention. Consider, for example, the issues below.

Political rights: The 145 million people of Pakistan are crying for the right of self-determination of the 13 million people of Kashmir. There are strong historical, geographical and religious reasons for them to do so. Moreover, this issue is inexorably linked with the very idea of Pakistan, but what political rights have the people of Pakistan themselves enjoyed over the past 55 years or can expect to enjoy in the future?

The past has been (mis) ruled by generals, bureaucrats and politicians. The future under the best case scenario will be a "managed democracy" where the sovereignty of its people and their elected representatives will be checked by an extraconstitutional body. Under the worst case scenario, history will repeat itself with the country swinging between fake democracy and naked dictatorship. Either way, 145 million Pakistanis, equal to 11 times the population of Kashmir, will continue to be denied the rights enshrined in their own Constitution. Can Pakistan demand, with a straight face, rights for another people when it has consistently denied political rights to its own people for more than 50 years?

Poverty: According to SPDC, approximately 38 percent of the population lived below the poverty line in 2000-2001, that is, 55 million people, equivalent to the population of four Kashmirs. Are Pakistan's efforts to eradicate poverty, as measured by its budgetary allocations, as focused and forceful as its efforts to keep the pot boiling in Kashmir? Did the ruling elite, whether civilian or military, seek the consent of its 55 million impoverished people to find out if they voluntarily agreed to subordinate the alleviation of their poverty to Kashmir?

Education: The World Bank stated that 54 percent of the population above 15 in 2000 was illiterate. With the population of those in this age group at 85 million, this yields an adult illiterate population of 46 million-more than three times the population of Kashmir.

This number excludes the millions under 15 who cannot attend school because of a lack of accessibility or affordability.

Is the benefit to Pakistan from the restoration of the political rights of 13 million Kashmiris so much greater than the cost and shame of raising an Islamic republic of 46 million illiterates? Did 46 million Pakistanis voluntarily agree to remain illiterate so that the nation could maintain a certain defence and foreign policy posture or pursue "development" of the "motorway and convention centre" kind? Pakistan's spending on education has stagnated at about 2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) while spending on defence ranges between 5 percent and 7 percent.

Health care: Again, according to the World Bank, the infant mortality rate in 1999 was 126 per 1,000 live births for children under 5 years of age. In comparison, the figure in Malaysia was 10 per 1,000 live births. How many deaths would have been avoided if Pakistan's rate had matched Malaysia's? The arithmetic shows that more than 403,000 children are unnecessarily dying in Pakistan every year for lack of investment in basic health care. At this rate, as many Pakistani infants as the entire current population of Kashmir have died over the past 32 years.

What kind of country, let alone an Islamic republic, allows its infants to perish when the means to avoid this tragic loss exist? This is what happens though when budgetary allocations for defence take priority over the development of human capital. Kashmir is important, but one is not aware of any war there in which more than 1,100 children die every day.

Politicians hold rallies, marches and hurl threats at India when Kashmiris die, but why are they not outraged at the daily silent deaths of Pakistani children? Why have the generals who are so keen to defend Pakistan against its external enemies not declared war on the biggest killer of Pakistani children operating within Pakistan's borders? This indifference continues with other pillars of society. Why are the ulema (Islamic religious scholars) silent? Should not the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) be suing the Finance and Health Ministries for misplaced priorities and poor implementation respectively? Should not the Supreme Court be taking suo motu action?

Based on this admittedly non-rigorous analysis, there are at least 19 Kashmir-sized problems in Pakistan today-the exact number is probably higher. This is because the victims of unemployment, of the unavailability of potable water, electricity, sanitation and housing, of gender bias, human rights violations, minority harassment and sectarianism have not been counted. This calculation also excludes the "stranded Pakistanis" forgotten by Pakistan. Remember East Pakistan?

Today's Bangladesh, with a population of 134 million, is equal to 10 Kashmirs. It is ironic that Pakistan has been so mesmerised by Kashmir that it is willing to risk nuclear war over it yet was insensitive and inflexible on the dialogue and political accommodation needed to retain East Pakistan, a province 10 times the size of Kashmir. History may repeat itself if the pursuit of Kashmir continues while ignoring other pressing national priorities, like the grievances of smaller provinces.

The Pakistani leadership made a courageous decision after Sept. 11, 2001, by cutting its ties with the Taliban in Afghanistan and actively supporting the world coalition against terrorism. Whatever pressures may have been applied, the decision to abandon a failed and indefensible policy is justified simply on the premise that "Pakistan comes first."

The time has come for another momentous decision for the same reason. Pakistan should permanently cease its backing for any military action in Indian-controlled Kashmir. It should disarm all militants and disband all supporting camps and training facilities. However, Pakistan should continue to provide moral, diplomatic and political support to indigenous forces fighting for their political rights. This policy will reduce tensions with India and allow Pakistan to concentrate on conquering the dozens of internal Kashmir-sized problems.

It is the responsibility of Pakistan's elite to inform, explain and reiterate these sobering truths to the people. First, that Kashmir cannot be liberated militarily-even the president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, admits that. Second, India will make Pakistan pay a very heavy price for supporting cross-border militancy. If Pakistan believes it can play the nuclear card, it must also know that, although a nuclear exchange may severely damage India, it will destroy Pakistan.

A poll conducted in Indian Jammu and Kashmir by the British group Friends of Kashmir revealed that more than 65 percent of respondents wanted independence from both India and Pakistan as their final objective. If that is what Kashmiris want, why are 145 million Pakistanis subordinating every national objective to a delusion?

Finally, it is self-destructive for a US$ 65 billion economy to get into a bleeding match with a US$ 450 billion economy. This confrontation becomes suicidal when the larger economy has additional "force multipliers," like three times the technical intensity, two times the savings rate, half the per capita debt, a higher GDP growth rate and a robust democratic political system.

Gen. Musharraf should act upon the same advice he gave the people of Bangladesh when he said that the "courage to compromise is greater than to confront." If Pakistan is willing to forgo confrontation, its youth at least have the prospect of transforming the vision of Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the Quaid-i-Azam or Great Leader of the country, into reality by the sunset of their lifetime.